Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*C4\-C5\s+Corvettes\s+in\s+stock\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*C4\-C5\s+Corvettes\s+in\s+stock\s*$/: 23 ]

Total 23 documents matching your query.

21. RE: C4-C5 Corvettes in stock (score: 1): Author: Jeff Winchell <jwinchell@Giftspot.com>; Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 20:04:25 -0700; SP cars can be grouped despite stock model differences because of backdate/update. It makes no sense to put a much slower car in the same class with the faster one just because they have somewhat sim; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00684.html (8,432 bytes)
22. Re: C4-C5 Corvettes in stock (score: 1): Author: Mark Sirota <msirota@isc.upenn.edu>; Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 23:14:41 -0400; I strongly disagree. No matter how much merit a new class argument may have, I'd vote against -- we have too many damn classes already. We should not add one without also removing one. I like the ide; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00687.html (8,484 bytes)
23. Re: C4-C5 Corvettes in stock (score: 1): Author: Jeff Cashmore <cashmo@spec-rx7.org>; Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2000 01:07:56 -0500; "Funny, they said the same thing about the new Celica's in ES, and Cashmore took an old one with some 25hp less, more weight and less tourqe and beat up on the 2 best Y2K Celica's in the country in P; /html/autox/2000-07/msg00703.html (8,929 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 23
Page: [1] [2]