Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Engine\s+weights\/was\s+how\s+about\s+a\s+real\s+V8\!\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Engine\s+weights\/was\s+how\s+about\s+a\s+real\s+V8\!\s*$/: 30 ]

Total 30 documents matching your query.

1. Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: The Richards <smrm@coastalnet.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 16:45:12 -0500; I want to be an open and trusting fellow, but 55 pounds sounds suspect. Plus, what kinda bucks go into the Ford engine you've used as your example? Plus, who really wants 320 HP in a TR6 or MGB witho; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01840.html (9,551 bytes)
2. RE: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: <larry.g.unger@lmco.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 17:19:59 -0400; Can you say 'MGC'... ;^) http://www.autox.team.net/sol/tech/engine.html Safety Fast! ... larry.g.unger@lmco.com "... an MGC motor? Damn, that is a big hunk of iron." Bob Allen, Sept. 10, 1997; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01841.html (8,230 bytes)
3. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: Robert Allen <boballen@sky.net>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 16:36:40 -0500; As usual, Larry is misinformed. 55 pounds? Lordy, the motor was 70 pounds above forecast when it arrived at the Abingdon plant in 1967. The 'C' motor actually weighs 610 pounds which, as I understand; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01842.html (8,605 bytes)
4. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: DANMAS@aol.com; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 18:16:36 -0400 (EDT); Thanks, Bob, I was counting on you coming through! Dan Masters, Alcoa, TN '71 TR6--3000mile/year driver, fully restored '71 TR6--undergoing full restoration and Ford 5.0 V8 insertion - see: http://ww; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01849.html (8,770 bytes)
5. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: DANMAS@aol.com; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 18:54:16 -0400 (EDT); Thanks, Bob, I was counting on you coming through! Dan Masters, Alcoa, TN '71 TR6--3000mile/year driver, fully restored '71 TR6--undergoing full restoration and Ford 5.0 V8 insertion - see: http://ww; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01852.html (8,853 bytes)
6. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: DANMAS@aol.com; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 19:04:58 -0400 (EDT); example? stuck Michael: Evidently, you missed one sentence in my previous post. I quote it below: "keep in mind, the BOP/Rover engine weighs less than the stock B, so the final configuration with the; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01855.html (11,524 bytes)
7. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: The Richards <smrm@coastalnet.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 19:49:03 -0500; Just always remember that mega HP doesn't help it stop any better! But I suppose what we each want out of a car can differ. My current B will remain 4 banger, though I intend to tweak it. The Jensen; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01860.html (9,782 bytes)
8. RE: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: <larry.g.unger@lmco.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 20:37:48 -0400; Well ... the idea of taking a well balanced car like the 'B', and stuffing in too heavy of an engine naturally made me think of the 'C' ... so I felt obliged to observe 'proper list etiquette' and 'z; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01864.html (10,320 bytes)
9. RE: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: The Richards <smrm@coastalnet.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 20:55:19 -0500; What are the relative torque figures? That's where from the low end grunt emerges. Michael, New Bern, NC 67 MGB, never met a curve it didn't like...well, that one with all the sand on it excepted. 74; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01866.html (9,362 bytes)
10. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: mgbob@juno.com (ROBERT G. HOWARD); Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 21:24:43 EDT; Granted, all MG engines were overweight. How is it that small airplane engines can come in at about 1 hp per pound, and turn at 2500 doing it? Granted, they are air cooled and require oil changes at; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01867.html (11,857 bytes)
11. RE: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: <larry.g.unger@lmco.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 21:43:15 -0400; Ahhhh ... there you go spoiling all the fun ... ;^) The 'C's massive six cylinder produces 170 lb ft of torque at 3,400 rpm compared to the 'B's 110 lb ft of torque at 3,000. The 'C's unladen weight; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01869.html (9,804 bytes)
12. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: Robert Allen <boballen@sky.net>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 21:17:16 +0100; See! Larry once again gets tripped up with the facts. The 'C' outperforms the 'B' by 7 tenths of a second in the 1/4 mile. It takes a lot of money and effort to trim your ET 7 tenths. The short versi; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01872.html (8,820 bytes)
13. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: "S. L. Hower" <howersl@mailexcite.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 14:41:38 -0700; some searching. Point your browser-o-choice at: http://www.team.net:80/sol/tech/engine.html Ford 302 (~460 lbs) Triumph TR6 (403 lbs) --Scott -- Scott Hower -> howersl@mailexcite.com 73 MGB 78 Midge; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01873.html (8,588 bytes)
14. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: The Richards <smrm@coastalnet.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 22:16:42 -0500; Road What are their speeds at the 1/4 mile?; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01874.html (9,330 bytes)
15. RE: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: <larry.g.unger@lmco.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 22:28:41 -0400; Sorry I don't have that info ... besides if I quote another article Bob Allen may have a stroke.' Safety Fast! ... larry.g.unger@lmco.com; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01876.html (9,085 bytes)
16. RE: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: <larry.g.unger@lmco.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 22:36:07 -0400; Sorry, but I don't see how I gotten tripped up with the facts. I never stated that the 'C' had less torque/hp than a 'B', that it couldn't 'haul ass' in a straight line, that it wasn't a 'babe magnet; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01878.html (9,599 bytes)
17. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: DANMAS@aol.com; Date: Tue, 23 Sep 1997 23:17:13 -0400 (EDT); Yes, this is true, but mega horsepower doesn't make it brake any worse, either. It all depends on where and how you drive it. Driving on the street, I won't be going any faster than I do now (althoug; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01881.html (10,598 bytes)
18. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: Teacher122@aol.com; Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 01:24:30 -0400 (EDT); << we all know spewing calculus ain't the hot ticket to get the babes pressed up against the wind screen. That does it! Tomorrow I'm getting rid of the horned-rimmed glasses, the slide-ruler, and the; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01887.html (9,197 bytes)
19. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: Carol <car@texas.net>; Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 01:13:51 -0500; Whew!! There for a minute I thought you wrote "plaid pants!" Plaid pants would DEFINITELY have to go, unless, of course, they were red and yellow. OTOH, plaid pans are very acceptable in most of Geor; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01888.html (9,594 bytes)
20. Re: Engine weights/was how about a real V8! (score: 1): Author: Robert Allen <boballen@sky.net>; Date: Wed, 24 Sep 1997 09:02:41 -0500; Hey! Is that what you were trying to say? The motor is heavy, causes oversteer, and ain't as powerful as they thought? Well why didn't you say so! That's obvious. Actually I wonder what the deal was; /html/mgs/1997-09/msg01899.html (10,742 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]