Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*GT6\+\s+really\s+a\s+\'69\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*GT6\+\s+really\s+a\s+\'69\?\s*$/: 5 ]

Total 5 documents matching your query.

1. GT6+ really a '69? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 07:14:12 -0300; I never even questioned the registration of my GT6+ ever since I've had it until the other day. My s/n, going by memory, is something like KC55557, or something like that. I am sure of the 5's. It's; /html/triumphs/1996-06/msg00369.html (6,681 bytes)
2. Re: GT6+ really a '69? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Fri, 14 Jun 1996 09:22:20 -0500; Two sure-fire ways to know if your GT6+ is a 1969 or a 1970: 1. Do the seats recline? They only did that on 70s. 2. Does it have two white beehive backup lights and a little chrome license plate lamp; /html/triumphs/1996-06/msg00384.html (6,956 bytes)
3. Re: GT6+ really a '69? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Fri, 14 Jun 96 12:33:11 MDT; Mitch, Number looks like 69. The practice by Dealers was to register the car as new in the year it was sold. So, if your car was built in say April of 69, shipped to the West side of the Big Pond, t; /html/triumphs/1996-06/msg00392.html (7,288 bytes)
4. Re: GT6+ really a '69? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Fri, 14 Jun 96 13:19:12 EST; It is most likely a '69 that was first sold and therefore registered as a '70. My Vitesse was built in '62 and sold and registered in '64. This is not uncommon since the brits kept with the concept o; /html/triumphs/1996-06/msg00400.html (7,415 bytes)
5. RE: GT6+ really a '69? (score: 1): Author: Unknown; Date: Mon, 17 Jun 1996 09:08:49 +0200; Yet another one would be to drop by my homepage: http://wwwvms.utexas.edu/~ngaard/index.html - and click your way to my GT6 for sale - this happens to be a 1969, registered as a 1970 (someone on the; /html/triumphs/1996-06/msg00452.html (7,188 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 5
Page: [1]