Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*MGA\s+vs\s+early\s+MGB\s+axle\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*MGA\s+vs\s+early\s+MGB\s+axle\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. MGA vs early MGB axle (score: 1): Author: "Larry Hoy" <larryhoy@prodigy.net>; Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 13:14:57 -0700; Can someone help me with clues as to how you would distinguish between an early MGB banjo axle assembly and a late MGA banjo axle assembly? Thanks. Larry Hoy; /html/mgs/2001-01/msg00499.html (6,603 bytes)
2. Re: MGA vs early MGB axle (score: 1): Author: "British Sportscar Center" <Lawrie@britcars.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 13:32:00 -0800; Somewhere on the periphery of the diff unit, where it bolts to the housing, there should be stamped either 10/39 (MGB) or 10/43 (MGA) Lawrie British Sportscar Center -- Original Message -- From: Lar; /html/mgs/2001-01/msg00505.html (7,201 bytes)
3. RE: MGA vs early MGB axle (score: 1): Author: "Larry Hoy" <larryhoy@prodigy.net>; Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 15:34:49 -0700; Thanks for the reply Lawrie. Are you talking about the stamping on the aluminum carrier? Aren't the aluminum carriers interchangeable between the early MGB and the MGA? If so, that doesn't really tel; /html/mgs/2001-01/msg00513.html (7,401 bytes)
4. Re: MGA vs early MGB axle (score: 1): Author: "Lawrie Alexander" <Lawrie@britcars.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2001 19:56:21 -0800; Yes, Larry, that's the part to which I referred. The other part - the housing - is (AFAIK) identical and there is no way to tell them apart. (Be careful, however, of the difference in housing length; /html/mgs/2001-01/msg00525.html (8,055 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]