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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*MGB\'s\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. FW: MGB's (score: 1): Author: car@texas.net (Carol); Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:10:55 -0600 (CST); George is having trouble with the list, so I forwarded this for him.; /html/mgs/1997-01/msg01608.html (7,381 bytes)
2. MGB's (score: 1): Author: Wes Grady <wesgrady@csbh.mhv.net>; Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 16:57:44 -0400; When did the chrome bumpers give way to the ugly ones?; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00381.html (6,943 bytes)
3. Re:MGB's (score: 1): Author: "Bradley J. Barnes" <barnes.182@postbox.acs.ohio-state.edu>; Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 19:08:46 -0400; In 1975 the MGB changed from Chrome to rubber ** Bradley J. Barnes Ohio State University barnes.182@osu.edu '74 MGB '58 Ford Fairlane **; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00384.html (7,248 bytes)
4. Re: MGB's (score: 1): Author: Napoleon Solo <G.M.Purkiss@bradford.ac.uk>; Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 09:45:44 +0100 (BST); 1975 - "N" registration cars in the U.K. G-Man ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00392.html (8,235 bytes)
5. Re: MGB's (score: 1): Author: SimJaysun@aol.com; Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 22:03:36 -0400; I resent that! :) My memory is failing me for an actual year, but I know the reason was to meet with US regulations regarding crash-safety. At the same time, I believe, the ride height went up on the; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00424.html (7,317 bytes)
6. Re: MGB's (score: 1): Author: Roe <proe@suffolk.lib.ny.us>; Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 14:06:11 -0400 (EDT); The only ugly ones I know of are the 1974.5 - later cars have a real nice looking wrap around black bumper!! Phil... 67B & 80B. Then I guess there are some people out there that feel the "Sabrina bum; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00431.html (8,856 bytes)
7. Re:MGB's (score: 1): Author: BLECKSTEIN@SHELL.MONMOUTH.COM; Date: Mon, 15 Apr 1996 17:10:40 -0400; On Sun, 14 Apr 1996, "Bradley J. Barnes" wrote: They never imported a 75 Gt. I don't consider the rubber bumper ugly, and actually like the design on my 80 black le. Mike Leckstein; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00435.html (7,858 bytes)
8. Re: MGB's (score: 1): Author: Robert J Donahue/DELCO <RJDONAHU@mail.delcoelect.com>; Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 08:31:16 +0000; <I resent that! :) <My memory is failing me for an actual year, but I know the reason was to meet <with US regulations regarding crash-safety. At the same time, I believe, the <ride height went up on; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00443.html (7,922 bytes)
9. Re: MGB's (score: 1): Author: todd@nutria.nrlssc.navy.mil (Todd Mullins); Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 09:56:45 -0500 (CDT); I'm one of the unlucky few with a Sabrina-bumpered car. I finally got some dome-head bolts and removed the overriders altogether. It really cleans up the look of the car. It'll look even better witho; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00446.html (7,884 bytes)
10. Re: MGB's (score: 1): Author: "W. R. Gibbons" <gibbons@northpole.med.uvm.edu>; Date: Tue, 16 Apr 1996 11:13:59 -0400 (EDT); You are correct about the reason. What I find interesting is the question of whether it really saved the insurance companies any money. I strongly suspect the big bumpers prevented small claims by el; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00450.html (8,650 bytes)
11. Re: MGB's (score: 1): Author: SimJaysun@aol.com; Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 12:20:29 -0400; damage the my You're probably more accurate in this hypothesis than I...I just remembered reading somewhere that the change was due to regulation of SOME kind. As far as the uglier thing...well, yea; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00472.html (8,302 bytes)
12. MGB's (score: 1): Author: baker@islandnet.com (Jack Baker); Date: Tue, 16 Apr 96 07:46 PDT; The beautiful rubber pumpers came out in late 75. They give the car a blended flow that was not present in the earlier fragile chrome models. The intent was ; 1. beauty 2. Standardized bumper height; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00534.html (7,513 bytes)
13. Re: MGB's (score: 1): Author: SimJaysun@aol.com; Date: Fri, 19 Apr 1996 07:55:27 -0400; Finally...someone who appreciates the rubber bumber cars! Honestly, as I said before, I prefer the asthetics of the chrome bumbers. However, I would have to say theat both types have their own parti; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00538.html (8,029 bytes)
14. Re: MGB's (score: 1): Author: gmccann@pcug.org.au (Graham McCann); Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 09:24:27 +1000 (EST); The interesting thing is that behind those harmless looking rubber (actually polypropalene) bumpers is a 25 lb hoop of steel at each end. If there was a thought of impact absorbing it must have been; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00579.html (8,011 bytes)
15. Re: MGB's (score: 1): Author: Napoleon Solo <G.M.Purkiss@bradford.ac.uk>; Date: Mon, 22 Apr 1996 09:41:54 +0100 (BST); BEAUTY ??? You, sad man....I bet you think Roseanne is Sexy !! (Just Kidding my chrome-challenged friend !!) G-Man; /html/mgs/1996-04/msg00653.html (7,699 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 15
Page: [1]