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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*MGB\s+vs\.\s+Alpine\s*$/: 11 ]

Total 11 documents matching your query.

1. MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: Jay_Laifman@countrywide.com; Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 12:53:14 -0700; My question is not meant to be a joke, but serious curiosity. When my 1967 Alpine was crushed, I considered replacing it with various other cars. One of the cars was the MGB. Now, I've driven a numbe; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00290.html (8,985 bytes)
2. MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: Jay_Laifman@countrywide.com; Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 13:07:00 -0700; Rick wrote the following before I sent my last post, but I did not see it until I sent mine: time)!!! This is certainly why I stuck with the Alpine. I cannot disagree with him. Catching that feeling; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00291.html (8,850 bytes)
3. MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: "Rick Ehlert" <ricke@idcnet.com>; Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 15:02:06 -0500; I have no intention of starting a war!!! Seriously though, I just love the '65 MGB. My Grandpa and I tinkered with that car to keep it going (a $900 bondo machine) and I made alot of good memories w; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00292.html (7,548 bytes)
4. RE: MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: "Chris Stephenson" <cs_tscg@bellsouth.net>; Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 15:47:43 -0500; Geez guys let Rick have his MG. The one thing that lowers my opinion of fellow auto aficionado is giving someone a hard time about his or her automotive preferences. I once went to a meet at Chateau; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00294.html (9,030 bytes)
5. Re: MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: "jumpin'jan" <servaij@cris.com>; Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:10:54 -0700; Well, at least when a passerby points out your MGB as a MG they will be correct without knowing any better. When they point out my Alpine they ask if it is an MG. Also, one benefit is that one can re; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00298.html (7,980 bytes)
6. Re: MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: "Steve Griffing" <bartdog@mindspring.com>; Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:58:06 -0400; Technically, the; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00299.html (8,211 bytes)
7. Re: MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: "Patrick" <pLaske@bigfoot.com>; Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:53:07 -0500; Very well said, Chris.; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00302.html (7,849 bytes)
8. Re: MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: sosnaenergyconsulting@home.com; Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:56:37 -0700; And for LBC owners who can't let well alone (I'm not naming any names mind you, but I see his face in the mirror every morning) there's the Buick/Olds/Rover aluminum V-8 conversion. Not a tiger, of c; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00305.html (8,556 bytes)
9. Re: MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: "Ian Spencer" <SpenceIC@Healthall.com>; Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 12:16:51 -0500; Yah...it must be nice to be able to rebody your MG...without it being called a Ian Spencer Client Services Alliance Business Center Health Alliance (513) 585-7123 Well, at least when a passerby point; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00312.html (8,223 bytes)
10. Re: MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: Alex & Peggy McGregor <apmcgregor@home.com>; Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 23:03:58 -0600; I've noticed a lot of controversy about this subject lately. I'm a bit prejudiced. I have hated MGB's (or the jerks who drive them) since 1971. I will admit that the B is a stronger car. It turns out; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00320.html (8,015 bytes)
11. Re: MGB vs. Alpine (score: 1): Author: TIGEROOTES@aol.com; Date: Fri, 23 Jun 2000 01:13:35 EDT; << The MGB survived. >> The MGB front fenders are not unibody...that helps: the early MGB's are 200+ lbs less in weight compared to the later MGB body shell units: all late MGB's were redesigned and; /html/alpines/2000-06/msg00321.html (7,582 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 11
Page: [1]