Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*New\s+MINI\s+Cooper\s+and\s+Cooper\s+S\.\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*New\s+MINI\s+Cooper\s+and\s+Cooper\s+S\.\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: "Tom Arnold" <toma@coolgamestuff.com>; Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 10:49:56 -0700; Has there been any word on class changes related to the new MINI Cooper? since nationals is over, I thought there was discussion about moving the car into another class. It was in HS. Tom Arnold PGP; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00067.html (7,866 bytes)
2. Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: Dan4223w@aol.com; Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 14:34:03 -0400; There is a 5 page discussion on this on www.SCCAForums.com. Here is the URL: [url]http://www.sccaforums.com/ubb/Forum18/HTML/000302.html[/url] I'll keep reading the bulletins in [i]Sportscar[/i] in h; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00068.html (7,750 bytes)
3. Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: Dan4223w@aol.com; Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 14:44:44 -0400; Sorry about all that HTML bullsh-t in my last email. I guess I'm not used to the way "AOL Anywhere" works.; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00069.html (7,643 bytes)
4. Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: Smokerbros@aol.com; Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2002 13:26:45 EDT; I'm curious as to why you think it would be moved. The winning HS car was a BMW 318i, at 103.6. Minis were 104.0, 104.2, 104.2, and the fastest Civic was 104.3. GS was won with a 102.1, and the faste; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00071.html (8,326 bytes)
5. Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: Jake Hodges <jake@codeworm.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 01:15:22 -0700; Personally, I don't care where the Mini gets classed, but I thought I'd burn a few minutes to share a different perspective. There's regional autocrossers, and there's Nationals autocrossers. We regi; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00077.html (11,524 bytes)
6. Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: Dan4223w@aol.com; Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 10:51:13 EDT; Jake, that was so eloquent. Take it to the committee! Dan Weitsman; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00078.html (7,897 bytes)
7. RE: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: "Thana, Peter {High~Palo Alto}" <PETER.THANA@ROCHE.COM>; Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 12:10:51 -0700; Yes, classing is based on national level results. But would it be more fair to base it on regional results? If so I'm afraid you'd be way more screwed than you are now. In many regions a driver of y; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00089.html (10,297 bytes)
8. Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: "James Creasy" <james@thevenom.net>; Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 14:17:55 -0700; other reason its such a great idea to co-drive an already competitive car. drives in my OSP car available for next season! it should be outclassed in OSP, but it did manage to win some trophies this; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00092.html (11,138 bytes)
9. RE: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: Jake Hodges <jake@codeworm.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 21:52:57 -0700; I'm curious about your proposal, Rich. Can you share details? Or did you already share details when I had my head under a rock? And, Peter, flattery will get you nowhere. When you look at other evide; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00100.html (10,081 bytes)
10. Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: Dan4223w@aol.com; Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 01:00:23 EDT; Actually Jake, my Prelude weighs almost 2900 lbs, without me in it. 135 hp and like 115 ft-lbs tq. However... I think I'm succumbing to the temptation for light modification. I'm going to make myself; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00101.html (8,424 bytes)
11. Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: "James Creasy" <james@thevenom.net>; Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 22:13:57 -0700; GRM dyno tested a mini and a mini S and got hp at the wheels that was pretty close to the published crank figures. its not a lightweight car so clearly theres been a little monkey business with the f; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00103.html (11,247 bytes)
12. RE: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: "Talley, Brooks" <brooks@frnk.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 22:12:50 -0700; Not to mention 4th gen F-bodies, which typically get the "crank" rating at the wheels (I haven't kept up, but when I got my 99 it was rated at 305 crank and turned 303 at the wheels, which would sugg; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00104.html (12,947 bytes)
13. Re: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: "James Creasy" <james@thevenom.net>; Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2002 22:30:59 -0700; oh, and how about the rx7 TT published 0-60 time of 5.5 seconds when 4.8 was more realistic! i drove a supra TT and a 98 z28 back to back once and boy the supra felt faster! -james OSP - Old School P; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00105.html (13,905 bytes)
14. RE: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: "pkincy P KINCY" <pkincy@msn.com>; Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 06:06:30 +0000; The FBod shipping wt is normally about 100 lbs over the C5 coupe weight excepting the 1LE which is about the same as a C5 coupe and about 120 lbs over a Z06. (And most Fbods will produce about 5-8 mo; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00106.html (8,461 bytes)
15. RE: New MINI Cooper and Cooper S. (score: 1): Author: "Michael R. Clements" <mrclem@telocity.com>; Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2002 10:05:07 -0700; Yup, 3rd gen RX-7 with a good launch in the 4.8-4.9 range according to my G-tech pro, showing that magazine writers / reviewers don't necessarily know how to launch a car with a pipey engine. Power o; /html/ba-autox/2002-10/msg00111.html (15,309 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 15
Page: [1]