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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Proposed\s+Rules\s+Change\s*$/: 36 ]

Total 36 documents matching your query.

1. Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: "anne & greg" <gvav27@home.com>; Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 21:34:33 -0400; I noted that Fastrack in the April SportsCar has a proposed rule change that would impact CMod. It would eliminate the requirement to have an operational reverse gear. See item 11 on page F-48. Perso; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00003.html (7,765 bytes)
2. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Hottvr@aol.com; Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 21:59:58 EDT; It doesn't really impact me much. I can never find reverse anyway????????? And if I could find it? I would be afraid of backing over a little guy like Dick R in the paddock!!!!! I still wanna hear ab; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00004.html (8,581 bytes)
3. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Mark Sirota <msirota@isc.upenn.edu>; Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 22:17:25 -0400; I agree with you, Greg. It also seems counter to the preface of the class listing in Appendix A, which discusses the desire to prevent Solo-only Formula Fords. I'll write a letter. I'm surprised nobo; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00005.html (8,472 bytes)
4. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: washburn <washburn@dwave.net>; Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 21:20:04 -0500; To be perfecty honest, I didn't know they could be had with reverse gears. :) They allow other things, like fire systems, to be left off. Is this in-consistent with that? You have reverse, how many d; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00006.html (8,490 bytes)
5. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Mark Sirota <msirota@isc.upenn.edu>; Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 22:23:26 -0400; Reverse is a fundamental part of the gearbox that comes installed in any Formula Ford. There are a few different common gearboxes, but they all include reverse, as reverse is required by the FF1600 r; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00007.html (8,423 bytes)
6. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: washburn <washburn@dwave.net>; Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 21:31:27 -0500; Thanks for the info, I was not sure and thought that perhaps most FF's did not have it. Given that this is a normal and common thing, I agree that there is no motivation to eliminate the requirement,; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00008.html (8,596 bytes)
7. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Dick Rasmussen <rasmussend@mindspring.com>; Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 22:36:40 -0400; My "problem" is somewhat different. I can find reverse, but thanks to the mirrors I have, I can avoid cutting giants like Mike B off at the kneecaps with that nasty rear spoiler on my car or impaling; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00009.html (9,368 bytes)
8. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Hottvr@aol.com; Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 23:18:05 EDT; << I'm surprised nobody has commented that neither of my class-related proposals (to move the SR/SRF to FM and to eliminate the weight allowance for S2) were taken forward. Mark >> I wanted to, but h; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00010.html (8,518 bytes)
9. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Hottvr@aol.com; Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 23:32:42 EDT; << My "problem" is somewhat different. I can find reverse, but thanks to the mirrors I have, I can avoid cutting giants like Mike B off at the kneecaps with that nasty rear spoiler on my car or impal; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00011.html (8,999 bytes)
10. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Dick Rasmussen <rasmussend@mindspring.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 06:01:53 -0400; with don't I personally cannot imagine not having reverse available. I have paid good money to replace broken mirrors so that I can see when I need to back up without a "guide" available to direct me; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00012.html (9,404 bytes)
11. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: VDieman@aol.com; Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 09:12:46 EDT; << I noted that Fastrack in the April SportsCar has a proposed rule change that would impact CMod. It would eliminate the requirement to have an operational reverse gear. See item 11 on page F-48. Pe; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00014.html (9,492 bytes)
12. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Sam & Greg Scharnberg <samandgreg@qwest.net>; Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 11:19:30 -0500; I sent the following response to Jr's post a couple of hours ago and it seems to be in E-mail purgatory. The 5 speed cars (MK9, FT200, and Staffs) all have a problem if they miss a shift. First is to; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00017.html (9,219 bytes)
13. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Mark Sirota <msirota@isc.upenn.edu>; Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 13:13:54 -0400; My 914 had the same pattern, and a truly horrible linkage -- you didn't so much select a gear, you recommended one. Whenever Josh drove it, he used to say "start in first, go straight up to second, g; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00018.html (9,661 bytes)
14. RE: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: "Chessick, Mark" <Mark.Chessick@fmr.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 05:51:53 -0400; As long as its legal with the GCR's at the moment. I have to think at some point the GCR's may be unrealistic for older cars. I like backing up instead of pushing right now. Mark Chessick /// /// aut; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00019.html (8,633 bytes)
15. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Charlie Mathews <cmathews@theramp.net>; Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 12:51:03 -0500; Apparently this did not get out. Forgot to delete bottom of email. /// /// autox-cm@autox.team.net mailing list ///; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00020.html (10,275 bytes)
16. Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Sam & Greg Scharnberg <samandgreg@qwest.net>; Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 12:56:43 -0500; Charlie, the proposed rule was not just for CM. I understand what you are saying but I don't think I understand why. There is no performance advantage to removal of reverse and it is easily replaced; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00021.html (10,570 bytes)
17. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Mark Sirota <msirota@isc.upenn.edu>; Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 14:01:55 -0400; Okay, that still is "disabling reverse" rather than removing the requirement. Asked and answered. Mark /// /// autox-cm@autox.team.net mailing list ///; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00022.html (8,862 bytes)
18. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Dick Rasmussen <rasmussend@mindspring.com>; Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 21:55:15 -0400; with don't I personally cannot imagine not having reverse available. I have paid good money to replace broken mirrors so that I can see when I need to back up without a "guide" available to direct me; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00023.html (8,453 bytes)
19. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: Dick Rasmussen <rasmussend@mindspring.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 19:04:56 -0400; Now that is a VERY good reason for removing/disabling reverse! Dick Rasmussen CM 85 85 Van Diemen RF-85 Formula Ford /// /// autox-cm@autox.team.net mailing list ///; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00024.html (9,207 bytes)
20. Re: Proposed Rules Change (score: 1): Author: VDieman@aol.com; Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2001 09:34:20 EDT; << > on Now that is a VERY good reason for removing/disabling reverse! Dick Rasmussen CM 85 85 Van Diemen RF-85 Formula Ford That is exactly why this proposal has been made. Since CM cars do not have; /html/autox-cm/2001-04/msg00025.html (9,726 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]