- 1. RFI: First draft of my proposed C&C re-write (score: 1)
- Author: "Arthur Emerson" <vreihen@hotmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 16:54:42 PDT
- Here it is, my proposed replacement for the current stock-class rule 13.2.A. As sent forth from the mountains of Colorado, under the title "National Solo 2000 Rules" : 13.2 Bodywork A. Accessories, g
- /html/autox/2000-06/msg00280.html (10,664 bytes)
- 2. Re: RFI: First draft of my proposed C&C re-write (score: 1)
- Author: Jon Rush <jonathan.rush@sdrc.com>
- Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 13:44:16 -0400
- The portion of the first sentence, "modifications which have no effect on performance and/or handling and do not materially reduce the weight of the car are permitted." Still doesn't capture what you
- /html/autox/2000-06/msg00393.html (11,639 bytes)
- 3. Re: RFI: First draft of my proposed C&C re-write (score: 1)
- Author: "David Hawkins" <otgrouch@twosrus.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2000 13:38:22 -0500
- How about 'not materially CHANGE the weight of the car' ? That way you keep the concrete speaker enclosures out too. But then you'll have folks battling over the definition of 'materially'. Oh, what
- /html/autox/2000-06/msg00411.html (7,561 bytes)
- 4. Re: RFI: First draft of my proposed C&C re-write (score: 1)
- Author: Gail/Sid deLeon <deleon@gs.verio.net>
- Date: Wed, 07 Jun 2000 17:12:29 -0500
- How many #'s in one materially ?
- /html/autox/2000-06/msg00442.html (12,474 bytes)
- 5. Re: RFI: First draft of my proposed C&C re-write (score: 1)
- Author: Jon Rush <jonathan.rush@sdrc.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2000 19:00:07 -0400
- Because it would eliminate 99.9% of the C&C items that people like to do to their car. Adding weight is just fine IHMO, because it slows forward acceleration, adds to the centripetal force required t
- /html/autox/2000-06/msg00675.html (8,164 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu