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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Rear\s+Shock\s+Kit\s*$/: 29 ]

Total 29 documents matching your query.

1. Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: Larry Colen <lrcar@red4est.com>; Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:37:53 -0800; One of the things on my near term shopping list is a rear shock kit, converting from the armstrongs to lever shocks. The two kits under consideration are the Moss Kit and Doug Jackson's kit from Brit; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00236.html (7,613 bytes)
2. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: Larry Colen <lrcar@red4est.com>; Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:41:12 -0800; Thanks for the advice. Can you refresh my memory as to which of the units are adjustable? I believe that you sell a spax unit which is. My gut agrees with your preferences. Thanks. Are the shocks in; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00237.html (8,781 bytes)
3. RE: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: "Dodd, Kelvin" <doddk@mossmotors.com>; Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:28:55 -0800; For the type of driving and experimenting you are doing I strongly The Spax are adjustable and are a specially short unit which allows the OE shock brackets to be reversed and retained. Early Spax we; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00242.html (9,897 bytes)
4. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: Larry Colen <lrcar@red4est.com>; Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:12:42 -0800; Since I need to pull in and out of my driveway, I won't be lowering the car overmuch. I've got an exhaust system from my local mufffler shop. If there's a problem, I'll have them fix it. They came up; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00243.html (12,167 bytes)
5. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: WSpohn4@aol.com; Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:48:32 EST; My .02 from an old racer. Converting to tube shocks definitely falls into the "I've got money burning a hole in my wallet and need to do something neat to the car" category. It will not make termendo; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00249.html (9,094 bytes)
6. RE: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: "Dean T. Lake" <dtlake@erols.com>; Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:29:22 -0500; --Original Message-- Most of the guys I talk to who rave about the conversions simply don't realise that they are NOT saying "The tube conversion is far superior to the original" - they are not in an; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00252.html (8,996 bytes)
7. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: Don Malling <dmallin@attglobal.net>; Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:01:10 -0500; I have been told, by a very reliable source, that if the lever shocks are not leaking they are fine -- that is, they do not need to be rebuilt. From your experiences would you agree? Don Malling; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00253.html (8,258 bytes)
8. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: "Paul M." <rowman22001@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:44:05 -0800 (PST); I'm not necessarily a fan of the tube conversions, and I plan to race my MGB with rebuilt and reworked lever shocks, but I thought I would mention that the SVRA DOES allow tube shock rear conversions; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00255.html (9,097 bytes)
9. RE: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: "Dean T. Lake" <dtlake@erols.com>; Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:28:17 -0500; Also, the SCCA allows the conversion for any autocross class other than http://mouton.best.vwh.net/sccasolo/Rules/sp.html#s145 I don't know about SCCA road racing classes. Chances are it is generally; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00257.html (9,558 bytes)
10. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: Bill McLeod <wbmcleod@cox.net>; Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 16:34:31 -0700; I will jump in and take exception with that, especially since I am a Bill (well, you didn't say which one!). I have several lever action shocks on hand, some good and some bad, and there is no sign o; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00261.html (9,273 bytes)
11. RE: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: "Dean T. Lake" <dtlake@erols.com>; Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:06:42 -0500; --Original Message-- if the lever shocks are not leaking they are fine -- that is, they do not need to be rebuilt. From your experiences would you agree? Don Malling -- you have on your hands, free t; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00262.html (8,480 bytes)
12. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: WSpohn4@aol.com; Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 00:48:16 EST; Not at all - it just means that THOSE seals (the shaft seals) haven't given up yet, but the inside of the shocks could be toast, or for that matter empty. You'd be amazed how many people have no idea; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00267.html (9,543 bytes)
13. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: "Telewest $PH$" <paul.hunt1@blueyonder.co.uk>; Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:03:22 -0000; If they *are* leaking they *do* need to be rebuilt. If they are *not* leaking the valves could still be faulty. PaulH.; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00271.html (8,389 bytes)
14. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: "Telewest $PH$" <paul.hunt1@blueyonder.co.uk>; Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 11:32:47 -0000; It is true that it is a service item but I have found over many years that if they aren't visibly leaking they won't need topping up. If they *are* visibly leaking they need rebuilding. PaulH. check; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00272.html (8,711 bytes)
15. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: Larry Colen <lrcar@red4est.com>; Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 09:30:09 -0800; This is interesting. Is there anyone that has installed tubeshocks, when they've had good working armstrongs, and noticed significant improvement? More than they would from heavier fork oil or compet; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00283.html (8,688 bytes)
16. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: Max Heim <mvheim@studiolimage.com>; Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:55:35 -0800; When this subject has been batted around before, no one has stepped I vaguely remember reading many years ago that lever shocks were theoretically inherently weaker at rebound control, but that it wa; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00289.html (9,114 bytes)
17. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: "N" <twobees@sprynet.com>; Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 20:41:28 -0500; Like Bill Spohn, I think the cost & time & effort to convert the MGB rear shocks to tube-type, just isn't worth it. I've put ten years (12 years if I go back to 1965 & 66 with my '65 B) of street & r; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00300.html (9,736 bytes)
18. Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: "Brinkman, Gerardo V" <GB127167@teradata-ncr.com>; Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 08:36:47 -0500; Over the past 6 years I have tried several different shock configuration on the rear. Stock lever shocks were okay - but do tend to wear out fairly quickly. Spax conversion is okay but way too stiff; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00302.html (8,845 bytes)
19. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: "James Nazarian" <jhn3@uakron.edu>; Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:40:08 -0500; I know that there aren't too many Bs running around with the lowered and uprated springs, but I find the SPAX shocks to be a perfect match to the stiffer springs. Considering the cost of the kit, tha; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00309.html (9,498 bytes)
20. Re: Rear Shock Kit (score: 1): Author: Glenn Schnittke <schnittke@mindspring.com>; Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 05:56:07 -0600; I've been driving B's daily for about fifteen years and I've got two cents on this but they mostly agree with the others. My '74 maroon was garbage when bought. After replacing all the springs, kingp; /html/mgs/2003-11/msg00311.html (9,201 bytes)

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