Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*SU\s+carbs\s+1600\s+v\/s\s+2000\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*SU\s+carbs\s+1600\s+v\/s\s+2000\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. SU carbs 1600 v/s 2000 (score: 1): Author: "Dixon, Clifton, SSG, 134ARW, CP"; Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 13:58:00 -0500; Greetings all, I have a 1970 2000 and two sets of SU carbs: one set from a '68 1600 and the original set from my '70 2000. They look almost identical except the '70s are dome-shaped, and the '68s are; /html/datsun-roadsters/2002-04/msg00183.html (6,917 bytes)
2. Re: SU carbs 1600 v/s 2000 (score: 1): Author: "sidney raper" <spl310@hotmail.com>; Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 14:02:26 -0500; The 2000 has a larger bore diameter. The 1600 carbs will likely not flow enough for your 2000 to rev to the outer limits - it will run out of breath. They would probably work for a sedately driven s; /html/datsun-roadsters/2002-04/msg00184.html (8,350 bytes)
3. Re: SU carbs 1600 v/s 2000 (score: 1): Author: "datsunmike" <datsunmike@nyc.rr.com>; Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2002 19:51:01 -0500; Don't use the 1600 carbs as they don't flow nearly enough for the 2000. The 1600s barely flow enogh for modified 1600s. The linkage will also present problems. Mike 1600 be for /// datsun-roadsters@a; /html/datsun-roadsters/2002-04/msg00199.html (7,917 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]