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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Tube\s+shock\s+conversion\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: "oliver" <sumton@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Mon, 3 Oct 2005 22:46:47 -0500; some time ago i posted some pics of a car with the tube shock conversion. i've added a few more. this is the "bolt to the body kind" strictly fyi http://www.sumton.com/daves/cars/mgb/tubeshocks/; /html/mgs/2005-10/msg00065.html (6,286 bytes)
2. tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: oliver <sumton@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2005 12:28:55 -0700 (PDT); hi. i deleted the message, so sorry to broadcast to the group. i have a parts car with the conversion if the person who is asking about diretions/manuals would like some pics. please contact me off l; /html/mgs/2005-09/msg00068.html (6,243 bytes)
3. Re: Tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: "Paul Hunt" <paul.hunt1@virgin.net>; Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 09:51:40 +0100; Biggest pitfall concerns the rebound-strap stubs on the axle - they are prime candidates for shearing off. Use plenty of penetrating fluid in advance, or cut/grind the old nuts off, or possibly cut t; /html/mgs/2000-06/msg00004.html (8,085 bytes)
4. Re: Tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: Doug_Cameron@icoc.org; Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 06:08:06 -0400; Craig, let us know how it goes - is on the project list for me as "Craig D. Niederst" To: "MG List" <mgs@autox.team.net> <niederst@tele cc: (bcc: Doug Cameron/BOSTON/ICC) rama.com> Subject: Tube shoc; /html/mgs/2000-06/msg00008.html (8,968 bytes)
5. Re: Tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: "James H. Nazarian, Ph.D." <microdoc@apk.net>; Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 09:53:01 -0400; Two cautions: Use locktight or some other means of preventing the rear tube shock conversion hardware from becoming unfastened while you drive. There is some vibrational phenomena at the rear of my; /html/mgs/2000-06/msg00011.html (9,297 bytes)
6. Re: Tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: "M. Edwin Vaughan" <edvaughan@juno.com>; Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 19:29:21 -0500; I don't mean to be rude, but I have always HATED the name of the above tool! Happy motoring, Edwin '77 MGB "I'm tryin' to think but nuthin' happens." -- Curly Howard (the stooge) Check out The MG Fil; /html/mgs/2000-06/msg00060.html (7,322 bytes)
7. Re: Tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: "Paul Hunt" <paul.hunt1@virgin.net>; Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 12:26:21 +0100; I think it's suite...; /html/mgs/2000-06/msg00091.html (7,880 bytes)
8. Re: Tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: Larry Macy <macy@bblmail.psycha.upenn.edu>; Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 12:39:21 -0400; My Ex had 2 - a left one and a right one At this exact moment in time 6/1/00 8:29 PM, edvaughan@juno.com made the profound statement: Larry B. Macy, Ph.D. macy@bblmail.psycha.upenn.edu System Adminis; /html/mgs/2000-06/msg00112.html (8,168 bytes)
9. Re: Tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: Max Heim <mvheim@studiolimage.com>; Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 11:22:55 -0700; My major motivation at the time was cost. 2 conversion kits including shocks were much cheaper than 4 new Armstrongs. I believe the current economics are not quite so compelling. Performance-wise, my; /html/mgs/2000-06/msg00326.html (8,836 bytes)
10. Re: Tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: Chris Attias <cattias@cats.ucsc.edu>; Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2000 16:35:18 -0700; My understanding is that the valving design and tolerances of tube shocks, in their more expensive and higher-tech incarnations, are better suited to performance applications. There are things like d; /html/mgs/2000-06/msg00339.html (8,763 bytes)
11. Tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: "Craig D. Niederst" <niederst@telerama.com>; Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2000 00:11:13 -0400; Going to be installing the Moss tube shock conversion kit for the rear of my '71 MGB tomorrow. Directions look simple enough, but I was wondering if there are any pitfalls to be careful of? Will be r; /html/mgs/2000-05/msg01605.html (6,535 bytes)
12. tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: Jim Stuart <jimbb88@erols.com>; Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 19:27:15 -0500; I know this is an old thread, but I just took a 2 hour ride with my Gabriel Pro-Rider Heavy Duty Gas Shocks (installed, as opposed to sitting in the passenger seat), & I wanted to howl a bit. Pn 7362; /html/mgs/1998-10/msg01182.html (8,434 bytes)
13. Re: tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: "Lawrie Alexander" <Lawrie@britcars.com>; Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 18:02:39 -0800; Jim has prompted me to publish my reactions to the tube shock kit I installed a couple of weeks ago, using the info on Skye Poier's website as a guide. First, let it be said that I bought Monroes onl; /html/mgs/1998-10/msg01191.html (9,547 bytes)
14. Re: tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: "Lawrie Alexander" <Lawrie@britcars.com>; Date: Sun, 25 Oct 1998 20:24:07 -0800; Help! My computer has taken over! This was the beginning of a draft reply; I don't know how it escaped and I certainly don't advocate anyone "ass"ing anything............ The correct report on the tu; /html/mgs/1998-10/msg01193.html (10,231 bytes)
15. Re: tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: grunt14@juno.com; Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 11:54:15 -0500; I just installed it also as I was doing new rear springs, I broke the rear shakel and am waiting for a new one to arrive,I reinsealled the rear bolt to fill the hole and prevent flex or stressing als; /html/mgs/1998-10/msg01210.html (7,237 bytes)
16. Re: tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: Skye Poier <skye@ffwd.bc.ca>; Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 12:26:48 -0800; This is for the rear I take it? Are these the aforementioned 1984-1988 Dodge Colt shocks (front or rear from a Colt?) I will be updating the conversion plans with the comments from the list soon. Sky; /html/mgs/1998-10/msg01219.html (7,632 bytes)
17. RE: tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: Fred Cheney <FCheney@kinneyassoc.com>; Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 15:28:52 -0500; The Colt would have struts in front, shocks rear. I would be suprised to find that MOPAR (or Mitsu as the case may be) replacement parts would be less expensive than aftermarket. Fred Cheney Kinney &; /html/mgs/1998-10/msg01221.html (8,481 bytes)
18. Re: tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: Andy Ramm <aramm@concentric.net>; Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1998 12:55:21 -0700; Yes, to confirm, it's the rear shocks from the Colt. Keep in mind, don't use the ones from a Colt Vista Wagon, I think they're different. Andy; /html/mgs/1998-10/msg01222.html (8,377 bytes)
19. Re: tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: Chad Cooper <mgb72@airmail.net>; Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 21:48:08 -0600; Those shocks can be remembered more easily by their application, '84-'87 Chad 72 B Daily Driver (w/Corvette suspension) = ' ) Front and rear.; /html/mgs/1998-10/msg01257.html (8,959 bytes)
20. Re: tube shock conversion (score: 1): Author: Chad Cooper <mgb72@airmail.net>; Date: Mon, 26 Oct 1998 22:02:58 -0600; Oh yeah and the Colt too, same shock, Vette just seems cooler...; /html/mgs/1998-10/msg01260.html (9,328 bytes)

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