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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*consensus\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. RE: consensus (score: 1): Author: Randy Rees <randyr@starwave.com>; Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 09:27:58 -0800; Just to set the record straight. Webers once setup NEVER have to be tuned unless you change something in the engines internals. In fact the only adjustment there is on a Weber is idle speed. No mixtu; /html/mgs/1996-12/msg00110.html (9,353 bytes)
2. Re: consensus (score: 1): Author: Jeremy DuBois <jer@thlogic.com>; Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 12:59:43 -0500 (EST); Sorry, I'm sort of coming in to this thread in the middle but are you talking about the Weber DCOE's? The Weber DGV downdraft I've got on my Spit does indeed have a mixture adjustment needle as well; /html/mgs/1996-12/msg00112.html (8,015 bytes)
3. Re: consensus (score: 1): Author: George G Curl <gcurl@tenet.edu>; Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 12:37:19 -0600 (CST); It has been my finding that the side draft 45DCOE make the B a most unwelcome beast for daily driving. The down draft seems to work well. As for power, the DCOE makes a different car out of the B. Mu; /html/mgs/1996-12/msg00114.html (7,355 bytes)
4. RE: consensus (score: 1): Author: Randy Rees <randyr@starwave.com>; Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 12:28:02 -0800; This has been my experience also!; /html/mgs/1996-12/msg00121.html (7,897 bytes)
5. RE: consensus (score: 1): Author: Randy Rees <randyr@starwave.com>; Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 12:32:36 -0800; not sure about the spit. but all the downdraft webers I've worked with on Fiats(don't even think about starting another thread on this one) and MGB's only have an idle screw, mixture is set with air; /html/mgs/1996-12/msg00122.html (8,796 bytes)
6. Re: consensus (score: 1): Author: Larryhoy@aol.com; Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 22:40:15 -0500; Randy, There are two adjustments on a downdraft Weber. One is the idle adjustment, the other is a mixture adjustment. Larry 1969 MGB; /html/mgs/1996-12/msg00148.html (7,404 bytes)
7. RE: consensus (score: 1): Author: Randy Rees <randyr@starwave.com>; Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 10:30:39 -0800; I stand corrected on the Downdraft. Now I wonder what model downdraft I had? Will have to pull out the old receipt folder. Thanks.; /html/mgs/1996-12/msg00183.html (8,001 bytes)
8. RE: consensus (score: 1): Author: "Jeff and Stash Blackwood" <blacksack@hotmail.com>; Date: 4 Dec 1996 20:14:28 -0000; Randy, thanks for the info. Everything I said was just based on what others had told me about Webers, anyway. Is the DCOE the racing-tuned one? I think that's what the comments I heard were based on; /html/mgs/1996-12/msg00201.html (7,936 bytes)
9. RE: consensus (score: 1): Author: "Jason F. Dutt" <simjason@ix.netcom.com>; Date: Tue, 3 Dec 1996 00:58:08 -0500; Okay, you asked for it! Prepare for a huge swarm of worms from the can you just opened! :) Here's my preferences, silly as they may sound (and probably are). = SU's are better than Webers. I say this; /html/mgs/1996-12/msg00203.html (9,033 bytes)
10. RE: consensus (score: 1): Author: Randy Rees <randyr@starwave.com>; Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 14:33:22 -0800; I suppose you could call it that. It definitely is not the tamer of the two styles. DCOE's are the sidedraft model and the big difference is that both barrels open at the same time vs. a DGV which i; /html/mgs/1996-12/msg00205.html (7,780 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 10
Page: [1]