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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TR\]\s+Satinless\s+Steel\s+Brake\s+Hoses\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [TR] Satinless Steel Brake Hoses (score: 1): Author: Dave1massey@cs.com; Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 08:18:34 -0400 (EDT); I installed Stainless hoses back in '96 and I had no such issues. The length was just fine. I think you may have revceived the wrong parts. If you lay the two parts ont on a bench is there an appeare; /html/triumphs/2012-10/msg00316.html (9,405 bytes)
2. Re: [TR] Satinless Steel Brake Hoses (score: 1): Author: Sam <trdoctor@aol.com>; Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:53:17 -0500; They are ~ the same length except for the threaded portion that attaches to the rigid steel line to the caliper. Sam <I installed Stainless hoses back in '96 and I had no such issues. The length was; /html/triumphs/2012-10/msg00318.html (8,096 bytes)
3. Re: [TR] Satinless Steel Brake Hoses (score: 1): Author: Dave1massey@cs.com; Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 19:09:36 -0400 (EDT); Hmm, will it fit the other way 'round? ** triumphs@autox.team.net ** Archive: http://www.team.net/archive; /html/triumphs/2012-10/msg00319.html (8,310 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]