Re: Re[2]: 67.5 1600 vs 2000

To:	roadsters <datsun-roadsters@autox.team.net>
Subject:	Re: Re[2]: 67.5 1600 vs 2000
From:	shifty <shifty@best.com>
Date:	Wed, 08 Dec 1999 17:36:58 -0800


> From: Fred_Katz@ci.sf.ca.us

> And the shifter holes on the trans tunnel are spaced differently.

I believe the 67.5 1600 and 2000 shifter holes are the same, the plate that
goes over them are different.

San Francisco

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
RE: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, John F Sandhoff 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Robert.Long RE: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Andrew Murphy Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Ron Hamilton Re[2]: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Fred_Katz Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, XeddeX Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Alan Bent Re: Re[2]: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, shifty <= Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, CalSpeed Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Gordon Glasgow Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Gordon Glasgow Fw: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Gerardo Magana Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, STAN CHERNOFF Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Fred Katz Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Toby B

Previous by Date:	RE: velocity stacks/strangled solexes, Jim Tyler
Next by Date:	Nice stuff for sale- Great Gift Ideas!, Jim Tyler
Previous by Thread:	Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, Alan Bent
Next by Thread:	Re: 67.5 1600 vs 2000, CalSpeed
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]