HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: screw in plugs
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 93 22:19:43 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Wednesday, Jan 06 17:19:40
X-Sequence: 3212
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


 From time to time I see performance engines with screw-in core plugs
instead of the usual pressed-in cup plug.  (freeze plug).  Assuming I
wanted to go to screw-in plugs, where would I be able to get 1-1/2
diameter, 1/2" thick pipe plugs?  Also, is there any place to obtain the
proper tap other than dropping $80 or so at the local machine supply
place?

 (actually *turning* a 1-1/2 inch tap is left as an exercise for the
reader...)
                             

----------
Posted by: emory!chaos.lrk.ar.us!dave.williams (Dave Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: Detonation - how to fix 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 20:55:31 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Friday, Jan 08 15:55:28
X-Sequence: 3286
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

        Reply to:   RE>Detonation - how to fix it?
[So here is the cruncher: has anybody used the stuff to control
detonation? Apparently it was used by F1 cars back in the turbo
era. Is it mixed into the fuel at fill up time or is it injected
separately from a separate holding tank like water injection?]
 

----------
Posted by: Mark Jose <emory!werple.apana.org.au!speednut>]

See the previous "home brew" octane boosters ... you'll notice that one of the
best combinations is good base stock gasoline (92 octane unleaded) with Toulene
added.  Toulene is what gives racing gasoline that characteristic aroma (which
immediately means RACING to me!).

I've mixed Toulene with 92 octane gasoline quite a few times to make my own
Unleaded high octane street gas.  Works great and allows me to run my race chip
with about 19 pounds of boost around on the street with no detonation ( I
normally run 20 pounds at the track ... that one more pound requires leaded
racing gas ... amazing how that one last pound makes such a difference octane
requirements).

However, Toulene is getting alot tougher to buy in bulk in my home state. 
Somebody has decided that it is a "semihazardous" material and you have to pay
disposal taxes, etc.
 

-- Ken Mosher
-- Buick Grand National:  Happiness is a low E.T.!





----------
Posted by: "KEN MOSHER" <emory!imd.sterling.com!KEN_MOSHER>
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject:      HP absorber thought
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 93 21:12:11 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 11 16:12:03
X-Sequence: 3349
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

Heres a 4:30am idea reguarding the wasting of horsepower..
has anyone looked into the use of boat props?
i know some of those big V6 motors make 100+ horsepower.
it wouldn't take too much to get a large piece of steel pipe
and run a shaft down it to mount the props on.
I'm not a pump expert by any means, but it seems that a
stationary prop might have to be mounted between stages to straighten the
water flow out for the next prop.
another possibility is to just put several of these on the same shaft
but not plumb them in series but in parallel....
or if somone got their hands on a pump or two out of a jet boat, well,
heck, life would be fairly easy....  the part i'm curious about in this dyno
discussion is the torque measurement technique..   my idea was to use a
torsion bar out of a large Chrysler. plot the torque vs degrees on paper
then put some sort of shaft position sensor on each end and watch
how far one advances over the other.

one thing that i heard about in a race car engineering class i took
last quarter was a problem involving a standing torque wave between the
engine and the brake. it was a problem at extreemly high RPM and
extreemly high horsepower.  Indy motors i believe. What they said was that
torque wave would get to the weak points and scatter parts around the dyno
room.  If anyone has heard anything else about this, it might be of interest
to those of us who are attempting to put a dyno together in their apartment. :)

                                               G.P.

----------
Posted by: "G. Peterson" <emory!WSUVM1.CSC.WSU.EDU!97578579>
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Forwarded: Re: humvee
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 93 21:00:43 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Wednesday, Jan 06 16:00:39
X-Sequence: 3203
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

----------   
I would think that the Cummins Turbo Diesel would work
very nicely in a HumVee.
-Merv

----------
Posted by: emory!MAINE.maine.edu!IO10702
 

Which 'Cummins Turbo Diesel'?  the members of the B5.9 series would be (at
900-ish lbs dry and without electrics, flywheel and flywheel housing) too heavy
and deliver too much torque.  the members of the B3.9 family might be a little
better (B3.9-120, perhaps... 300lb-ft @ 1700 and 120hp @ 2500...
four-cylinder), but the height of that engine (and all the B-series engines)
from intake-elbow to oilpan bottom would be too much for the hummer's engine
compartment.  but, *if* it could be affordably swapped in, fuel mileage would
radically increase, top-end would decrease (maximum engine speed of the
B-series is 2900+/-50rpm, the GM is 3300+?/-?rpm, these are fixed by the pump
and shouldn't be tampered with lightly...).  don't know if you all noticed this
or not -- the Cummins B3.9-120 puts out more usable output than GM's 6.2, of
course the 6.2 (and 6.5) GM engines are still conversion engines, albeit a
little better executed than the 350cid... also (sorry Mike S.) the Navistar
used by Ford is a conversion engine, quite well executed, however...

Walt K.

-------

----------
Posted by: emory!halibut.nosc.mil!koziarz (Walter A. Koziarz)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: 2 speed powerglides
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 93 20:33:46 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Wednesday, Jan 06 15:33:43
X-Sequence: 3200
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


-> I do not know too much about powerglides, but I would like to know
-> how
-> many variations there are.  As I understand it, there are iron and
-> aluminum cases, and V6 and V8 first gears.  Thats a total of 4
-> variations I know.  Anything more?

 Some early aluminum case 6 cyl Powerglides were air cooled; the one in
my '63 Chevy II was.  I've seen ones from later models which used the
standard fluid cooler.

 There was one variant for the Vega 4, with the unique Vega bolt
pattern.
                                                                               

----------
Posted by: emory!chaos.lrk.ar.us!dave.williams (Dave Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: 2 notes to JGD
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 93 19:38:01 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Tuesday, Jan 05 14:37:58
X-Sequence: 3182
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


The address for American Science and Surplus is 

   601 Linden Place
Evanston, IL 60202

	 Frank Evan Perdicaro 				Xyvision Color Systems
      Legalize guns, drugs and cash...today.		101 Edgewater Drive
   inhouse: frank@marvin, x5572				Wakefield MA
outhouse: frank@contex.com, 617-245-4100x5572		018801285

----------
Posted by: emory!marvin.contex.com!frank (Frank Perdicaro)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Fuel Delivery Contd
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 19:10:25 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Sunday, Jan 10 14:10:20
X-Sequence: 3335
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


Using an estimated molecular weight of 100 for gasoline (seems OK for
a benzene-like molecule), I get about 13.5 kg/min on a 500ci 8000rpm 11:1mix
1.0 VE engine. That's about 10 gallons a minute. I used a real calculator,
and only slightly bogus numbers (like that molar weight estimate above),
and it's not too far off from John's 6gal/min estimate.

John R. Lupien

>Thanks  John.  This idealized system (500ci 8000rpm 1.0ve) will be closer
>to 476ci 6000rpm and 0.8ve.  So 360 gph is probably high.  Mallory makes
>a 250 gph electric pump with matching regulator.  It seems to me that it
>should do the trick, or am I cutting it too close?  I can install an
>inexpensive mechanical pump between the electric pump and regulator.
>This would add a good 70 gph, or 320 gph total.  I would prefer to use
>one pump with a regulator (keep it simple).  However, the Mallory comes
>in 250 gph and 500 gph flavors, the 500 being rather expensive. Thoughts?
>
>Regards,
>Eric
 

----------
Posted by: ERIC WEBB 919-541-7896 <emory!epamail.epa.gov!WEBB.ERIC>
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: humvee
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 93 21:42:53 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Tuesday, Jan 05 16:42:49
X-Sequence: 3189
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


I am considering a serious 4 wheel drive vehicle.
I got some literature from AM General about the Humvee aka Hummer.
It has a GM 6.2L Diesel FI motor, with 150 hp at 3600 rpm and 250 ft-lbs of
torque at 2000 rpm. The governor is mechanical, the bore & stroke is
3.98*3.82 inches, and the compression ratio is 21.3:1.

It also has a GM 3L80 3 speed automatic with a max input torque of 451 ft-lbs.
The gears are 2.48, 1.48, and 1.

The vehicle has a top speed of 65 mph and gets 13-14 mph. 0-60 is 19.5 sec.

It seems like a nice vehicle other than the price, and the poor acceleration
and top speed. I know that people turbocharge the GM 6.2 Diesel. What do you
folks suggest to improve acceleration, and top speed.  I know that GM has
a 4 speed automatic truck trans around; might it help top speed? 

Are there other suitable 4 wheel drive vehicles. I would like full time 4
wheel drive, fully independent suspension, lotsa ground clearance, and to be
able to sleep 2 inside. ABS, 4 wheel disk brakes, EFI, good gas mileage,
reasonable acceleration, and top speed and cheap would be nice.

	Jeff turbo Deifik	jdeifik@isi.edu
-------

----------
Posted by: Jeff Deifik <emory!isi.edu!JDEIFIK>
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Watts Link
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 22:36:12 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Thursday, Jan 07 17:36:08
X-Sequence: 3250
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


-> I need to build a watts link for my '88 Mustang GT to run SCCA
-> American Sedan.

 Where do you want your rear roll center to be?  The Watts link is
usually right near the axle centerline.  With a strut car the front roll
center is usually quite low, giving a steep roll axis.  This causes roll
understeer, which is aggravated because the struts allow the roll center
to shift from left the right in front as the body rolls, and it shifts
the "wrong" way to help.

 Generally, lowering the rear roll center and leveling the roll axis
will greatly help the stability and turn-in characteristics of a strut
car.  You can go to very short Watts link arms, which can give you an
S-shaped motion instead of straight line, or flip the link 90 degrees,
which can cause mounting problems, or you can run a Panhard rod, which
you can drop damned near to the track surface if you want.  If you run a
maximal-width Panhard rod, your side-to-side movement of the axle will
be less than 1/4 inch, and you have only two bushings instead of five,
and you can put the roll center anywhere you want, and you don't have to
engineer some way to mount it to the axle housing without roasting the
innards with the torch.  Besides, with three extra bushings and their
slack, the Watts link probably won't be any better than the Panhard rod.

 Typically, after adding the Panhard rod to move the roll axis, the car
will "feel slow" when turning in; this is NOT the case in reality;
you're just dispensing with some of the weird gyrations the car normally
performs.  If you've raced the car much, you'll be surprised at how much
difference the rod makes.
                                                                                                 

----------
Posted by: emory!chaos.lrk.ar.us!dave.williams (Dave Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: Watts Link
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 09:36:15 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Friday, Jan 08 04:36:00
X-Sequence: 3277
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


          You must be a Ford man; I think you meant Camaro. :-)
          Some thoughts:
           
          Cheating: Without cracking off the cylinder heads, I couldn't 
          tell the difference among 305, 327, 350, 383, 400 engines 
          (provided the last two were internally balanced).
          
          Performance: I thought oversquare engines (i.e. stroke >= bore) 
          were torque monsters, but not high rpm pullers.  My thinking is 
          that the reciprocating assembly mass requires more power to move 
          at higher rpms than an undersquare assembly.  But I better leave 
          that to the physics or engineering experts.  Meanwhile I have 
          conjured up an analogy.
          
          I'm trying to image a stationary bike example.  Both bikes have 
          the same size front and rear gears.  One bike has pedals attached 
          to "journals" which locate the pedals one foot apart.  The other 
          bike has pedals located two feet apart.  Seems like it would be 
          easier to start the two foot peddler, but take more energy to 
          sustain it a higher rpms.  Conversely, the one foot peddler would 
          be harder to start yet easier to sustain higher rpms.  Am I on 
          the right track with this analogy?     
          
          Eric

----------
Posted by: ERIC WEBB 919-541-7896 <emory!epamail.epa.gov!WEBB.ERIC>
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: JBA
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 93 20:51:00 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Tuesday, Jan 12 15:50:55
X-Sequence: 3401
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu

Mike Brattland asks about the new JBA facility.

I only spent a few minutes inside and the place was a total
disaster at the time - boxes of stuff everywhere, furniture
in arbitrary positions, etc.  You know how it is when you're
moving.

I would guess that the new facility has about 3 times the
floor space in the office and showroom area.  I think that
they have space for at least twice as many service bays in
the back but I didn't really get to look back there.

It's good to see that the recession hasn't crippled all
businesses.  JBA sure has grown.

Bob Hale                                      ...!ucsd!btree!hale
...!btree!hale@ucsd.edu                       ...!ucsd!btree!hale@uunet.uu.net


----------
Posted by: emory!ucsd.edu!btree!hale (Bob Hale)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: iron to aluminum glide conversion
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 93 08:51:28 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 04 03:51:22
X-Sequence: 3163
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List) writes:

> That reminds me.  When did Chevrolet drop the straddle mount
>configuration?

The side engine mounts were introduced in '58.

> The front bolt bosses came back in '68 on the 350 so they could mount
>the power steering and stuff more easily, so there were only a few years
>there without the front bosses.

John Michelsen, in "Chevy Performance" (Brea, CA: S-A Design Books, 1981)
says that "until the mid-'70's the blocks retained the front mounting holes,
but they are usually left undrilled on late-model engines".

> I think the mounting holes on the front of the cylinder heads also
>appeared in '68.  (?)

The long water pump came out in '69 on most passenger cars; its belt
configuration allowed the alternator to be mounted forward of the head
instead of over the valve cover.  Presumably, the bolt holes necessary
for the alternator bracket were introduced at the same time.

I haven't found any info about the timing of the switch from bellhousing
to block for the starter mounts; all my references say "some early blocks"
had the bellhousing mount, or something equally unspecific.

--Mark Looper
(fat ol' smallblock '70 Caprice, vaporware '64 Chevelle)

----------
Posted by: emory!cco.caltech.edu!looper (Mark D. Looper)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: 305 torque
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 09:15:01 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Friday, Jan 08 04:14:31
X-Sequence: 3275
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


->      You can mail order complete 305s with 400 cranks for less than
-> $2000.00. Probably less than having all that machine work done and it
-> has

 You can build one for half that, and it won't cost you $300 truck
freight to get it, either.

 This is the hotrod list, you know.  Who's going to buy a motor from
some mail order bozo when they can do it in their own kitchen?
                                                                     

----------
Posted by: emory!chaos.lrk.ar.us!dave.williams (Dave Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: Re: 305 torque
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 09:28:15 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Thursday, Jan 07 04:28:11
X-Sequence: 3226
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


-> > How about a 329 the hard way?  3.73 305 bore, and a 3.75 stroke 400
-> >crank.  You'd have to have the mains cut to the standard large
-> journal >diameter, but they do that all the time for 383s.  At least
-> one company >is making their own 383 cranks now too.
>
> That should do it.  You'ld probably have to relieve some metal about
> the base o the cylinder bores so that the longer throw crank doesn't
> whack them.  At least you have to do this for 350-383 conversions.

 There's a LOT of difference between Chevy blocks, but given the small
bore I'd agree you'd have to notch the bottoms of the bores a bit.
Since you may wind up cutting as much as a 1" wide x 3/8" deep x 1-1/2"
long slot in a 350 with the stock crank and aluminum rods, it shouldn't
be any major deal.  (not that you'd probably have to get that
radical here!)  There should be no problem with the cam or oil pan rail.


-> I don't remember what kind of camshaft you have or budget.  You could
-> install a high lift/duration hydraulic roller cam with 1.6 ratio
-> rocker arms.  This shoul allow over .500 inch lifts with a mild
-> duration cam.

 I don't remember him saying either, but one of the 214 to 220 degree
hydraulic roller "computer cams" would have the short duration, low
overlap characteristics a 4500 RPM max torque motor would want anyway.
Uuuhhhh... late 305s would have block provision for the rollers anyway,
and Crane makes a kit to retrofit early blocks to the stock type GM
rollers.  If this is an '86-up motor with the single piece rear seal,
he'll need a seal adapter to fit the 400 crank in, and an early style
oil pan.  The seal adapters are about $75.

 Since I haven't started building the #(#*! flow bench yet I don't have
any flow numbers, but the later 305 heads have really nice ports with a
good shortside radius; they're totally different from the old style
heads.  However, with the late center-bolt valve cover heads you need to
either wallow out the center intake manifold bolt holes or use a new
style manifold that can take the different bolt angle.
                                           

----------
Posted by: emory!chaos.lrk.ar.us!dave.williams (Dave Williams)
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod
From: hotrod@dixie.com (The Hotrod List)
Subject: 302 rev. limiter
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 93 02:50:02 GMT
Organization: Dixie Communications Public Access.  The Mouth of the South.
To: hotrod@dixie.com
Reply-To: hotrod@dixie.com
Posted-Date: Monday, Jan 04 21:49:57
X-Sequence: 3172
X-Gifs-To: met@sunset.cse.nau.edu
X-Gifs-From: ftp.nau.edu


I've got to admit, this is the most intersting group I've read in a long
while (we can't subscribe to alt.sex here, can't imagine why :)).

The injected 302 *does* have a rev limiter (the EEC-IV, actually).  The 
system is set to shut off the fuel at 6,450 rpm.  No big deal on my GT, since
it's about time to shift at 5,200 rpm or so (stock heads, no porting or
polishing - yet).

Solid lifter cam:  I'm going with solid lifters for my 351C.  The cam profile
is 306 degrees (260 @ 0.050) with 0.629 lift, both intake and exhaust.  I
figure it should bring out the full potential of the 4V closed chamber heads.

My recollection of the intake/exhaust valve size for the 4V 351C heads is:

2.19 (intake) 1.71 (exhaust).  The 429 BOSS had something like 2.26 intake.

Oh, yeah, the solid lifters.  I had a '74 Capri V6, and only adjusted the
lifters when I replaced the valve stem seals.  The rule is:  a little clatter
isn't bad, no noise *is*.  I guess if you're worried about the 0.001 mark
in your 14 second quarter mile time, you'll be adjusting the valves every
weekend.  You'll probably be the guy using a grinder to bore the cylinder
walls out, too :)

As for me, *my* reaction time is *way* less consistent than the car's.  As a
data point, I've got an '88 Mustang GT, run slicks (MT 26/8.50's), and the
car runs 14.59's to 14.65's.  It's run like this from about 15,000 miles on.
With 98,000 miles on it, the results are *still* the same (better, actually,
since I've bumped up the timing to about 16 BTC, pulled off the intake baffle,
put in a 160 degree thermostat - though I don't think that does much good
in the summer, the radiator seems *barely* able to keep the temp to 180 on a 
hot day).  Guess running Mobil 1 from 10,000 miles on hasn't hurt, either :)

John DeArmond:  I've notified the "keeper of the VAX" of the multiple mail
problem.  Hope it's fixed by now.  Let me know if it ain't.

[Thanks Mike.  While on the subject, this is to anyone reading this list
on alt.hotrod.  Please check to see that your site has the group marked
as moderated with the mailpaths file pointing back to hotrod@dixie.com.
What happens if the group is unmoderated is when you post, your article
is propagated to adjacent sites that likely are set up right.  
Each site snatches up the article and mails it to hotrod@dixie.com.
End result is I get 10 or 15 or more copies of each post.  That 
makes it pretty much impossible for me to let the list run on automatic.
I issue a newgroup each week with the proper info in it for alt.hotrod
but apparently there are a lot of admins out there who pay no attention
to the instructions.  Thanks, JGD]

Mike Jamison

----------
Posted by: emory!mars.lerc.nasa.gov!edwlt12 (Mike Jamison (ADF))
Newsgroups: alt.hotrod,wiz.hotrod