HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pjp@cray.com (Patrick Perro)
Subject: Re: Pre-Season Fever
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: 17 Aug 92 15:06:14 CDT


Come on all of you snowmobiling freaks!! Let's hear from you!!

Doug Ritter commented on various articles in the Aug. Snow Goer. I too received
that magazine a couple of weeks ago and it sparked a little life into me but the
real kicker was taking delivery of my new sled. However, Doug, you asked a couple
of questions one of which being the great increase of horsepower in Yamaha's when
a pipe is added. Yamaha has allways had tin cans for pipes. Back in the early '70's
Yamaha sold their sleds in two versions. a standard muffler version and a "piped"
SS version. The increase in performance of the "piped" version was 20% (same as
it is today) but, because of the noise restrictions, they dropped the "pipes" and
continued sale of the normal "tin can" versions. Since then, Yamaha has never
paid much attention to the "state of tune" of their exhaust systems. Polaris and
Cat on the other hand have realized the performance gains of a well tuned exhaust
system and the "sale-ability" of a sled that is the "top performer" of it's class.
So they have gone through extensive research and are basically selling the best
performing pipe for their engine as the stock exhaust pipe (they are basically
silenced chaimbers). If you look at PSI`s or SLP's performance catalogs you will
see very little change in horsepower with the single pipe (usually with a HP loss
in mid-range) and a 10 - 15% incerease with twin (or tripple) pipes. In fact,
PSI admits in it's `92 catalog that (for the Indy 440) they cannot produce a better
pipe than the stock pipe, but they'll port and bore it for you.

Why hasn't Yamaha paid as close attention? I don't know maybe they are too big;
it cuts into the profit margin; too much bureaucratic red-tape. People have been
asking why doesn't Yamaha pay attention? You can only speculate. If you ever really
looked at a Yamaha sled you will see that there is great attention paid to space as
well as material conservation (read that as cost conservation). I'm not saying that
they are poorly built but the word minimal does come to mind.

=================================================================================

Patrick J. Perro              Indy 580 XLT                 The comments listed
Cray Research Inc.             				   above are my own. Not
655F Lone Oak Dr.  					   that of my employer
Eagan, MN. 55121					   (unless specifically
pjp@fig.cray.com					   noted).

=================================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.snowmobiles
From: chuck@col.hp.com (Chuck Rice)
Subject: Re: Fuel mixture?
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 14:59:09 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

ec@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Edgar Circenis) writes:
> I have recently acquired an old snowmobile.  It is a
> 500cc 2-cycle AMF Ski-daddler.  I have no idea what kind
> of fuel/oil mixture I should use.  Does anyone out there
> know anything about the fuel mixture in AMF snowmobiles?

I don't know anything about the AMF but in that era I'll bet they used
20:1. With a good quality snowmobile oil 50:1 will probably work fine.
Newsgroups: alt.snowmobiles
From: pjp@cray.com (Patrick Perro)
Subject: Re: Pre-Season Fever
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Distribution: usa
Date: 19 Aug 92 08:48:50 CDT


I have a friend who had been riding Yamaha for the last 7 years. First he had an `87
Phazer, then an `89 and in `90 he upgraded to a `91 Phazer because he wanted the better
handling of the wider ski stance (I had been riding an Indy 400 during these years).
Plus he was hoping that Yamaha had improved the performance of their engines. They had
not. It took a PSI pipe to bring the performance of his sled near that of my stock
400 (the Phazers use a 475cc (I think) engine). He was quite happy with the fit,
finnish and handling of the sled(s) but the performance was way off par. Now he
is jumping the Yamaha ship for Polaris. He has an XLT special on Snow Check.

Now for some inside Yamaha info, a friends mother (who is an accountant) was working
a contract job here for Yamaha (their snowmobile division is headquartered in the
northern suburb of Blaine Mn.). She said some Japanese Big Wigs came into town
recently and raked the locals over the coals as to why they are third behind Polaris
and Cat here in the U.S. She did not stick around to hear the answers but my
Yamaha buying friend said that:

	1) Yamaha has no snow check or factory sponsored "accessory rebates"
	
	2) Dealers do NOT dicker on price. You pay whole sticker price.

	3) Yamaha holds their "open house" in Chicago, not in Minn. where the 
	   competition (not to say one of the largest populations of snowmobiliers)
	   resides.

	4) Yamaha doesn't listen to their customers. His experience with the
	   company and their dealers has left him with a bad taste for Yamaha.
	   They don't cater to the customer.

	5) Yamaha dealers are too busy selling motorcycles. The sleds don't
	   come out until late in the "buying" season and dissapear shortly
	   after the New Year.

It appears that Yamaha might start something new for `94 since the Big Wigs were
here just a few weeks ago. We'll have to wait and see. Also, my friends statements
and experiences come from the Minnesota and NW Wisconsin dealerships and are not
necessarily representative of all Yamaha dealerships. How does Yamaha fare elsewhere?



=================================================================================

Patrick J. Perro              Indy 580 XLT                 The comments listed
Cray Research Inc.             				   above are my own. Not
655F Lone Oak Dr.  					   that of my employer
Eagan, MN. 55121					   (unless specifically
pjp@fig.cray.com					   noted).

=================================================================================
From: randy@raven.alaska.edu (Randy Hayman)
Newsgroups: alt.snowmobiles
Subject: Fogged vision
Date: 21 Aug 92 15:36:14 GMT
Reply-To: randy@raven.alaska.edu (Randy Hayman)
Distribution: usa
Organization: U of AK - Fairbanks

First, let me preface this with the following:

1) If you ride around Fairbanks, you must wear a faceshield (or lose
your face) 
due to the cold riding conditions.   

2) There is no wind (usually) in the winter.

Now, how have all of you who wear glasses, or use face shields, or goggles
keep them from fogging?  I tried spit, car wax, no-fog glasses cleaner...all
to no avail.

I wear contacts*, but my face shield fogs up on me when ever I slow down, so
I have to keep flipping it up, until I get going again, and flipping it down...
ad nauseum.  A fellow I ride with has bought anti-fog plastic lenses for his
glasses (no contacts), and he is in a worse predicament - glasses and face
shield fog up.  btw, the anti-fog plastic lenses work - to a certain extent.

Is this something to live with?  hopefully not


*I usually wear my Ray-Ban sunglasses with a yellow face shield and get
great depth perception (for moguls at high speeds) and can keep my eyes
open when it's so darn bright out.  

Comments?!

Randy
sxrmh1@orca.alaska.edu
From: randy@raven.alaska.edu (Randy Hayman)
Newsgroups: alt.snowmobiles
Subject: Re: All tuened up and no place with snow
Date: 18 Aug 92 14:31:14 GMT
Reply-To: randy@raven.alaska.edu (Randy Hayman)
Organization: University of Alaska - Fairbanks

Well, I hear ya!

We've been getting to the low 30s at night, but no freeze yet.  Rumor
has it that El Nino, 
or whatever it's called will bring warm moist air north this winter, and
when it hits the
cold temperatures snow, snow, snow!!

I do know that Barrow has had snow this month, but can't say if it has
stayed (probably).

Fairbanks (home) is about 180 miles south of the Arctic Circle, whereas
Barrow is about
500 miles *North* of the Arctic Circle or about 3500 miles north of
Eagan, MN.

Randy
sxrmh1@orca.alaska.edu
"He gave away his dogs so he could travel?!?  What an idea?!" - an ol' sourdough
Newsgroups: alt.snowmobiles
From: jwabik@uc.msc.edu (Jeff Wabik)
Newsgroups: alt.snowmobiles
Subject: Re: Fogged vision
Date: 21 Aug 92 19:15:03 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Minnesota Supercomputer Center

In article <1992Aug21.153614.15435@raven.alaska.edu>, randy@raven.alaska.edu (Randy Hayman) writes:
> First, let me preface this with the following:
> 
> 1) If you ride around Fairbanks, you must wear a faceshield (or lose
> your face) 
> due to the cold riding conditions.   

I think this is true anywhere the temps are cold enough to support
snow.

> Now, how have all of you who wear glasses, or use face shields, or goggles
> keep them from fogging?  I tried spit, car wax, no-fog glasses cleaner...all
> to no avail.

I have a Shoei motorcycle helmet with a double-pane face shield.  Its not
perfect, but, its an order of magnitude better than the single-pane shield
I used two years ago.  Think of it like a McDLT..  The warm side stays
warm, and the cold side stays cold.  ;-)

Dont most "snowmobile helmets" come with double-pane face shields?   Seems
like everyone I know has one (or wishes they did).

	-Jeff

--
Jeff Wabik				E/Mail:	 jwabik@msc.edu
Minnesota Supercomputer Center 		AT&T:    +1 612 626 0211
Minneapolis, MN  			FAX:     +1 612 624 6550
Newsgroups: alt.news-media
From: jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer)
Subject: Re: Nightline-- oh so topical...feh!
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 16:54:14 GMT

maxwell@fnalc.fnal.gov writes:

>All that other stuff-- Bush's abortion gaffe, the UN resolution WRT Bosnian
>relief, the recent report relating handgun ownership to suicide rates-- that's
>not news.

It's only a gaffe if you want it to be.  The media is trying to portray
it as a gaffe...  But then what would you expect?


Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 

Xref: sparky alt.news-media:910 alt.activism:15285 alt.activism.d:2781
From: hmiller@lucpul.it.luc.edu (Hugh Miller)
Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.activism.d,alt.activism
Subject: Re: Time IS a Conservative Mouthpiece
Date: 22 Aug 92 06:36:32 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Loyola University Chicago

In <2A95BE17.25926@orion.oac.uci.edu> cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman) writes:

>Even if the above statement was perfectly true, it would be a sign that Time is  
>_opposed_ to conservativism. After all "establishmentarian, Ivy League  
>Republicanism" is what is more commonly refered to as "Rockefeller  
>Republicanism". And that in turn is the banner of the left wing of the  
>republican party in contrast to its conservative wing.

>The rivalry between these two factions since the second world war has an  
>interesting history. It probably reached its peak with the Goldwater candidacy  
>in which the conservative wing of the Republican party managed to attain  
>control for the first time. But in the following election cycles the  
>Rockefeller republicans counterattacked and managed to bring several of their  
>own including Nixon and Ford into the oval office. After the defeat of Ford at  
>the hands of Carter the left wing was discredited and with the landslide  
>primary and electoral victories of a devoted member of the conservative wing,  
>Ronald Reagan the Rockefellerians were thought to be dead and buried. That is,  
>until the Bush administration began ...

>	Carl Edman

    Thanks, Carl.  Your post puts the situation in a good historical
perspective; an un-USENETtian one, I know, but a breath of fresh air
still.

    Still, though, don't you think it fair to say that even the oldline
/ Eastern Establishment faction of the party is pretty `conservative,'
by most Western standards?  And haven't they been moving, under extreme
pressure from Southwestern big-rich parvenu and Moral Majority elements
on the radical wing, further right?  And as to the radicals, hasn't even
Barry Goldwater gotten on their case as being too wacko?

    Pat Robertson had a chilling line in his speech: "The countries of
the former Soviet bloc have gotten rid of their leftists.  Isn't it time
we got rid of our leftists too?"

    "Got rid of" ... I don't like the sound of that, or the creepy glint
Pat got in his eye when he said it, or the howls of the radicals in
response.

    -=- H.
-- 
Hugh Miller         | Dept. of Philosophy | Loyola University of Chicago
Voice: 312-508-2727 |  FAX: 312-508-2292  |    hmiller@lucpul.it.luc.edu
"Read broadly, think scientifically, speak briefly, and sell the goods!"
            -- Sinclair Lewis, _The Man Who Knew Coolidge_
Xref: sparky alt.news-media:834 alt.desert-storm:1692
From: cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Subject: Re: Time IS a Conservative Mouthpiece
Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.activism.d,alt.activism
Reply-To: cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Date: 22 Aug 92 04:09:59 GMT
Distribution: na

Yash Holbrook writes
> "These are the jugments not of Democratic partisans, but
> of correspondents for Tim, a magazine that over the years
> has often been identified with precisely the same
> establishmentarian, Ivy League Republicanism with
> which bush himslef is most  comfortable..."
> 
> There you have a source to prove that Time is a
> conservative mouthpiece. Prove may not be the right
> word, but in the face of some of your derisive rebuttals to
> the contrary, this quote seems to  substantiate the claim
> that Time truly IS a conservative  publication. 

Even if the above statement was perfectly true, it would be a sign that Time is  
_opposed_ to conservativism. After all "establishmentarian, Ivy League  
Republicanism" is what is more commonly refered to as "Rockefeller  
Republicanism". And that in turn is the banner of the left wing of the  
republican party in contrast to its conservative wing.

The rivalry between these two factions since the second world war has an  
interesting history. It probably reached its peak with the Goldwater candidacy  
in which the conservative wing of the Republican party managed to attain  
control for the first time. But in the following election cycles the  
Rockefeller republicans counterattacked and managed to bring several of their  
own including Nixon and Ford into the oval office. After the defeat of Ford at  
the hands of Carter the left wing was discredited and with the landslide  
primary and electoral victories of a devoted member of the conservative wing,  
Ronald Reagan the Rockefellerians were thought to be dead and buried. That is,  
until the Bush administration began ...

	Carl Edman
Newsgroups: alt.news-media
From: Chuck.Lavazzi@bbs.oit.unc.edu (Chuck Lavazzi)
Subject: Re: Comedy Central's GOPcon coverage
Organization: Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 04:01:21 GMT

In article <1992Aug19.163216.1@fnala.fnal.gov> maxwell@fnala.fnal.gov writes:
>I know this is a little late to do a lot of netters any good (although I *did*
>tip you to it before the DemCon, albeit subtly), but if you want a good time
>tonight and tomorrow night, and have access to the Comedy Channel, watch their
>coverage of the GOPcon. 
>
>It's biased as hell, and I love it!  
>
>Al Franken, self admitted LIBERAL(!) hosts the fun.  
	In all fairness, Franken wasn't especially easy on the Dmocrats during
their convention.  I thought that coverage was prety hysterical, too.

>
>The NYT spent some ink on CC's coverage yesterday, and Franken was on NPR
>today.  
>
>You might be surprised at some of the guests Franken has on the show. 
	Including Ben Stein and a couple other conservatives with an actual
sense of humor (there actually are a few...).  My favorite, though, was Joe
"Bob" Briggs on "family values".
>
>This stuff is worth taping.
>
>It was about the only way I could deal with Buchannan's speech.  
>
>Oh, and they re-broadcast their coverage after Alan Havey's show. 
>
>chuckling.max

Chuck
No .sig, no frills, no foolin'

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  bbs.oit.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Xref: sparky alt.news-media:880 alt.activism:15218 alt.activism.d:2748
From: cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Subject: Re: Media Bias
Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.activism,alt.activism.d
Reply-To: cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Date: 21 Aug 92 18:04:17 GMT
Distribution: na

Brendan B. Boerner writes
> Well, sure, whether I approve of the names or not is not the
> issue - my point is that maybe the "liberal" media has a
> reason for calling pro-choicer's "pro-choice" and
> pro-lifer's "anti-abortionist", which is they believe
> in calling groups by names more reflecting their true
> nature.  In this instance, they believe that saying
> "anti-abortion" more reflects what pro-lifer's mean to
> accomplish, and "pro-choice" accurately reflect that
> groups goals.  I'm not saying this is what actually
> happens, it's just an idea. 

'Pro-choice' is hardly a justified label for that movement. Most pro-choice  
activists are _not_ for school choice or even for a womens right to own her own  
body (or where were they when the FDA outlawed breast implants ?). No,  
pro-choice is just as much an inaccurate propaganda label as 'Pro-life' is.

On the other hand, it is conceivable that there are people who believe that  
abortion should be legal, but disapprove of it nevertheless (or vice versa), so  
'pro-abortion' or 'anti-abortion' would not be accurate descriptions either. 

IMHO, the most accurate labels for the two movements would be  
pro-abortion-rights and anti-abortion-rights or even pro-fetal-rights and  
anti-fetal-rights. But then it is rather unlikely that these terms will come  
into common usage as long as the media are dominated by the left which enjoys  
labeling people it disagrees with as 'anti-choice' far too much.

	Carl Edman
From: jswitzer@afit.af.mil (Chip Switzer)
Subject: Re: Bias? What Bias?
Organization: Air Force Institute of Technology
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 14:43:50 GMT

Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:


>I have been following this bias argument.......
> 
>We all have a point of view shaped by our life experience to date. We
>interpret new events against that background. Our backgrounds differ and so
>will our interpretations.
> 
>To be objective is impossible. To analyse anything, you have to have a system
>of values or ideas/opinions. These differ from person to person. Hence the
>need for politics.
> 
>The media are no different. It is a cliche, but reality really *is* only a
>point of view.
> 
>If journalists attend a political convention and a majority think the BIG GUY
>is a bozo.......well, they are either calling it the way *they* see it, or
>they are lying. Lying isn't bias, it's another thing altogether.
> 
>If you don't accept the way they see it......fine. They probably don't accept
>the way you see it, either.
> 
>That is life. No point moaning about it. It isn't going to change.
>
What you say is very true, and if it was as simple as that it wouldn't be 
worth the space or time I have devoted to it.

The problem is that, especially in an election year, the media is our
eyes and ears on the world, and they filter everything both candidates 
have to present to us.  If one of the candidates is consistently getting
"good" coverage and the other is being panned, those honest biases do
the country a grave misjustice.  That is precisely why the Republicans
and to some extent the Democrats, live for the convention.  It's one of
the *only* times where they can present exactly what they what to the 
public--directly to the public. 



Chip Switzer                            "A witty saying proves nothing." 
jswitzer@afit.af.mil                              -- Voltaire 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Available: Software Engineer or MIS. MSCE, 1 year C++, Unix Experience
	   Highly motivated, keeps political opinions at home!
	             Seattle area, only.  513-233-4502
Newsgroups: alt.news-media
Subject: Bias? What Bias?
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 13:04:14 GMT
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange


I have been following this bias argument.......
 
We all have a point of view shaped by our life experience to date. We
interpret new events against that background. Our backgrounds differ and so
will our interpretations.
 
To be objective is impossible. To analyse anything, you have to have a system
of values or ideas/opinions. These differ from person to person. Hence the
need for politics.
 
The media are no different. It is a cliche, but reality really *is* only a
point of view.
 
If journalists attend a political convention and a majority think the BIG GUY
is a bozo.......well, they are either calling it the way *they* see it, or
they are lying. Lying isn't bias, it's another thing altogether.
 
If you don't accept the way they see it......fine. They probably don't accept
the way you see it, either.
 
That is life. No point moaning about it. It isn't going to change.
 
Steve
-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | If you don't vote for MMP on 
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         |  September 19, 1992, then you 
withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            |  must like things the way they 
**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       |  are.....can I live with YOU?
Newsgroups: alt.news-media
From: maxwell@fnalc.fnal.gov
Subject: Nightline-- oh so topical...feh!
Organization: What does *this* button do!?
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 15:11:54 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnalc.fnal.gov
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

So what did _Smartline_ cover last night?

Post mortems on the Perot campaign.

What's scheduled for tonight?

More of the same.

Now *that's* news.

All that other stuff-- Bush's abortion gaffe, the UN resolution WRT Bosnian
relief, the recent report relating handgun ownership to suicide rates-- that's
not news.

gagging.max
From: cedman@714-725-3165.nts.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Subject: Re: Comedy Central's GOPcon coverage
Newsgroups: alt.news-media
Reply-To: cedman@golem.ps.uci.edu (Carl Edman)
Date: 20 Aug 92 01:17:48 GMT

maxwell@fnala.fnal.gov writes
> I know this is a little late to do a lot of netters any good
> (although I *did* tip you to it before the DemCon, albeit
> subtly), but if you want a good time tonight and tomorrow
> night, and have access to the Comedy Channel, watch their
> coverage of the GOPcon. 
> 
> It's biased as hell, and I love it!  
> 
> Al Franken, self admitted LIBERAL(!) hosts the fun.   

So how is this different from the rest of the coverage ?

	Carl Edman
Newsgroups: alt.news-media,alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.activism.d
From: maxwell@fnala.fnal.gov
Subject: Comedy Central's GOPcon coverage
Organization: What does *this* button do!?
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 22:32:16 GMT
X-Posted-From: fnala.fnal.gov
X-Posted-Through: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

I know this is a little late to do a lot of netters any good (although I *did*
tip you to it before the DemCon, albeit subtly), but if you want a good time
tonight and tomorrow night, and have access to the Comedy Channel, watch their
coverage of the GOPcon. 

It's biased as hell, and I love it!  

Al Franken, self admitted LIBERAL(!) hosts the fun.  

The NYT spent some ink on CC's coverage yesterday, and Franken was on NPR
today.  

You might be surprised at some of the guests Franken has on the show. 

This stuff is worth taping.

It was about the only way I could deal with Buchannan's speech.  

Oh, and they re-broadcast their coverage after Alan Havey's show. 

chuckling.max
Xref: sparky alt.news-media:899 alt.rush-limbaugh:3846