Subject	Re: To wing or not to wing....
Posted by	Z32TT-R on July 04, 2013 at 4:49 PM
	This message has been viewed 173 times.
In Reply To	To wing or not to wing.... posted by Branz on July 03, 2013 at 04:05 PM
Message	No wing.
Follow Ups	To wing or not to wing.... - Branz 16:05:58 07/03/13 As much as I love the wingless look, - TriniTT 16:18:23 07/03/13 I think it looks clean either way - PYROhafe 22:39:28 07/03/13 Not a fan of the stock wing on a 2+2. Go mission lip. - bbug 16:25:21 07/03/13 I didnt care for the mission style but its growing on me. (n/m) - white22sky 16:53:25 07/03/13 yummmmy (n/m) - 300ZMang 21:22:43 07/03/13 LOL - been debating the same for my 2+2 for years... - jzack 18:07:40 07/03/13 kaminari. (n/m) - Antihero 18:12:26 07/03/13 Stock Wing (n/m) - ZXoltan 18:13:07 07/03/13 I really liked the 94+ stocker when I had a 2+2 (n/m) - Bernie (NoVA) 19:14:51 07/03/13 +1 - Jayru 23:06:12 07/03/13 BTW - Bernie, you wouldn't happen to have one - Jayru 23:07:30 07/03/13 No I don't CRP was not offered after 93 (n/m) - Bernie (NoVA) 13:32:08 07/04/13 Oh, I wasn't aware of that, thanks. (n/m) - Jayru 14:43:38 07/04/13 Like...... - Branz 09:51:22 07/04/13 2+2 needs a wing. (n/m) - dogpile 19:36:51 07/03/13 Re: To wing or not to wing.... - TRJohn46 19:38:55 07/03/13 90-93's have spoiler. 94-96's have wing. - lil'abner 20:07:11 07/03/13 On a side note, can you hook me up with your dealer? - TriniTT 21:00:33 07/03/13 LOL. I'm high on reality. Really. Reality. (n/m) - lil'abner 21:39:48 07/03/13 Good analogy. +1 (n/m) - samsung-Z [Houston] 11:58:06 07/04/13 Re: To wing or not to wing.... - ariz 22:37:36 07/03/13 Looks too long without. (n/m) - SWhiteTT(GA) 09:17:36 07/04/13 wing it! - RobZ32 09:58:27 07/04/13 Your car looks so clean w/o a wing. I would not - JMartz 10:52:10 07/04/13 Re: To wing or not to wing.... - Z32TT-R 16:49:43 07/04/13 for the love of god, these cars should ALWAYS have a wing. (n/m) - arrowenterprises 18:39:50 07/04/13
Post a Followup	You cannot reply to this message because you are not logged in.