Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

" fine...next time i will do the same, and make everyone feel sorry for me, even when im in the wrong...and i will get a few mates on this forum to back me up and make me sound like ive done the right thing"

Are you serious, your showing your intelligence now.......move on

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

lol can't people just realise this was just a bad situation, neither did anything really wrong, sometimes shit just happens. Both have legitimate reasons for what they did and i can see boths point of view. Funny how everyone sided with maximum till they found out the excuse now everyone is dissin him.

How was he to know? If he did in truth delete his pm with phone number then he did what i probably would do a week or 2 after hearing no reply.

Anyway relax. I would suggest deleting this thread and maximumrpm and oscar sorting out this problem privately. Everyone knows by now that noone is ripping off anyone and it was just a bad run of luck that caused this problem.

Anyway just my opinion...

Cheers

ps oscar i do think you're being a bit harsh, surely u can see why he did this

i think both should move on from this

i always keep any communication until u have the products in hand. its a simple rule i guess if anything goes pair shaped

anthony has had his reasons and has given this dude enough info to make contact with him

hmm.

I think you should probably send him the parts and be done with it Oscar. Everyone here can see what the story is so there is ultimately little harm done and it will show your decent side.

What I find strange is someone deleting a pm containing details about a transaction while it is still in progress - in this instance the phone number. maximumrpm, even when I pm'd you Oscars number and told you to call him you didn't. You just replied to me with details that I was presumably to pass on. You wouldn't even call me even though I gave you my number as well.

In my opinion Oscar is a seriously stressed out dude due to his personal circumstances. He could have done slightly better but his actions are completely forgivable due to his attempts to go the extra mile for maximum rpm and his personal situation.

Maximumrpm seems to me to be a very shy person who could have solved a lot of this with a phone call. He joined SAU in April 2003 so he must have a pretty good idea about how the forums work. That said, he wasn't rude about Oscar, he just called him out.

In short; shit has happened outside of the control of either party which has set off a chain of events. It's up to both of you to do your best to sort it out and make yourselves look good to the rest of us.

End of discussion.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Great interview on damper settings and coil selection by HPA https://www.facebook.com/HPAcademy/videos/30284693841175196/?fs=e&s=TIeQ9V&fs=e
    • Yeah, it was a pretty deep dig.
    • The values for HID colour are also defined ~ see https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2006L02732/latest/text  ~ goto section 3.9 onwards ....
    • So, if the headlights' cutoff behaviour (angles, heights, etc) are not as per 6.2.6.1.1 without automatic levelling, then you have to have to have automatic** levelling. Also, if the headlight does not have the required markings, then neither automatic nor manual adjusters are going to be acceptable. That's because the base headlight itself does not meet the minimum requirement (which is the marking). ** with the option of manual levelling, if the headlight otherwise meets the same requirements as for the automatic case AND can be set to the "base" alignment at the headlight itself. So that's an additional requirement for the manual case. So, provided that the marking is on the headlight and there is a local manual adjustment back to "base" on the headlight, then yes, you could argue that they are code compliant. But if you are missing any single one of these things, then they are not. And unlike certain other standards that I work with, there does not seem to be scope to prepare a "fitness for purpose" report. Well, I guess there actually is. You might engage an automotive engineer to write a report stating that the lights meet the performance requirements of the standard even if they are missing, for example, the markings.  
    • Vertical orientation   6.2.6.1.1. The initial downward inclination of the cut off of the dipped-beam to be set in the unladen vehicle state with one person in the driver's seat shall be specified within an accuracy of 0.1 per cent by the manufacturer and indicated in a clearly legible and indelible manner on each vehicle close to either headlamp or the manufacturer's plate by the symbol shown in Annex 7.   The value of this indicated downward inclination shall be defined in accordance with paragraph 6.2.6.1.2.   6.2.6.1.2. Depending on the mounting height in metres (h) of the lower edge of the apparent surface in the direction of the reference axis of the dipped beam headlamp, measured on the unladen vehicles, the vertical inclination of the cut off of the dipped- beam shall, under all the static conditions of Annex 5, remain between the following limits and the initial aiming shall have the following values:   h < 0.8   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   0.8 < h < 1.0   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   Or, at the discretion of the manufacturer,   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The application for the vehicle type approval shall, in this case, contain information as to which of the two alternatives is to be used.   h > 1.0   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The above limits and the initial aiming values are summarized in the diagram below.   For category N3G (off-road) vehicles where the headlamps exceed a height of 1,200 mm, the limits for the vertical inclination of the cut-off shall be between: -1.5 per cent and -3.5 per cent.   The initial aim shall be set between: -2 per cent and -2.5 per cent.
×
×
  • Create New...