Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

p.s

I want a Anthrax Kitty

It's from Full Moon wo Sagashite (Full moon), a manga turned anime about a chick who wants to be a famous singer, but she has throat cancer. Basically, she makes a deal with the death gods to transform her into a 16 year old girl, and her throat cancer is clear... ;)

how sick would one of them be! :huh:

Indeed!!!

ERA Mini Turbo: The engine is identical to that fitted to the MG Metro Turbo. It has a capacity of 1275cc and is fitted with a Garret T3 Turbocharger.

Hehe I want 101kw in a mini. That'd be so much fun!

Anna you're in my siggy now lol

Edit: Spelling error

;)

My tres arent real semis but so I only gave them 2 seconds, At the official track day it is on Liz, you and me winner takes all, by then there will be no excuses, I will have had more experience and you wil have your car of choice....*dramatic music*

You can borrow my stock 33

Are you guys gonna do your cardboard car race on foot this time? I was a little disappointed that it didn't happen :P

Liz are you one of those lady boys from thighland

:huh::laugh:

It all depends on the budget you have obviously you can buy a modded 32 gtr track car with 500 horsies plus for the same money you can buy a newish standard evo probably cheaper. There are so many variables between the two such as driver, track, and budget however either would be considered just as capable in my opinion.

agreed, both are close enough for it to come down to the driver, but I still reckon the EVO is freindlier to the average driver.

The EVO pwns the R32 and R33 but

In fact stock for stock the R32 got beaten by the V35 at the test track! ;)

EDIT, I jut remembered the V35 got a 50m head start

i've had 3. Does that count.

i like you too! lol

but on a serious note, all this argument about what's better etc, it's all crap!!! I'm sure both of you have a lot of good points about your cars, and both of you have alot of work to do on your driving.

Liz are you one of those lady boys from thighland

I have to put these rumours to rest.. I DO NOT HAVE A WANG

agreed, both are close enough for it to come down to the driver, but I still reckon the EVO is freindlier to the average driver.

The EVO pwns the R32 and R33 but

In fact stock for stock the R32 got beaten by the V35 at the test track! ;)

EDIT, I jut remembered the V35 got a 50m head start

what tyres were on them? and dont the evos come standard with some hi-end tyres?

so many people want to prove their manhood by beating a chick!

it's just ODD!

What physical attributes does a woman have that would make her worse at driving? The fact you are a woman is beside the point ;)

agreed, both are close enough for it to come down to the driver, but I still reckon the EVO is freindlier to the average driver.

The EVO pwns the R32 and R33 but

In fact stock for stock the R32 got beaten by the V35 at the test track! :huh:

EDIT, I jut remembered the V35 got a 50m head start

And a 16 year technological advantage ;)

I wouldnt build a drag car...getting beaten by 25k bigblock toranas would hurt

That would have been cool

My tres arent real semis but so I only gave them 2 seconds.

I know, and I gave them 3 because WAkie is such a technical track and they'll get more seconds than say Oran or EC.

i like you too! lol

but on a serious note, all this argument about what's better etc, it's all crap!!! I'm sure both of you have a lot of good points about your cars, and both of you have alot of work to do on your driving.

I have to put these rumours to rest.. I DO NOT HAVE A WANG

*takes leaf out of josh's book* but i am THE best ;)

the banter will continue until it is actually taken to the track, im sure... *waits for comment regarding when that'll be*

Specs on your S13, Liz?

93 Silvia Q ;)

ok.. with an s14 adm engine, s15 brakes, shanef's gtr fuel pump, some gay intercooler.. and 3inch exhaust of course... the work has only just been completed.. got a few little problems to work out before I move onto suspension etc.

but the most important thing is it flutters better than a vl turbo :huh:

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • 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...