Slashdot Mirror


Car Hacks & Mods for Dummies

donour (Donour Sizemore) writes "I recently bought a high-performance automobile that has a reputation for its tuning potential. Before making the purchase, I joined several online forums for enthusiasts in order to get a good reading on how happy people are with the particular model. I was amazed at the vibrant communities built around websites such as evolutionm.net and nasioc.com. A wealth of information is available, but the data is surrounded by noise. For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk. Enter David Vespremi's Car Hacks & Mods for Dummies." Read on for the rest of Sizemore's review. Car Hacks & Mods for Dummies author David Vespremi's pages 384 publisher Wiley & Sons rating 9 reviewer Donour Sizemore ISBN 0764571427 summary Presents the big-picture view of car mods that have to do with making the car stop, go, turn, and keep the occupants safe.

In general, I steer myself and others away from the "for Dummies" book series since I believe a lot of material at this level can be found on the internet for free. HOWTOs and tutorials abound for using and modifying most consumer products. In this case, the time saved from filtering online discussion is well worth it. The book is well organized, with separate sections devoted to handling, power, braking, engine management, safety, and cosmetics. There are 26 chapters spread across 360 pages. As you can see, chapters are short and can be tackled easily during lunch or a short taxi ride to retrieve your broken car.

Slashdot readers may be surprised to learn that there is no discussion of entertainment electronics such as stereos or car-mounted computers. This should not be confused with engine management units (ECU). ECUs are discussed at length. Car Hacks & Mods for Dummies main focus is making your car go, stop and turn. Sections were added for safety and cosmetics, but performance is by far the emphasis.

The book does not actually explain how to do any specific modifications whatsoever. Instead it serves as a guidebook to learn what options are out there and compare one upgrade path to another. For example, there is a great explanation of the differences between a turbocharger and a supercharger, but you're not going to get an analysis of the mods required to support your brand new 10.5cm hotside. Instead there are careful treatments of the pros and cons associated with almost any upgrade car car enthusiast may be considering. The coverage of jargon and rating systems used for various products is especially useful. Whenever a new subject or car component is mentioned, the author goes over regulating and standardizing bodies (the DOT, EPA, and SAE) as well as explains how parts, pieces, and fluids are rated. While this is useful when thinking about a new project, it isn't the information someone would want to rely on once they begin such an undertaking itself. The author clearly states, "this book is not intended to be an instruction manual."

The author gets high marks for addressing safety -- both the driver's and the vehicle's -- before any modification. The emphasis on maintaining legal and effective safety devices on a tuner car is something you are not likely to get during an argument about which upgrade path is optimal, nor is it obvious that many safety 'upgrades' -- 4-point harnesses, flashy roll-bars -- actually decrease driver safety when used on the street. In addition the author consistently gives warning when introducing a mod that could put added stress on a vehicle.

If you are a professional mechanic, this book is not for you. You already know most of the contents. Mechanics would be better served by product literature and shop manuals. If you are thinking about modifying your car, but don't have any idea where to start, this is probably a good place. Just be sure to read the first chapter. Car modding quickly becomes expensive, and jumping in without knowing the attached costs (which this book addresses) can be a financial nightmare.

You can purchase Car Hacks & Mods from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

373 comments

  1. Noises by fembots · · Score: 3, Insightful

    A wealth of information is available, but the data is surrounded by noise. For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk.

    Instead of reading other websites or books, he should have done a AskSlashdot :)

    In my opinion (a WRX), it's best to leave any mods/upgrades to the experts. If you have the money to spend on mods, you should have the money to pay for the experts' time. Cars, in most cases, are the second most expensive asset a person's going to get (after a supercomputer), so I would rather put it in good hand, and just enjoy the outcome, not the journey of car mods.

    1. Re:Noises by boudie · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And how you become an expert is the same as with computers, you first get an old one and tear it apart. Bonus points for putting it back together.

    2. Re:Noises by Short+Circuit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I know a couple people who mod their cars. The impression I get is that, for them, the joy is in the journey, not the destination. One guy I know sells cars and boats off once he's done fixing them up.

    3. Re:Noises by wynler · · Score: 1

      But sometimes the goal is the journey and not the destination.

    4. Re:Noises by slart42 · · Score: 1

      Possibly true if you're just looking for getting the most performance out of your money..
      If you like "hacks", though, you might want to try out some mods to your car, just for the sake of trying it, and seeing what results you come up with. You'll be much prouder of your fast car, when you've made it fast by yourself, than if you just gave it the standart expert treatment. At least with old engines, there is still quite a lot you can do on your own, and you can experiment without immediatly killing your engine, if you know a littlebit about what you are doing..

    5. Re:Noises by `Sean · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'd tend to agree when it comes to novices and people who want a fast daily driver. But, personally, I'd rather become an expert myself and turn every bolt. That's why I built my own project car from the ground up for rally and ice racing.

      But, by your logic, most computer users of high end systems should only trust installing software to the experts at Best Buy. ;)

    6. Re:Noises by `Sean · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Rephrase: novices getting in over their heads and people with no interest in mechanics who want a fast daily driver.

    7. Re:Noises by lashi · · Score: 4, Funny
      >Cars, in most cases, are the second most expensive asset a person's going to get (after a supercomputer),

      Most people would say house, but we are on slashdot so I am glad you have your priority straight.

    8. Re:Noises by cathouse · · Score: 1

      My take on *the experts*, based on half-a-dozen reasonably completed major projects over a period of more than 40 years, is that you can rarely trust any of them. It has always ended far better when performence mods came from the Factory racing department, and when other mods were *restoration*. The only exceptions that can be regarded as entirely successful have been those involving Radio Communications/Audio or Lighting. While I've never turned a running vehicle into a basket case, I have twice found myself the proud[?] owner of a machine that could no longer reasonably be driven on the public roads.

      --
      Thelma, I'm not making ANY deals.
    9. Re:Noises by pqdave · · Score: 1

      I do most of my own auto work because I've had a hard time finding someone capable of competently fixing common problems on my low-performance sedan. I can usually do better with a few hours and a Hayne's or Chilton's manual.

      There are plenty of tuner shops around, but I bet Sturgeon's law is even worse than with general mechanics.

      Even if you are going to pay someone else, you need enough clue to know what to ask for.

    10. Re:Noises by Big+Smirk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That's it, you are out of the hacker club! :)

      There are different levels of mods.

      Beginner - bolt on the exhaust and make vroom vroom noises. Do you really want to pay someone $70/hr to install this?

      Intermediate - replacing engine components - camshaft heads; Bolting on superchargers. Almost everything in kit form. Requires an investment in tools (Sear Craftsman - not too bad)

      Advanced - Fabrication! Welding in roll cages (maybe even bending them yourself). Welding up your own exhaust because no one makes it off the shelf and you can't afford custom ($3000). You find yourself asking what the hydraulic ratio of a particular brake master cylinder is. You know you are at this level where part of your long term plans is to repaint the car "when you are done". Lets just say tool costs have gone up a bit. $3000 for a TIG welder, $1000 in tube bender (including dies), about $1000 in saws, grinders, shapers, and real car hackers of course have the modified tools - example - a band saw that can cut pre-bent tubing perfectly along radiuses. Other clues are being on a first name basis with the sales and tech people at companies like OTC, Miller, and Kent Moore

      There's an old hotrodder saying "Nothing beats cubic inches"... and the lesser known other half... "Except cubic dollars"

      --
      TODO: create/find/steal funny sig.
    11. Re:Noises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I like the IT color scheme. So shoot me.

      ***BLAM***!

    12. Re:Noises by theinfobox · · Score: 1

      That's how my nephew became an expert. He runs PCMforless.com along with a friend of his. They both started programming mod chips for their own cars. As they got better, friends started asking them to mod their chips. Now they have a pretty good business and a reputation for turning out excellent mods. Now they are using their 'hobby' to pay for college! :)

    13. Re:Noises by EZmagz · · Score: 1
      the WRX is a great relatively cheap car. A good friend of mine bought one a couple years ago, and for about $3K in mods he has a VERY fast car (comparable to a stock STi) that handles better than practically everything on the road that's affordable, with exception of the Evo.

      For DIY people like me, the fun part is in installing the parts. Journey, not the destination. There's a certain sense of satisfaction knowing that your car's 1.5" lower because YOU put your coilovers on.

      But, as always YMMV. And honestly, I'm surprised this topic even was brought up. People have been modifying cars decades before people even dreamed of computers. So it's not like this is a new subject. Hell, NASCAR was born from the bootleggers pimping out their cars to outgun cops chasing them. Think those cars were stock? ;)

      --

      "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."

    14. Re:Noises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > But, by your logic, most computer users of high end systems should > only trust installing software to the experts at Best Buy. No. There are no experts at Best Buy. Unless you're in the IT business, you are better off engaging an IT services firm.

    15. Re:Noises by JesseL · · Score: 1

      You've hit on a very interesting aspect of performance mods. There are many times when mixing and matching parts from the manufacturers models and years can yield BIG gains with little headache. My 1987 BMW 325e started with 121HP, a 2.73:1 diff ratio, and a 0-60 around 9 seconds. It has since recieved a 325i engine with 168HP and a 4.1:1 differential from a 325i automatic. These two mods alone are worth a nearly 3 second drop in 0-60 times.

      I've seen guys that have built some amazing Porsche engines by mixing various years' heads, cylinders, pistons, and cranks - easily doubling their power output using nothing but factory parts.

      Once you start talking to the experts in a particular car you can learn some impressive tricks for building performance (You run into trouble when the "expert" is elling somthing). For example, later 1st generation RX-7s have an anti-backfire valve in their intake manifold that can cause airflow restriction, you can gain some cheap horsepower by switching to an earlier intake. Or, you can greatly improve the braking on a Porsche 914 by replacing the calipers with ones scrounged from a BMW 320i.

      --
      "Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado!"
    16. Re:Noises by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who worked at a Best Buy for 18 months, I can tell you that there definietly ARE experts at Best Buy. I have worked with people who have education ranging from high-school-droup-outs to MSCEs to degrees in nuclear science. The one thing I can tell you is that you can't generalize such an immense amount of people like that and expect to have a half-way truthful comment. For one thing, most tech at Best Buy I worked with were out-of-work netowrk administrators. That said, there are also a lot of idiots working at Best Buy.

    17. Re:Noises by donour · · Score: 1

      "degrees in nuclear science"

      um...Back when I was studying, they called that physics.

      ;)

      donour

    18. Re:Noises by qqaz · · Score: 1

      When it comes to Best Buy, you can generalize all you want. You are a Best Buy employee. Your opinion is worthless.

      --
      sup :cool:
  2. Good but.... by 2.7182 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    I like this book a lot but it does have a number of typos. Overall though, worth the money.

    1. Re:Good but.... by jargoone · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Liar. There was NOTHING funny said, EVER in Seinfeld. I don't get peoples' thing with that show, it was dumb as hell and I'm glad it's gone.

      Family Guy any day, for me.

    2. Re:Good but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hi there!

      Nobody cares what you think.

      Good day to you.

    3. Re:Good but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NO SOUP for YOU !!!!!

  3. Yeah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Car Hacks & Mods for Dummies

    Oh yeah. This is gonna go well.

    1. Re:Yeah by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      After spotting the Forensics for Dummies book, nothing would surprise me. (Other than a MCFE certification.)

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    2. Re:Yeah by timster · · Score: 1

      "Pregnancy for Dummies" is my personal favorite.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    3. Re:Yeah by edrain · · Score: 1

      I could swear I just saw 'Catholicism for Dummies' at the bookstore the other day. So, not only can you take your life in your hands but your afterlife, too. :)

  4. Install a larger fan for modding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Do I need to install a really big fan on my car to mod it?

    1. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Solder+Fumes · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm going to go all-out l337 and install a water-cooling kit!

    2. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Do I need to install a really big fan on my car to mod it?

      Um, yes actually. If you're tuning a turbo car with an intercooler, you need a large fan to provide airflow while getting the boost and fuel map right.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    3. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by EtherAlchemist · · Score: 2, Funny


      I'm going to go all-out l337 and install a water-cooling kit!

      Ha! Mine CAME with liquid cooling!

      --
      R(k)
    4. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by s_mencer · · Score: 1

      most cars, with the exception of old VW Bugs are already water cooled.

    5. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by DeDmeTe · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nope, just a HUGE wing, tons of stickers (they add about 5hp a piece) and the biggest, most obnoxious sounding coffee-can exhaust pipe you can find. Extra points for "cutting" your own springs for a lower ride. To increase handling, make sure to get the oversized 18" rims with 1" low-pro tires, make sure you get a few spares, and keep that jack handy! Oh.. and don't forget to get the carbon fiber hood. Before you know it.. your Chevy Cav will be blowing the doors off of Z's, RX8's, Vette's, Vipers... you will 0wn the road..dude.

      --
      -Guns kill people like spoons made Rosie O'Donnell fat-
    6. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do I need to install a really big fan on my car to mod it?

      a turbo is a big fan

      well more of a hair dryer :)

    7. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No the neon lights and clear panels will be sufficient for everyone to know what a dork you are.

    8. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1
      ... and old Citroens - that's a GSA with an aircooled 1300cc flat four, which takes it to around 115mph (will cruise all day at just under the ton). Going from 0-60 in about 11 seconds is helped by the upper rev limit of around 8,500rpm...


      The 2CVs and Dyanes had an aircooled 600cc twin (with fairly manky exhaust emissions if not properly looked after). The 2CV Sahara was four wheel drive - it had a second engine mounted at the back!


      And of course, if you want to really enjoy the aircooled fun, get a Tatra 603 (but you're going to have to Google that yourself).

    9. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 2CV Sahara was four wheel drive - it had a second engine mounted at the back!

      Thats where engines are supposed to go, at the back... unless you want heat inside the car that is.

    10. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Enigma_Man · · Score: 1

      Your statement is wrong on so many levels...

      My car is turbocharged. I only have one fan in it, and it's disconnected most of the time (it runs cool). The airflow required by the engine is supplied by the suction of the engine itself, and the suction of the turbo itself. Boost doesn't have a map, it has a level.

      -Jesse

      --
      Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    11. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by sbpope · · Score: 1

      I think the original post was tounge in cheek but man I can't figure out if your reply is. I have a intercooler for my turbocharger, but it takes adavantage of a hood scoop to ram air over it. I know a lot of guys move their intercooler in front of the car to get even more air flow, but I've yet to hear of a fan in front of an intercooler. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I would imagine fan blades are just going to cause more obstructions when you are going 60mph anyway.

    12. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Peepsalot · · Score: 1

      Ok, I know you are joking about radiators here, but there are other forms of water cooling modifications that people really do on cars. Air-to-Water intercooler: Cools the intake air after it has been compressed and heated by a turbocharger. As opposed to Air-to-Air, which is much more common. They both have their advantages and disadvantages. Water or CO2 IC Sprayer: Cools the outside of an air to air intercooler by spraying it with water. I believe the STI's come with wter ic sprayers stock. CO2 sprayers used compressed CO2 resulting in a drastically lower intake temperature leading to denser air, and more power. Water/alcohol injection kit: Spraying water, or a mixture of water and alcohol into the intake, to cool the intake air, and help prevent detonation or engine knock.

    13. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      He said "Fuel map" not "boost map"

      Also, nothing is supplied by "suction of the engine". Atmospheric pressure PUSHES air into the turbo intake, and the turbo further compresses that and feeds it to the engine. The engine doesn't "suck it in".

      You don't need a fan all the time on an intercooler or otherwise because the car is already moving, and the intercooler is exposed at the front of the vehicle. The fan is for when you aren't moving.

    14. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      I would imagine fan blades are just going to cause more obstructions when you are going 60mph anyway.

      The point is that you're not going 60 on a dyno. You're stationary, doing 4krpm in 3rd gear. Fans are necessary.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    15. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by sbpope · · Score: 1

      OK, so when you said "tuning" you meant on a dyno. Cool man, I can dig using a fan on an intercooler if I was on a dyno.

    16. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two. Your turbo is also a fan, it just spins faster and has better seals than your radiator fan.

    17. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Ha! Mine CAME with liquid cooling!

      Crap. Mine doesn't have water cooling, and I was told it was a sports car. I want a refund.

    18. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      - and I was told it was a sports car. I want a refund. -
      Totally, I'd ask for not only the refund but a usable car, Minivan maybe, for making me drive something air-cooled It's just, un-natural.

      Sig? I have no sig. What you are seeing is a figment of my imagination

    19. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Boost doesn't have a map, it has a level.

      Boost may well have a map. Depending on whether the ecu is told what gear you're in, you have 1 or 2 variables that determine max boost - rpm and gear. You may want to restrict the boost in low gears to avoid wheelspin, and you also want to taper boost at high rpms to avoid overloading the injectors.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    20. Re:Install a larger fan for modding? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Porsche 911s until the 90s and Chevy Corvairs were air cooled.

  5. Type R by Grayden · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does the book cover proper application of Type R decals?

    1. Re:Type R by ebooher · · Score: 2, Funny

      What are you talking about!? I have Sw33t Type-R decals on my Chevrolet Cavalier sedan. You're just jealous of those more l337 than you.

      --
      "Genius may shine aloof and alone, like a star, but goodness is social, and it takes two men and God to make a Brother."
    2. Re:Type R by fredistheking · · Score: 1

      Like the reviewer stated "The book does not actually explain how to do any specific modifications whatsoever." However, it does compare the advantages of standard Type R stickers to the new higher performace yellow Type R stickers.

    3. Re:Type R by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      If you attach the processor from a robot vacuum cleaner, would it be a VaRoomba?

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    4. Re:Type R by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Type-R, phesh, whatever... I have a "Maserati" sticker across my windshield. ... I drive a rusty late 80's 4-door Cavalier with the paint peeling off, the next sticker is going to be "2fast4paint".

    5. Re:Type R by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What are you talking about!? I have Sw33t Type-R decals on my Chevrolet Cavalier sedan. You're just jealous of those more l337 than you.

      What about those VW bugs rollin' around with the Porsche stickers on the rear windows...

      Ugh.

    6. Re:Type R by JonTurner · · Score: 1

      >>What about those VW bugs rollin' around with the Porsche stickers
      I too think it's silly, but there is a shared heritage between these car lines. In fact, a surprising number of Porsche parts are directly interchangable with VW, etc. For instance, you can swap a 944 rear suspension control arms directly into an old aircooled VW beetle to add rear disc brakes. Even the hydraulic lines line up perfectly. You almost can't believe how easy it is.
      While the cars are different, the design methodology is quite similar. But yes, a Porsche sticker on a Beetle is nonsense.

    7. Re:Type R by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what if the beetle has a porsche moter?

    8. Re:Type R by mad+flyer · · Score: 1

      Except the first Beetle was designed by Ferdinand Porsche...

      So she's just arboring her father's name...

  6. Heh. by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

    For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk.

    Sounds like just about every discussion board I've ever read.

    1. Re:Heh. by guido1 · · Score: 1

      For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk.

      Sounds like just about every discussion board I've ever read.


      Where's the +1 (Ironic) mod when you need it?

      (And I should get double bonus points for recursive irony...)

    2. Re:Heh. by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      I'd tack on a "Pot vs kettle" argument, but I think I've made my point.

  7. Sweet by Nickdawwg · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'd like the Speed racer kit please.

  8. And I thought it only happend on /. by RealAlaskan · · Score: 3, Funny
    For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk.

    And I thought it only happend on /.

  9. Watch out, they see you coming! by `Sean · · Score: 4, Informative
    1. Re:Watch out, they see you coming! by Akira1 · · Score: 1

      :banana:

      --
      Food: It's whats for dinner
    2. Re:Watch out, they see you coming! by `Sean · · Score: 1

      OMGHI2U! :disco:

    3. Re:Watch out, they see you coming! by Jens_UK · · Score: 2, Funny
      But we're not doing our job:

      Currently Active Users: 1712 (973 members and 739 guests)

      Most users ever online was 6057, 01-18-2004 at 10:35 AM.

    4. Re:Watch out, they see you coming! by eclip5e · · Score: 1

      doh!

      --
      "Charging a man with murder in this place is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500" -Apocalypse No
    5. Re:Watch out, they see you coming! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The user count of 6057 was from a previous Slashdotting. (The Honda Del Sol Star Wars Car)

    6. Re:Watch out, they see you coming! by `Sean · · Score: 1
      Most users ever online was 6057, 01-18-2004 at 10:35 AM.

      That was two Slashdottings ago for the Star Wars Car at NASIOC.

    7. Re:Watch out, they see you coming! by zaffir · · Score: 1

      :alien:

      --
      "Upon attaching the waterblock to my penis, I began to notice that I know nothing about computers." -- JRockway
    8. Re:Watch out, they see you coming! by freq · · Score: 1

      DIAF n00b :confused:

      --
      "Tension is the great integrity" -- R. Buckminster Fuller
  10. Yes, and? by jawtheshark · · Score: 2, Insightful
    For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk.

    And this differs from Slashdot, how? ;-)

    Driving an unmodified car and proud of it. Can't stand "overtuned" cars.

    --
    Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
  11. well G'ah by geekoid · · Score: 1, Funny

    Hmmm, you went to forums for people who are fans of something, and they all liked it!
    why, color me surprised.

    And you say there were people who were unifirmed, but still gave an opinion! jeez, what is the world coming to.

    I think we are all very fortunate that slashdot doesn't have those things.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    1. Re:well G'ah by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just like this ;)

  12. cooling? by slart42 · · Score: 0

    Does this book cover installing a liquid cooling system into my car? to make it.. uhm... cooler?

  13. Car Hacking??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why o why does slashdot keep referring to modding a car as a "car hack". You are not hacking anything and people have been modifying cars for ages, long before personal computers were around. Please slashdot overlords remember that just because you can modify a piece of hardware does not mean that you are "hacking" it.

  14. dummies? by xao+gypsie · · Score: 1

    the only way i could be a dummie is if i actually tried to improve my old saturn's performance.....leaving it run is the only way i can asure myself of my intelligence....

    --


    xao
    http://TheHillforum.hopto.org
    1. Re:dummies? by nomadic · · Score: 1

      Actually, performance modifications at least have some noticeable, real-world effect, unnecessary as they usually are. If you really want to look like a dummy, don't touch the engine, but put an enormous spoiler on your car.

  15. "misinformed or incorrect speculators" by nusratt · · Score: 0, Redundant

    "For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk."

    And the difference between this and slashdot is exactly what? ;-)

  16. Spoliers! by DogDude · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I hope that this book explains the usefulness of putting giant spoilers on front wheel drive cars to all idiots who continue to do so. I also hope that it explains the difference between a real exhaust system, and a fart pipe. Kids these days are really, really, really stupid, it seems (either that, or I'm getting old).

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Spoliers! by VAXcat · · Score: 1

      And don't forget, the apparently irresistibile desire to put on tires that are either far too small or far too tall to work safely and effectively...like those tiny wide tires on the "slammed" cars, or the equally ridiculous, center-of-gravity raising 20 and 22 inch tires.

      --
      There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
    2. Re:Spoliers! by bconway · · Score: 0

      Not big on physics, huh? Spoilers (if they work correctly) create downforce at very high speeds. At those speeds, it doesn't matter WHICH wheels are moving you from a start. Downforce to the rear wheels is always benificial at a track. Think about it a little, m'kay?

      --
      Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
    3. Re:Spoliers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Downforce is only good on the drive wheels to attain greater traction. Think about it a little more, m'kay.

    4. Re:Spoliers! by dykofone · · Score: 5, Funny
      You've obviously never taken any aerodynamics classes. The point of the spoiler isn't for traction, it goes along with the basic understanding that an airfoil will provide a significant horsepower increase. Your typical spoiler on a Civic will increase horsepower 40 to 60 percent.

      Take airplanes for instance. They need a large amount of thrust to get off the ground, so aircraft engineers went ahead and put TWO big airfoils on each side, as well as some smaller ones in back.

      It's all simple engineering really. Let me guess, you think that stickers are purely aesthetic, and don't serve their main purpose of abrateable heat sheilding during fast runs?

    5. Re:Spoliers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is incorrect. If I'm turning or braking without accelerating, it doesn't matter what wheels are driving. More traction is ALWAYS beneficial.

    6. Re:Spoliers! by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 1
      Spoilers (if they work correctly) create downforce at very high speeds.

      Yea, but most of the time, if the cars they are on were capable of reaching the speeds needed to produce any aerodynamic effect - the way the spoiler is mounted will cause the trunk deck to collapse. Think about that, mmmmkay?

      I believe DogDude's point stands.

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    7. Re:Spoliers! by blk96gt · · Score: 1

      And how many of these morons running around with big wings ever see these "high speeds". With as much weight as their stupid body kits add, a wing isn't hurting anything besides their credibility.

      How many cars do you see running 10 second 1/4 mile that have wings on them? Even the fast rice rockets don't have wings on them.

    8. Re:Spoliers! by Toshito · · Score: 1

      If you put lower profile tires on a bigger rim, you keep the same diameter and you don't raise your center of gravity.

      But very low profile tires are only useful on a glass smooth track, on everyday roads they have a lot less traction because they don't follow the bumps on the road, so it gives you a very inneficient bumpy ride. Every inch more of contact patch you have with a wider tire is not useful if the tire is too rigid and bounces off the asphalt.

      --
      Try it! Library of Babel
    9. Re:Spoliers! by Enigma_Man · · Score: 2, Informative

      You're all somewhat wrong. Spoilers create downforce at _any_ speeds, including 0 (more weight). It's only really appropriate at higher speeds though. An FWD car, while not up high on the list of "needs more downforce" (FWD cars usually understeer very terribly because the front wheels have so much force (and usually weight by design) on them), but any car will benefit from more downforce in the "able to stay on the road while turning" category.

      -Jesse

      --
      Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    10. Re:Spoliers! by Suidae · · Score: 1

      More traction is ALWAYS beneficial.

      Not if you're drift racing.

    11. Re:Spoliers! by DogDude · · Score: 2, Funny

      You've obviously never taken any aerodynamics classes. The point of the spoiler isn't for traction, it goes along with the basic understanding that an airfoil will provide a significant horsepower increase. Your typical spoiler on a Civic will increase horsepower 40 to 60 percent.

      So, assuming that you have a Civic that will go 120 MPH +, how exactly does downward pressure on the back end accomplish adding horsepower? And I'm sorry, I only took a few college level physics classes, but from what I remember, air flow around a vehicle doesn't have shit to do with the amount of power the engine puts out.

      As someone who's also owned a car that could have used a spoiler, I always assumed that a spoiler added downward pressure on the back of the car, helping to maintain traction when accelerating rapidly. I've never, ever, ever, ever seen a Civic's back tires smoke. Ever.

      But more imporantly, how about providing a simple explination as to how a piece of plastic on the back of a car, in no way attached to the engine, increases the engine's output.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    12. Re:Spoliers! by atta1 · · Score: 1

      It's a joke... it's sarcasm... or did you believe that the poster also believed that vinyl stickers help with heat dissipation?

      --
      "The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote" -- Kosh
    13. Re:Spoliers! by DogDude · · Score: 1

      So, when was the last time you saw a Civic, or any other family car that kids like to dress up, lose traction in the rear wheels? Living in a college town, I see lots and lots of Civics and Corollas every day, but never have I seen one lose traction in the rear, no matter how fast they were going.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    14. Re:Spoliers! by dlakelan · · Score: 1

      Downward forces applied behind the rear wheel will reduce the force on the front wheels where the braking, turning, and acceleration forces are most important. It's a simple matter of calculating the torque around the rear wheel and setting it equal to zero since the car is (hopefully) not going to rotate around the rear wheel. If your goal is to do "wheelies" in your car, it's another story.

      In short, although rear mounted fins are helpful on rear wheel drive cars to increase acceleration, they are harmful on front wheel drive cars in almost all cases.

      The truth is on these cars that the physics is secondary to the looks.

      --
      ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) http://www.endpointcomputing.com a scientific approach to custom computing.
    15. Re:Spoliers! by On+Lawn · · Score: 3, Informative
      I believe DogDude's point stands.

      DogDude didn't relay a point, other than he's ignorant of why people put spoilers on front wheel cars (As if the answer is different than rear wheel cars).

      One place you won't see "ricer" nonsense is on the drag racing track. But you will see wheelie bars and spoilers on front wheel cars.

      No, a front wheel car is not in danger of doing a wheelie, but the wheelie bars do help keep the front wheels from lifting and losing traction.

      From NHRA magazine (talking about the for-runner for the car pictured in the link)

      Bergenholtz earned his nickname when he and his brother, Ron, reinvented the wheelie bar and then broke the 10-second benchmark in the quarter-mile. Wheelie bars are like car training wheels. They trail behind a dragster, preventing it from tipping over backwards on launch. The Bergenholtz brothers put wheelie bars on their '89 Honda CRX - a front-wheel-drive car, which, by definition, cannot wheelie. On a front-wheel-drive car, the (now slightly misnomered) wheelie bars shift the center of gravity forward. They prevent the rear shocks from compressing at launch. This is, in fact, genius in its simplicity: Gain traction by planting the front end more firmly on the tarmac.


      Moral of the story? When someone complains he doesn't see a reason for something, that is not a point its an admition of ignorance.

      As to your point about caving in the rear deck, they can handle the weight of a 300lb person, at most denting the sheet metal. 300lb of downforce is quite a bit.

      That said, they are probably superflous on many cars. But I'm not going to go parading my ignorance by laughing at it. You never know.
    16. Re:Spoliers! by DogDude · · Score: 1

      I didn't get the sticker thing, true. But no, I took him seriously. Damn. Now I feel really stupid.

      --
      I don't respond to AC's.
    17. Re:Spoliers! by dr_dank · · Score: 1

      You've obviously never taken any aerodynamics classes. The point of the spoiler isn't for traction, it goes along with the basic understanding that an airfoil will provide a significant horsepower increase.

      Pot... come in pot, this is Kettle. You're looking mighty black today, over.

      --
      Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
    18. Re:Spoliers! by s_mencer · · Score: 1

      Its not the body kit that really bogs them down, its the hundreds of pounds of amp and subwoofer in the trunk...

      And a wing at the drag strip on a FWD car wouldn't be much help, but at the track (the kind with corners to turn) a wing is actually useful.

      But you are correct, most the cars that you see with a "park bench" rear wing never actually spend any time on a track.

    19. Re:Spoliers! by Osty · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're all somewhat wrong. Spoilers create downforce at _any_ speeds, including 0 (more weight). It's only really appropriate at higher speeds though. An FWD car, while not up high on the list of "needs more downforce" (FWD cars usually understeer very terribly because the front wheels have so much force (and usually weight by design) on them), but any car will benefit from more downforce in the "able to stay on the road while turning" category.

      You're also wrong, by the way. A spoiler doesn't create any downforce. A wing is used to create downforce (negative lift, as the wing is exactly the same areofoil shape as you'd find on an airplane, except inverted). A spoiler simply "spoils" the lift generated by the inherent shape of a car. A car is roughly shaped like an aerofoil (rounded on top, flat on the bottom), and thus at higher speeds it tends to generate lift. It's certainly not enough for your car to actually fly, but it is enough to reduce traction necessary for handling and braking. By spoiling that aerofoil shape, a spoiler lessens the natural lift generated by the body shape of a car. For most non-racing applications, a spoiler is all you need, and in most cases you don't even need that (most factory spoilers are indeed cosmetic -- why is it that a Chevy Cavalier needs a spoiler, while a C6 Corvette doesn't?).


      In a racing application, a simple spoiler is often not enough, however, and it doesn't really matter where your drive wheels are in that application. That's why you'll see touring cars like the Acura RSX or TSX, or the Mazda 6 with big wings in the Speed World Challenge races (and other touring car series). These are fully adjustable wings that generated downforce (the amount determined by the angle of attack, just as the amount of lift generated by an airplane is determined by its angle of attack). You simply do not need a big-ass wing like that outside of a full race car. That is why the ricers are silly for putting big ol' wings on their cars (well, aside from the facts that they suffer from "bigger is better" and "more is better" syndrome with huge and multi-level wings, and that 9 times out of 10 the wings they're buying are not fully adjustable, and that 10th time the wing isn't properly adjusted for the conditions).

    20. Re:Spoliers! by Osty · · Score: 1

      Downward forces applied behind the rear wheel will reduce the force on the front wheels where the braking, turning, and acceleration forces are most important.

      That's why a proper (functional) aerodynamic package includes not just a wing for the rear, but also a front lip spoiler, and perhaps underbody panelling and tunnels as well. But I agree, most people putting wings and body kits on their cars are doing so for the look, not the physics.

    21. Re:Spoliers! by FXSTD · · Score: 1

      But they only work at VERY high speeds. At the speeds street cars brake and turn there is no benefit.

    22. Re:Spoliers! by Enigma_Man · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When was the last time you needed 2 GHz to check your e-mail. When was the last time you needed a giant SUV to get a carton of milk? When was the last time you needed anything more than bare minimum to do anything?

      Personally, I hang out with a different crowd of people that actually does race their cars (on tracks, not the street like assholes), and I've seen many a car kick out the rear end around a corner (FWD or otherwise).

      The average joe doesn't need much more than bare minimum. But it's fun to go overboard sometimes, for that time when you do want to take it to a track.

      -Jesse

      --
      Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    23. Re:Spoliers! by LurkerXXX · · Score: 1

      Which are you talking about, drifting or racing? Drifting is almost NEVER the fastest way around a corner, so it's not really racing.

    24. Re:Spoliers! by Jac_no_k · · Score: 1

      I actually spun a FWD Mazda3 at a Rev It Up event. Caught me completely by surprise that FWD will spin when the driver was simply trying to go fast through a cone course.

    25. Re:Spoliers! by FXSTD · · Score: 2, Funny

      You forgot the thrust generated from the "fart can" style muffler. The rythmic pulse generated will induce a thrust coefficient similar to what a turbo would effect. Sure the sound is nice but the extra 50hp is the real gain. Tinted windows also reduce cabin temp allowing for increased ignition timing without detonation. Lets not forget how VTEC technology has brought hydraulic roller lifters into the spotlight. The reduced friction coupled with boost potential from the carbon fiber bling items have maximum rev potential.

    26. Re:Spoliers! by MadHungarian1917 · · Score: 1

      They do work well on REAR wheel drive cars. On front wheel drive cars i.e. the infamous 'Type R' all they do is reduce the amount of traction applied by the front wheels as the downforce provided by the spoiler is LIFTING the front wheels. They would work well mounted in front though...

    27. Re:Spoliers! by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

      Well, see, since it is front wheel drive it forces hte back end of the car down, which decreases traction up front, which means the drive wheels spin easier/faster - and isn't that what HP is about?

      Now pardon me while I go teach some ricers about proper handling in the twisties with my wimpy 4 cylinder car...

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
    28. Re:Spoliers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (-1, No sense of humor)

    29. Re:Spoliers! by coyote_oww · · Score: 2, Insightful
      As someone who's owned cars with spoilers, I confirm that they do add downward pressure to the back of the car. The calculation for this is quite simple: if the spoiler weighs 15lbs, it adds 15lbs of downforce.

      Of course, you could put 15lbs of potatos in the trunk, and you'd get the same effect.

    30. Re:Spoliers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the difference between generating downforce and generating less upforce is . . . zip, zilch, zero, nada.

    31. Re:Spoliers! by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 1

      Wow. If a spoiler adds 40 to 60 percent horsepower, then I'm sure if I put some of those black racing stripes down the center of my 4 cylinder Neon they will add at least 10 to 20 percent, don't you think?

    32. Re:Spoliers! by DaveJay · · Score: 1

      Most of the spoilers you see on street cars are flat horizontal -- there's no angle to them relative to the surface plane they're mounted on. Without angle, the spoilers, they do nothing. Well, that's not entirely true -- the leading edge will slow down the wind a bit, which will introduce an almost immesurable amount of drag/downforce -- but that is no more noticeable than the "downforce" of "more weight" provided by the spoiler. Negligible, and better achieved by other methods.

      A flat spoiler can provide downforce if it is attached to a non-horizontal surface plane (Porsche 911, for instance), of course.

      On the other hand, street cars with functional rear spoilers (there are a few, the aforementioned Porsche 911 and the Audi TT for example) that actually do generate downforce at high speeds -- but the speeds must be very high for that downforce to be of use. In the case of the TT, they added the spoiler because aerodynamically the back ends were getting light on the autobahn and causing accidents, an unfortunate side effect of the smooth drooping tail, which resembles the leading edge of a plane wing.

      Speaking of plane wings, you can get downforce from a spoiler that runs at the same angle as the surface plane it is mounted to, but you'll have to shape it like an upside-down plane wing, and you'll really need to go fast to see any effect.

      So, as a rule: on a street car, unless the spoiler is angled (pitched forward) compared to the surface plane it is mounted on, it's just eye candy. That's partially because downforce == drag, so manufacturers want you to think "performance car" while still getting the fuel economy benefits of low drag.

      And for what it's worth, my SE-R Spec V has a spoiler, but it came from the factory and is flat -- and I will be removing it once I can afford having the trunk holes filled and repainted.

    33. Re:Spoliers! by DaveJay · · Score: 1

      Oh, and I've driven FWD cars at Willow Springs -- you really have to make a big mistake to lose it on the back end. The RealTime Racing crew, which races Acuras and (recently) Spec Vs in the SPEED touring series, has a driver that described his setup as this (from memory): 'we make the car as loose as we possibly can, then keep the power down to make the car straight.'

      In other words, downforce at the rear isn't really an issue, and in fact they work hard to keep the back end as loose as possible to help the car rotate, knowing that they can always hit the gas to straighten the car out.

    34. Re:Spoliers! by Osty · · Score: 1

      And the difference between generating downforce and generating less upforce is . . . zip, zilch, zero, nada.

      Not quite. You're correct about the net effect at "normal" speeds, but the way they approach it is completely different. A spoiler negates most (but not all) lift. You're never going to get a net downforce out of a spoiler, and you're always going to end up with some amount of positive lift. A wing generates an opposing force that cancels positive lift. Because it's generating its own force vector, you certainly can end up with more downward force than upward force. In general, the ideal is to balance it out to 0, but that changes depending on what the car is doing. You cannot get to that goal with a spoiler.


      Think of a picture of a car with arrows pointing upwards from underneath the car. That's lift. A spoiler will shorten the length of those arrows, but will never eliminate them or replace them with arrows pointing down. A wing will generate its own set of arrows, this time at the top of the car pointing down. If you add the two vectors together, you'll end up with some resulting force that can be pointing up, down, or is 0. (If only Slashdot would show pictures, and I had some small amount of artistic ability, I could draw this out to explain it.) As a colorful example, we've all heard about how F1 cars generate so much downforce that they could drive on an upside-down track without falling off. An F1 car could not do that with just a spoiler alone. That's why they have big wings (and not just on the rear of the car, either).

    35. Re:Spoliers! by Karma+Farmer · · Score: 1

      A riced out civic once passed me at about 80 mph down a narrow residential side street. The back end moved a lot when the driver threw the car back into his lane. To this day, I'm still suprised he kept that thing under control. The old trees and parked cars on the side of the road would have made his life momentarily very, very painful.

    36. Re:Spoliers! by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      Also, back in their time, these devices ran on double a's and triple a's and couldn't be recharged easily. They failed because of the 4-6 hour life, yes, but because not everyone had a battery recharger, and a quick means to recharge them was not available.

      Not entirely correct. See the videos of the Mercedes CLK Le Mans cars from a few years back. One "took off" during practice. A second "took off" during the race and was caught on film. The car had a serious aerodynamic flaw that allowed it to briefly generate enough lift under certain situations that the car would take off.

      Also, see the studies into the aerodynames of the Audi TT and (I believe) the New Beetle. There's a reason for the addition of the spoiler on later model year TTs. While neither car would take off per se, a study showed that both could generate enough lift to become highly unstable and/or flip at high rates of speed. I wish I could remember in which issue of Road & Track I read about this study, but it was several years ago, and I haven't the time to search for it on the web.

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    37. Re:Spoliers! by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 1
      A spoiler simply "spoils" the lift generated by the inherent shape of a car.

      Incorrect. 'Spoilers' do generate downforce, which is why theri shape and size are tightly restricted in NASCAR. If you look at the GoodWrench C5 Corvette road car, it does need a big ass wing! Big ass wings generate more force at lower speeds than spoilers, but also more drag. The higher speeds that NASCAR runs in (as opposed to GT cars) don't require the surface area of a wing, therefore a spoiler is sufficient. But the GT cars, which run at lower speeds, need the added surface area. The angle of attack can also be adjusted, for less drag at higher speeds.

      You are correct (below) about F1 cars needing wings on both ends, as well as aerodynamic undercarriges. A 1/2 pound of pressure difference in the tires is what killed Arie Liendyke, when his undercarrige scrapped on the road, and he lost all adhesion in a high speed corner. (I'm a big racing fan too) ;-)

      But we can both agree that ricers need help. But at least they hack their cars! Gotta give 'em some props for picking up a wrench!

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    38. Re:Spoliers! by Dr+Caleb · · Score: 1
      300 pounds is quite a bit, but consider the wing on a Ferrari F-40. It is capable of generating 1G of downforce. The car can run at full speed, shiny side down. The 'wing' on many ricers is much larger than on an F-40. That's about 1200kg for the Ferrari, and I don't know many cars that can take their own mass resting on the trunk ;)

      --
      "History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." Mark Twain
    39. Re:Spoliers! by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      The weight doesn't rest on the trunk. I think it was the F40, but it may have been some other race-style car (I can't even call them sports cars, because enough people think of a Cavalier or Mustang as a sports car). Perhaps a McLaren F1. Anyway, the rear spoiler was linked to the rear suspension. The reason was that the increased downforce on the back changed the geometry and resulted in lift on the front, so by putting the force directly on the rear suspension, it didn't change the vehicle's geometry.

      To my knowledge, the cheapest car with a real, functional wing is the Supra TT. It could put down 300+ lbs of downforce.

      Spoilers are not related to wings. The afore mentioned Supra doesn't have a spoiler, but has a wing. Most cars don't have wings, but have spoilers. A few (Ford Escort Cosworth) have both. The way they function is completely different, but the result is quite similar. But in general, spoilers do not generate downforce, but "spoil" the laminar airflow to generate turbulance and reduce the lift generated by most car designs. The wing works best when in "clean" air high off the car and uses and inverted wing to generate downforce.

    40. Re:Spoliers! by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      In short, although rear mounted fins are helpful on rear wheel drive cars to increase acceleration, they are harmful on front wheel drive cars in almost all cases.

      Completely false. In most cases, a small fin will improve traction on all 4 wheels. In most cases, a small fin will improve aerodynamics (thus top speed and mileage). The normal car shape is that of a wing, disrupt that shape, and you reduce lift. Lift causes drag. Reduce lift on the back and you improve balance (thus traction), as well as reduce drag. This is as true with FWD as RWD or AWD cars. Of course it takes more to properly size a fin to a car than "Dude, this one would look cool on your car."

    41. Re:Spoliers! by donour · · Score: 1
      Cheaper cars with functional wing:

      • Integra Type R
      • Evo
      • WRX STi


      donour
    42. Re:Spoliers! by shiftless · · Score: 1

      It was a joke, man. :)

      The purpose of a spoiler is not to provide traction, it's to provide stability at high speeds (120+), and that's only if it's functional (many spoilers have not been tested in a wind tunnel and aren't functional- for looks only). Spoilers provide pretty much zero downforce at speeds where traction is an issue.

    43. Re:Spoliers! by calculadoru · · Score: 1

      I've never, ever, ever, ever seen a Civic's back tires smoke. Ever.
      I guess you've never stomped on the brakes hard enough.

      --
      The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. -- G.B. Shaw
    44. Re:Spoliers! by jawtheshark · · Score: 1
      There's a reason for the addition of the spoiler on later model year TTs.

      Most probably there is a reason. However, (at least here in Europe), every owner of an original TT could get a free upgrade to the spoiler version. That was not the only thing changed: they also modified the suspension and a whole list of other things. Note that the spoiler that was *not* mandatory in the recall. If you wanted you could leave it out. Occasionally I see one without, but mostly all have spoilers. (The TT is a very popular car here, you see at least 5 a day, if not 10.)
      Also in the same recall you could optionally add ESP if you didn't have it. That however cost about 350€.

      Why do I know this? Simple: I own one. I have an "original TT", and it's got a spoiler and ESP. I just want to add that I drove 200kmh with it before it was modified and it behaved perfectly normal at that speed. Of course it was on a clear straight highway. I still wonder what exactly went wrong with the people that lost control of their TT's, but apparently I wasn't driving fast enough to get strange behaviour.

      --
      Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    45. Re:Spoliers! by cbeaudry · · Score: 1

      C'mon.

      Have you seen a Hyundai Accent with a HUGE aluminum spoiler, driving around town with a "wheelie bar" lately ?

      Didint think so.

      Its not because 10 NHRA professional drag racers with TUBE FRAMES and fully built FWD cars have huge spoilers and wheelie bars to compensate for those spoilers that its not a stoopid idea for all street driven FWD cars.

      Honnestly, a Type-R spoiler... is fine, not all that practical, but fine.

      An aluminum spoiler on a street FWD is useless without a proper front spoiler/splitter, to keep the front of the car down as well.

    46. Re:Spoliers! by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      The Audi TT's not that popular where I live. But then, it's the American south where domestics are still regarded very highly. I couldn't find an article about the exact study that I read, but here is another article that talks briefly about the lift phenomena of the two cars:

      So it was interesting to since find that on the recently released 1.8 Turbo New Beetle, an auto-deploying lip spoiler is placed at the top of the rear window. It pops up at 150 km/h - obviously the generated lift was so bad that Volkswagen was concerned that autobahners were going to "do an Audi TT" at high speed. [The Audi TT developed so much rear lift that people were crashing them on sweeping high-speed corners. Even a former rally champion died in such a crash. Audi recalled all cars, fitting a rear spoiler and also making suspension mods.]

      http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_1065/article.html (Google cache for highlighting)

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    47. Re:Spoliers! by sjwt · · Score: 1

      and lets not forget its also good on the highway for those of us with lighter cars, doing 120kph down the highway in my old lancer(insert rice jokes hear) and it used to nearly get blown out of the lane with only a semi desent wind, new one with spoiler, and its sweet as =>

      nothign ricey about stoping your car salming into another on the freeway IMHO

      --
      You have 5 Moderator Points!
      Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
    48. Re:Spoliers! by sjwt · · Score: 1

      Ive seen my old lacer without a spoiler geting blowen across lanes on the freeway in gale force winds, and could feal most crosswinds hit the car, add a spoiler problem goes away, but no spoiler will be fine if your just driving yoru car to chuch down the street grandmar...

      --
      You have 5 Moderator Points!
      Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
    49. Re:Spoliers! by Suidae · · Score: 1

      Well, I dunno how drifting is scored (I presume there is an element of subjective judging in addition to timing), but I'd call it a kind of constrained racing. There are many types of racing where there are requirements other than getting from the start to the finish as fast as possible.

    50. Re:Spoliers! by On+Lawn · · Score: 1

      Didint think so.

      Wheelie bars are illegal for public roads.

    51. Re:Spoliers! by bungo · · Score: 1

      You're also wrong, by the way. A spoiler doesn't create any downforce

      hmm... now either you're wrong, or the ride and handling Engineers at Lotus Cars are wrong.

      When I went to drive the new Lotus Eixge around a track, then engineers first gave a slide show, giving the differences between the new model Lotus Elise, and the new Lotus Exige (which is based on the Elise).

      The Elise has only a spolier, which is integrated into the body of the car. The Exige has a spoiler, sitting about 20cm above the rear clamshell.

      Both the Elise and Exige produce downforce, but the Exige produces about 80kg more downforce at
      120km/h (roughly, I can't remember the exact figures). ... hmm... who to believe .....

      Do you think that you could be less definitive about telling someone they're wrong next time.

      The problem with slashdot, there's always going to be someone eho knows more that you.....

      --
      "The best part? I became an ordained minister while not wearing pants." -- CleverNickName
  17. Car annoyances by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 3, Funny

    Is there a discussion of common car annoyances such as fart pipes, chain-link license plate frames, spoilers on family sedans, ill-fitting aftermarket plastic body kits, and drivers of any type of Pontiac?

    --
    Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    1. Re:Car annoyances by ebooher · · Score: 2, Funny
      spoilers on family sedans, ill-fitting aftermarket plastic body kits, and drivers of any type of Pontiac?

      Man it's hilarious to see downforce spoilers/wings on front wheel drive cars. I may make a lot of people angry with this statement, but I can't help but laugh my white arse off when I see posers trying to lift their drive wheels off the ground. Absolutely hilarious.

      --
      "Genius may shine aloof and alone, like a star, but goodness is social, and it takes two men and God to make a Brother."
    2. Re:Car annoyances by sparty · · Score: 1

      There may be, but will it help? After all, I doubt most of the maledies cited are the result of car owners doing thorough (read: any) research before modding their cars...so reading a book is probably out of the question.

    3. Re:Car annoyances by timster · · Score: 1

      Hey now, for all you know, that Civic has a rear-wheel-drive mod.

      But in any case, don't tell them about it -- next thing you know we'd see downforce wings on the front of the car that took up an extra two lanes of the road.

      --
      I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
    4. Re:Car annoyances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not much one for physics, are you?

    5. Re:Car annoyances by NardofDoom · · Score: 1
      What's wrong with Pontiacs? My wife drives a vibe GT and it goes like a bat outta hell, but it also hauls a dog or mulch like an SUV, and gets 30 mpg.

      Of course, its more Toyota than Pontiac, and it's got a Suzuki designed engine.

      --
      You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
    6. Re:Car annoyances by Enigma_Man · · Score: 1

      Downforce on the rear wheels of a car won't lift up the front wheels, the front will receive the same amount of downforce, unless the rear wing is _way_ out behind the rear wheels, using the rear wheels like a lever. Yes ricers do that a lot, no it won't lift the front wheels up. Most of the shoddy body kits also serve to increase front downforce as well, by blocking off air from going underneath the car, creating a nice low pressure zone.

      -Jesse

      --
      Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    7. Re:Car annoyances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      many mods are done cosmetically, not for any performance advantage. spoilers on a FWD car are one example. Putting heavy audio equipment into a car doesn't help performance either... it's installed for a completely different reason. The same for spoilers.

    8. Re:Car annoyances by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 3, Funny

      Nothing is wrong with Pontiacs, except that they could lose all the plastic trim pieces, generally handle like dogs, and their owners actually think they're driving a car that's better than a Chevy.

      Not that there's anything wrong with an inexpensive un-fancy car. I drive one myself, but don't have any illusions about it. Europe has a similar phenomenon with people who drive Alfa Romeos. They are always weaving around in traffic, revving the engine, looking like morons, because when you get right down to it it's no better than a Fiat.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
    9. Re:Car annoyances by cakefool · · Score: 1
      Only in america would someone proudly state their car does 30mpg, as if that were amazing. The last big run in my car was at an average of 90mph for a couple hours, and averaged 60mpg.

      Oh diesel, I love thou

    10. Re:Car annoyances by NardofDoom · · Score: 1
      We tend to drive the Vibe through on upaved roads pretty regularly, so we like the plastic body cladding along the bottom.

      I don't like other Pontiacs either, but our Vibe is the perfect car for what we need it for.

      No, a TDI Golf would be perfect, but the Vibe's close.

      --
      You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
    11. Re:Car annoyances by Carnildo · · Score: 1

      More importantly, does it have instructions on the installation of big-ass spoilers on Volkswagen Bugs?

      --
      "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
    12. Re:Car annoyances by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      So primer colored paint jobs, mismatched body panels, and nailed on spoilers are considered a thing of beauty these days? Boy, I have gotten old.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    13. Re:Car annoyances by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Well, you have to admit that at least the Monar^W GTO is decent...

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    14. Re:Car annoyances by NardofDoom · · Score: 1

      I want a TDI, but I couldn't find one in my price range, and my wife won't drive one. And she especially won't let me put a greasel system in it.

      --
      You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
    15. Re:Car annoyances by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with Pontiacs?

      They're horrendously ugly. That's their main flaw. They're a perfect illustration of the horrible sense of aesthetics that Americans have.

    16. Re:Car annoyances by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      If you go to Pontiac.com and check out their lineup, they're dumping the body cladding.

      It's about time, too. Now if only GM could roll out it's five and six speed automatics and hybrid powertrains before Toyota runs them into the ground.

      GM finally makes great progress catching up in crash protection and reliability, and they blow it by letting the cutting edge tech pass them buy.

    17. Re:Car annoyances by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      Are you talking US gallons or British Imperial gallons, which are 20% larger?

      Either way the numbers are impressive, but in the latter case you'd be getting 50 mpg, which is more inline with the Volkswagen Turbo Diesel Jetta and Golf available in the US.

    18. Re:Car annoyances by digital+bath · · Score: 1
      Most of the shoddy body kits also serve to increase front downforce as well, by blocking off air from going underneath the car, creating a nice low pressure zone.


      Wouldn't the "low pressure zone" be above the car?

      Think about it: a car is basically the same shape as an airplane wing. The air goes straight under the car, but must move faster over the top of the car, creating a low pressure zone above the car.
      --
      find / -name "*.sig" | xargs rm
    19. Re:Car annoyances by Enigma_Man · · Score: 1

      Nope, you're thinking about it wrong, the ground plays a big part in all of this. A wing skimming along 1 inch from the ground will slap into the ground faster than you can say "aw crap, my wing".

      If you have a really low front bumper, you're shoving all of the air that would normally go under the car over it. Throw a bunch of mass over you, and you're bound to move downwards. It's a front-spoiler basically. You get a venturi effect between the car and the ground, making a much bigger low-pressure area underneath the car.

      -Jesse

      --
      Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    20. Re:Car annoyances by Moses_Gunn · · Score: 1

      Er, close but not quite right. If the downforce vector of the spoiler passes *exactly* through the rear axle of the car (imaginary or otherwise) then you are almost correct, it won't lift the front of the car. It also won't put *any* downforce on the front wheels. I would be very surprised if this is the case, however. Also, since the car is presumably moving *forward*, if you factor in the additional drag induced by the spoiler, which most definitely won't have a force vector colinear with the downforce vector (it will in fact point towards the rear of the car and not into the axle) you will indeed have a lessening of the force on the front wheels. Of course, simply accelerating has the same effect, which is why I have never understood FWD on a "performance" car. I invite you to draw the free-body diagram to verify this for yourself. Use the center of the rear wheels and sum all the torques around it.

    21. Re:Car annoyances by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1
      Is there a discussion of common car annoyances such as fart pipes, chain-link license plate frames, spoilers on family sedans, ill-fitting aftermarket plastic body kits, and drivers of any type of Pontiac?
      Absolutely!
      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    22. Re:Car annoyances by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Perhaps it makes you ammused because you don't know how a spoiler works? Let me state something as fact that is counter intuitive, then not support it. A spoiler (not a wing) behind the rear wheels of a FWD car will increase downforce on the front wheels. Since you are obviously too ignorant to know I'm right, and so hard headed that you like to spew your ignorance in a public forum, I'll not waste my time with proofs and evidence.

      (If you have mod points, you should mod me down as a troll, I'm telling the truth, but I'm being an ass about it)

    23. Re:Car annoyances by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't the "low pressure zone" be above the car?

      Yes. And a spoiler at the tail of the car increases pressure 3 ft (or so) in front of it. And a front spoiler (well, that's what I call them, airdam, ground effects, and other words are the same) lowers the pressure under the car. The lower the pressure under the car, the better downforce. It decreases the pressure under the car by restricting the flow under the car, but allowing more out the back. The ground effects that lower the rear bumper too often worsen lift. You want a small front opening and a large rear opening. The volume increases, the amount of air remains the same, so it has to decrease in pressure.

    24. Re:Car annoyances by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with Pontiacs?

      It's like a Chevy, but ribbed for her pleasure.

    25. Re:Car annoyances by maddskillz · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It's more Toyota than Pontiac seems like an understatement. When I was talking to a Toyota salesman, he said the only GM part was the stereo. And of course you know car salesmen never lie!
      And I thought it was Yamaha that designed the engine

    26. Re:Car annoyances by shiftless · · Score: 1

      A common misconception. Spoilers are not used to increase traction, because most of them don't really function below 100-120 MPH or so. Therefore it's irrelevant whether the car is FWD or RWD.

      The point is to generate downforce at high speed to increase stability.

    27. Re:Car annoyances by cakefool · · Score: 1
      British imperial, though my brothers mate has a 2003TDi golf, and that at best manages 58mpg at 80mph. BTW, I drive a 1996 Citroen Xsara - the engine design hasn't changed in 15-20 years.

      The next engine change was 2003 - The HDI, which commands double the price secondhand and manages 50-60mpg around town.

    28. Re:Car annoyances by whoever57 · · Score: 1
      Are you talking US gallons or British Imperial gallons, which are 20% larger?

      Actually, the difference is less: a US gallon is more like 5/6 (rather than 4/5). The measures of fluid ounces are also different between US and Imperial systems.

      --
      The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  18. What about the non-ricer? by Nick+of+NSTime · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have a 2005 Dodge Magnum RT, so a lot of the ricer-type "upgrades" don't apply to my car. I need a balance of old-school stuff (bigger exhaust, cold air induction) with new-school stuff (reprogrammed PCM). Unfortunately, a lot of the upgrades for the Hemi engine in the Dodge Ram pickups don't work with the Hemi engine in my Magnum.

    So my question is, does this book cater to the pocket racer crowd or will I find any good information for my 347 cid hot rod station wagon?

    1. Re:What about the non-ricer? by wankledot · · Score: 1

      There's no way that a book like this can address the nuances of every motor, so I would say it's mostly useless to you. It can tell you in general terms what to do to a big displacement NA engine (colder air, better ECU, engine internals, etc.) but you probbaly already know that.

      --
      My sig is blank, I typed this by hand.
    2. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Llarian · · Score: 2, Informative

      The simple fact is that in order to make your car faster, you need more air and more fuel. That's it.

      Learn how your particular engine works, its tolerances, and its choke points. Fuel is easy to add more of, especially in a fuel injected car. Bigger injectors and the ability to change your fuel curve and monitor the engine status will fix that.

      Air is harder. The MAF is often a choke point, as is the intake box. Throttle bodies will sometimes be an issue, although less so with the larger V-8 engines. For NA cars, you'll eventually need a stroker or something of that nature to get much more air (or adding forced induction).

      When push comes to shove, an engine is a simple thing. Its just a big air pump. Learn the basics of engine management, fuel injection and timing, and static/dynamic compression if you're looking at forced induction, and the rest of it is easy.

    3. Re:What about the non-ricer? by vg30e · · Score: 1

      check out www.pricechemical.com

      I have used their "super street" octane boost product with very positive results in different cars of all types including a Nissan Maxima sedan without any real problems.

      Just don't exceed manufactureres guidlines.

    4. Re:What about the non-ricer? by PsychoKiller · · Score: 1

      Don't waste your money on a performance chip unless you are going to have someone come, hook up a scantool to your car, and burn one based on the results.

      Hypertech makes it hard to read their chips, but the bottom line is that the ECM needs to read it, and you'll be able to get to the data eventually.

      This is all F-body specific, but you'll get an idea of what they're doing:

      Stage 1: Lower fan turn on temperatures.

      Stage 2: Advance timing in the upper rpms.

      It's a waste of money, and may in fact hurt performance if it's advancing timing too much, since the ECM may detect knock and retard the timing worse than stock.

    5. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Enigma_Man · · Score: 1

      Something that will make power on engine 99.9% of the time will make power on another engine. Bigger exhaust, cold air intakes like you mentioned are the bread-and-butter of "ricers". The concepts are all the same, cram more air into the engine, along with more fuel. It's the same whether it's a 1.6L honda, or a 6.7 liter turbo diesel.

      -Jesse

      --
      Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    6. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got an 05 300C, so I've been looking for info on this also:

      Exhaust: Magnaflow, Corsa, Borla, Flowmaster all have or are coming out with exhausts for the Magnum/300C. Mopar will be redistributing the Borla exhaust under the Mopar nameplate.

      Replacement intakes: 360AirIntakez and others have released CAIs for the Magnum. http://www.360airintakez.com/

      H&K has a drop-in filter for the 300C/RT. IIRC there are a few other companies making them. Also, there is a baffle/silencer on the stock air intake that can be removed to improve airflow.

      PCM: No luck yet. The LX platform is new and the computer is very complex. DC hasn't been interested in supporting or helping the aftermarket. Heard rumors of some people making progress but nothing yet.

      Expect a lot of new products for the magnum to come out next week at SEMA.

      Check out http://dodgemagnum.net and http://300cforums.com . They are the most active LX platform message boards and have a wealth of good info on upgrades.

    7. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hate to break it to you, but a stock 4 cyclider WRX will do 0-60 in just over 5 seconds. An STi or Lancer EVO will smoke your HEMI powered RT in every way straight from the factory. Bolt on a few grand of mods and these cars are well into supercar territory with sub 4 second 0-60 times and 11 second quarter mile's. You would have to do a hell of a LOT of work and spend a heck of a lot more money to bring your heavy assed Dodge up to the acceleration and handling characteristics of these so called "pocket racers". Then there is the fact that at the end of the day you will still have a Dodge, with al of its quality and reliability problems.

    8. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Nick+of+NSTime · · Score: 1
      What do I care what another car will do? I bought my car because it's what I wanted, not because it'll do whatever in whatever seconds. My Jeep Wrangler will go places a 4 cylinder WRX will never go, but what the heck does it matter?

      There's more to life than just numbers and measurements. Maybe if I were 19 instead of 29 I'd care about your car wars.

    9. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "these cars are well into supercar territory"

      No. There is more to a supercar than low speed acceleration. Like handling. Go drive a BMW 3 series. Then drive a WRX. You'll feel the difference. Never driven a real supercar, but I can't imagine that its even close.

    10. Re:What about the non-ricer? by donour · · Score: 1

      He wasn't referring to a WRX. The link is for the vishnu evo from c&d's super car challenge. The evo had about 20k in upgrades. The test included standing 0-60, quarter mile, road course, and braking distance from 150mph. There was also a recent article in CAR magazine that put the bran new Evo VIII MR FQ-400 up against a pagani zonda. Yes, it's a totally rediculous comparison, but the lap times were scary close. I'm not saying the evo is a supercar. It mostly certainly is not.

      To put it another way, the BBC show TopGear has a test track (designed by some lotus folks) that they've been testing loads of UK-spec cars on. The Evo MR FQ-320 (a uk only car) finished a few seconds of ahead of both the M3 and the Z8.

      donour

    11. Re:What about the non-ricer? by shiftless · · Score: 1

      A stroker with pretty much stock everything else is pointless, and would be a dog. Stroking it will increase cubic inches (and torque as a result), but the stock heads will choke it off and it will be horsepower-limited.

      To really wake most motors up, what you need is port work, big valves, and a cam/gears/converter to match.

    12. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're the one going on about "pocket racers" and "rice". I'm just pointing out that your Dodge is not even in the same league performance wise as either the Subaru or the Mitsubishi that you are deriding.

    13. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bzzzt. So sorry, but you cannot be more wrong. The EVO's handling is considered by most pro's as simply the best ever made for a street going sedan. Better than the E46 M3, at half the cost. Only an idiot would buy an M3 unless image is more important than performance.

    14. Re:What about the non-ricer? by donour · · Score: 1

      Well I wouldn't call an M3 owner an idiot. It still handles beautifully and is way more comfortable.

      donour

    15. Re:What about the non-ricer? by sjwt · · Score: 1

      yerh, but then you have to face the facts under the same you cant say jack about a ricer who puts a 3 tire wing on the back of his car..

      your car is what you want, and the ricers car is what he wants..

      --
      You have 5 Moderator Points!
      Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
    16. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Llama_STi · · Score: 1

      a three-series?!! you've got to be kidding me! Germany's Taurus. A WRX will own a three-series any day of the week, anyplace on the planet.

    17. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Nick+of+NSTime · · Score: 1

      I don't have a problem with what other people do to their cars in the slightest.

    18. Re:What about the non-ricer? by Nick+of+NSTime · · Score: 1

      Well, I never derided any car. I like the WRX and the Lancer EVO. I wanted a larger car, so I didn't buy either of those. They're fine automobiles and a huge step in the right direction (in the 1990s, it was nearly impossible to find a decent sports car $50k). I believe *you* were the only one that said anything negative about another car....

  19. Car mods for dummies by CRepetski · · Score: 2, Insightful

    IMHO, the majority of modded cars you see on the road are driven in a significantly more aggressive manner than unmodded ones. This seems to outweigh a slight improvement or reduction in safety by such mods. That said, perhaps learning about safety from a "for dummies" book is even more important in these cases?

  20. seems familiar by octal666 · · Score: 2, Funny

    For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk.

    I have nightmares about an unmodded slashdot...

    --
    DON'T PANIC
    1. Re:seems familiar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Browse at -1 at some point and you'll get an idea of what it would be like.

  21. Well you've come to the right place... by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

    For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk. ... b/c this is where all of the misinformed speculators hang out.

  22. For VW lovers, I recommend ... by Buran · · Score: 4, Informative

    VWVortex.com has some great discussion forums, although the main model-specific forums, especially the Golf/Jetta forums, are mostly full of "what rims should I get?" and suchlike, which is a shame because I keep finding that requests for actual help are buried under such junk. It's quite frustrating to check back a while after a request to find two pages of rim polls burying your post past the 1-3 pages most people bother to read. Some people resort to adding a photo to their post to get the camera icon next to their thread so people will open it even if the photo is unrelated to the help request.

    Then there are the large number of people who, frustrated by this and by the search function that seems to be totally incapable of actually finding anything, post a nice query that obviously took some time to set up, only to be greeted by people who post "Use the search" or screenshots of the forum software toolbar with huge arrows pointing to the search function ... which has probably already been tried, with no success.

    So, I recommend the forums, but use the more-specific forums for your problem ... although the sad fact still is that fewer people traffic those forums so you'll have to wait longer than you should for a real answer.

    1. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by maddskillz · · Score: 2, Informative

      For what it's worth... TDIclub has great resources for modding TDI's (again, VW specific). Lots of really useful information on that, and not too many posers.
      Of course, you have to understand that you are trying to mod a 90 HP car that sounds like a tractor...not really cool with the in-crowd. But it takes a special person to "get" a diesel, and you can actually get some pretty descent performance out of it at the same time.

    2. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by Buran · · Score: 1

      I am planning at this point to trade in my auto 2.0 for the Golf 5 TDI when it's available (since I no longer have to share the car with a non-stick driver... my ex-husband refused to learn) so I'll definitely be joing TDIclub and chipping the car when I've got it (I've heard great things about the TDI chips.) I want a fun-to-drive car that is efficient at the same time.

    3. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      That's exactly why you should go to Sport Compact Racing instead of the 'Tex. The Whoretex is full of assess for the most part.

      It's amazing what a simple ECU upgrade can do to a turbocharged engine with regards to performance ;-)

    4. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      He refused to learn manual transmission? No wonder you dropped him. (No offense, just making a joke.)

      A friend of mine has a Jetta TDI. He chipped the car and replaced the injectors for a total price of ~$350. He claims the mods gave him about 150 horsepower and 230 ft.lbs. (or is it lb.ft.? I can never remember) of torque, and the way it accelerated, I'm inclined to believe him. His mileage hasn't changed, either.

    5. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by Buran · · Score: 1

      You had it right the first time -- "foot-pounds" is correct in the (horrible) US system. In the (better! and I live in the US) metric system, it's "Newton-meters".

      I tried to teach him. Harrumph. :P

    6. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by HeyLaughingBoy · · Score: 1
      you'll have to wait longer than you should for a real answer.

      But the wait can be worthwhile. A few years ago (1999 or so) I needed to remove the CV joints on my 4x4's front end for repacking. It was a known difficult job, and even with the detailed instructions I received on one of the forums for that vehicle, it still took me forever. Without that help, though I might have given up in frustration, or ripped the entire front end apart: the clearance between the axle end and some suspension members was less than 1/4" Not a lot when you're wrestling a hunk of steel weighing somewhere close to 100lbs.

      I sold that truck with a nice, detailed set of instructions on replacing the timing chain stapled to the factory service manual. Luckily, I never had to actually use them.

    7. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by michaelhood · · Score: 1

      You might enjoy the forums at ClubTouareg, then.

    8. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by Newspimp · · Score: 1

      www.20vturbo.com FWIW, Caters to the newer 1.8T 20v motors specifically, but we're predominantly uncensored AND we have a bristling pr0n section :D

    9. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by Buran · · Score: 1

      Detailed specs and interview (with the owner, not the T-Reg) (emphasis mine)

      I don't know, actually... I'd love to see what a VW would say if I could talk to it!

    10. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by maddskillz · · Score: 1

      That sounds optimistic, but could be true. It will definetly have lots of torque. And the mileage should be about the same...just wait till he has to replace his clutch though...that will be more the $350 ;)
      I definetly love the torque on these cars. The fact that it has so much low end makes it a pleasure to drive too

    11. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by maddskillz · · Score: 1

      The chips for the TDI's are great. You could also go with a tuning box instead...they are supposed to be good as well..huge debate over which is better

    12. Re:For VW lovers, I recommend ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone that is buying a new VW is crazy. Check out the latest consumer reports roundup. While my preferred vechicles didn't stack up too well, they didn't do NEARLY as bad as the VW. Can we say triple black across the board? Of course, most are made in Mexico now so what do you expect?

  23. colors... yellow in specific by ryane67 · · Score: 2, Funny

    the book's gotta say something about painting parts yellow to make your car go faster..

    --
    ?SYNTAX ERROR IN LINE 42
    1. Re:colors... yellow in specific by Fizzog · · Score: 1

      No! No! No!

      The correct colour enhancements are:

      Red - faster acceleration
      White - better top-end speed
      Yellow - reduces weight
      Black - increases traction
      Chrome - increases horsepower
      Blue - improves braking
      Green - smoother running engine

      Did I miss any?

    2. Re:colors... yellow in specific by coyote_oww · · Score: 1
      the book's gotta say something about painting parts yellow to make your car go faster..

      Parts, hell, paint the whole car yellow!!

      Seriously, I once owned a car tinted, as Road and Track described it, "eye-popping yellow". I regret not getting the same color on my next car. Nothing like being able to pick your car out in the parking lot as long as only a sliver of it is visible! As a side benifit, the car appeared clean even when it was filthy. Something about the bright color overwhelming the dirt or something. But you really couldn't see dirt on the car unless you were standing right next to it.

      I'd claim it was safer too (improves your chances of being seen), only I got t-boned in a low speed accident - 16yo girl "didn't see me" while trying to pass on the right as I was turning into the A&W on a two lane road (one lane each way). I guess the car wasn't bright enough.

  24. vrrrrrrrrrroooooooooom by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    more like Ricermobile hacks & mods for ricers.

    Yes i know its trolling and flaimbait, but i speak my mind.

  25. So it's basically by OverlordQ · · Score: 4, Funny

    "A Dummys Guide to Ricing" instead of an O'Rielly "Car Computing"

    --
    Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    1. Re:So it's basically by jstockdale · · Score: 1

      Not at all. David's part of a performance car community that's quite the anti-thesis of "Ricing." Rather than the crowd from The Fast and the Furious, you'll find a group of people that are dedicated to increasing the performance of their vehicles by bettering the car's power and handling. Very little, if any, modifications are made to the cars that do not directly impact performance. For an example of such a tuning shop, check out the one David worked at a year ago, WORKS.

      These enthusiasts partake in spirited driving, various club competitions, and open track days. They frown on any type of reckless behavior such as excessive speed, street racing, etc.

      Contrast this behavior to that of a typical "Ricer," where The Fast and the Furious looks are either equally, or more imporant than acutal performace. They'd rather throw a bottle of NOS and a big exhaust on the car, slap it with a body kit, a few decals and a type R sticker, and go out cruizing the streets.

      -S ...

      --
      **AA: a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes
  26. On the other hand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  27. Obligatory diy-efi.org link by PsychoKiller · · Score: 2, Interesting

    www.diy-efi.org is a great source of information on GM vehicles. The guys there have reverse engineered many GM ecms and distribute their work for free.

    Right now I'm working on a GPL'd bin editor, and once that's done I'll be working on a PROM burner that works in Linux.

    Oh, I should add a link to www.moates.net as well, since he makes lots of cool stuff like PROM emulators and USB programmers. Craig's gonna kill me...

    1. Re:Obligatory diy-efi.org link by nate1138 · · Score: 1

      Another one to check is PGMFI.org. Very good DIY ECU hacking for Hondas. Covers most ODB0 and ODB1 chipping, reprogramming, adding boost, whatever.

      And yes, moates.net is awesome. I have one of his pocket USB EEPROM programmers and haven't had a lick of trouble out of it.

      --
      Where's my lobbyist? Right here.
  28. the only website you need by theMerovingian · · Score: 1
    --
    "If you think you have things under control, you're not going fast enough." --Mario Andretti
    1. Re:the only website you need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ha! Thank you! I've been trying to find this page the whole time I was reading this thread, but couldn't remember the name.

  29. okay . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But will it tell us /.'ers how to hardwire OGG support in the ECU while power sliding through the corner and hitting thw NAWZZZZZ button at the same time? Oh and will it run Linux?

  30. I overclocked my car by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but the cop wasn't impressed by my technical expertise when he gave me a ticket.

  31. Duh! Me by EmbeddedJanitor · · Score: 3, Funny
    So far the dummy books deal with non-lethal issues. The thought of encouraging a dummy-level person to dick with the steering, braking and engine of a lethal killing machine does not help one sleep well at night. I hope, but I doubt, that the book has only one page: "If you're a dummy then don't dick with your car!"

    --
    Engineering is the art of compromise.
  32. tuning potential by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I recently bought a high-performance automobile that has a reputation for its tuning potential

    you just got a new Minivan??? sweet!

    1. Re:tuning potential by germanbird · · Score: 1

      you just got a new Minivan??? sweet!

      Be careful what you wish for! Its been done. http://www.turbominivan.com/

  33. unfortunantly.. by bk_veggie · · Score: 1


    unfortunantly, the original title "Ricing for Dummies" was rejected, as there is already a dummies book on the finer points of uncle bens boil-a-bag.

  34. Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This particular model was reported in Car and Driver as having some problems with warranty support problems from the manufacturer. Specifically owners are reporting that after participating in race situations, they were refused warranty support when Nissan allegedly surfed the internet and made notes about the owners from websites. Caveat Emptor.

    Here is the article:
    http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp? section_id =29&article_id=8422

    1. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FYI, it's Mitsubishi. And, what do you expect when you buy a Mitsubishi? It's going to break.

    2. Re:Warranty by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Nah, Mitsubishis are gutless shitboxes, but they run forever. I haven't had an engine problem in the go-kart mirage I've been driving, and I'm not exactly gung-ho as far as maintainance as concerned.

      I'm the guy who drives 5000 miles with the "check engine" light on. I consider such vehicles pretty much disposable.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    3. Re:Warranty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That hyperlink does not mention Nissan anywhere!!

    4. Re:Warranty by sjwt · · Score: 1

      WTF troll on.

      My first car, a stock standard 1994 lancer GLI coupe,
      it had 90K-kms(56K-miles) on it, i got it serviced at 100k(62m), 110k(68m) and 120k(75m).. then went to 160k(100m) with out a service or an oil change just toping up.

      at 160,000k(100,000m) i blew the distributor(sp), something to do with doing 110kph(68mph) normally I changed at 95kph(60mph)... but I just wanted to see)

      Then going from 160,000k(100,000m) to 230,000k(140,000m) with out changing the oil just top ups, no servicing..
      At 230,000k I blew the distributor (sp), again (the original replacement was a cheapie one) the high tension wires apparently needed to be replaced too..

      Then didn't service the car again. It was written off (flooded the engine crossing a ford) and that was at 290,000kms(180,000 miles), though I did take to changing the oil my self every 10,000kms(6,000 miles).

      At the end of 200,000kms(125,000 miles) driving over 4 years total upkeep on the car was 5 services, 2 distributors (sp), 1 set of high tension leads, 6 oil changes my self and 3 sets of wheels.

      So im not sure what was magic about my car, or what others have done around you, but my experience was good enough that my next car was a Mitsubitchy too.

      And lets not forget by toping up the oil, I usually drove for 2-4 weeks before adding oil after the light came on.

      And just incase you are wondering, yes I did flog the shit out of the car all the time.

      --
      You have 5 Moderator Points!
      Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
    5. Re:Warranty by sjwt · · Score: 1

      Thats the mirages for you, oh and dont go near a vrx with Auto man do they have problems.

      --
      You have 5 Moderator Points!
      Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
  35. Be Honest by PhraudulentOne · · Score: 1

    Now be honest... you bought a Civic didn't you?

    --
    You create your own reality - Leave mine to me.
  36. Car Mods for 1960's Mercedes by ebooher · · Score: 1

    So, since I doubt this would get an overall success rating from /. in an Ask Slashdot forum, and since it's more on topic talking about a book of Car Hacks .....

    How many people dream of modifying a 60's model Mercedes sedan? I mean, don't you just drool at the thought of fiberglass bumper covers? Trick rims on lower suspension? Maybe some AMG disc break conversion info? 6.3L V8 swap. Oh yeah baby!

    Bring it on, let's get some ideas!!!!!

    --
    "Genius may shine aloof and alone, like a star, but goodness is social, and it takes two men and God to make a Brother."
    1. Re:Car Mods for 1960's Mercedes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go to JTRs website and get the basic parts for a small block Chevy swap. Check the VOLVO they did!

  37. Excerpt from article sounds familiar. by jdkane · · Score: 1
    For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk.

    Really! ... Well then you have certainly come to the right place.

  38. Where have I ... by El_Smack · · Score: 1


    "For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk."

    Dude, you just described the entire Internet. Get on a *moderated* mailing list if you want a decent signal to noise ratio.

    --


    There are 01 kinds of cars in the world. The General Lee, and everything else.
  39. Some bumper stickers I want to have made by wowbagger · · Score: 1, Funny

    I want to make some bumper stickers for the ricers - after all, we should help these people feel "special"

    THE BIGGER THE PIPE, THE SMALLER THE PENIS
    HIGH WING, LOW IQ
    TYPE-Retarded!

    Oh, the fun I could have in your average mall parking lot....

  40. What about the... by PhraudulentOne · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Offroaders! We mod too.
    Jeep Enthusiasts!

    --
    You create your own reality - Leave mine to me.
  41. Fuel Efficiency by NardofDoom · · Score: 2, Interesting
    I'd love to mod my car, but to get better fuel efficiency, not to go fast and make loud noises.

    Unfortunately, there's no source for after-market parts or chips that can do this, which makes me sad.

    --
    You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
    1. Re:Fuel Efficiency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the manufacturer has already mostly tuned for mileage (thank CAFE). However, less restrictive intakes and exhausts can improve mileage if not driven harder, and you can burn aftermarket chips for better fuel economy, though I don't know if you could save enough to make the tuning time worthwhile.

    2. Re:Fuel Efficiency by dknight · · Score: 1

      Did you know that many turbochargers can actually INCREASE your cars fuel efficiency? Not all do, but it's true that many can. They're not cheap, and you likely wont get more than a few mpg gain, but you cna do it.

    3. Re:Fuel Efficiency by TigerNut · · Score: 2
      When you tune your engine to go fast, you do it by improving the engine's volumetric efficiency. That typically means you'll burn more fuel (and air) than the original engine, but also make correspondingly increased power from a given engine displacement. If you combine that with gearing appropriate to your driving environment, you WILL get decent mileage, and be able to merge into traffic too. If you want to significantly increase your mileage, then you need to address waste heat, and you need to reduce the car's inertia.

      A turbocharger uses exhaust heat energy to drive an intake air compressor, and thereby recovers some of the 25 percent or more of the fuel's BTU content that goes straight out of the tailpipe. Typically the turbo configuration is sized towards the performance end of the spectrum, but if you pick a more street oriented compressor, you will improve the cruising efficiency compared to a naturally aspirated engine as well as having some serious power at your disposal when you put your foot in it. If you want to just increase your mileage, then drop the engine displacement when you install the turbo - your cruising mileage will be governed more-or-less by the engine size and configuration (number of cylinders, inline or vee, etc), and the peak power is determined by how much boost you run.

      The acceleration you can get from your car depends a lot on the rotational inertia of the various driveline parts. A lighter wheel/tire combination will reduce the rotating inertia so that you can spin everything up to speed more quickly. A lighter flywheel and clutch also contribute significantly to faster acceleration. Faster acceleration means you burn less gas while getting up to speed, so you will get better mileage especially around town. Reducing the weight of your car's body and interior will generally improve acceleration as well, but it also decreases the comfort level, so you'll be making a choice there between fast or cozy.

      --

      Less is more.

    4. Re:Fuel Efficiency by HeliosTrick · · Score: 1

      A turbocharger uses exhaust heat energy to drive an intake air compressor, and thereby recovers some of the 25 percent or more of the fuel's BTU content that goes straight out of the tailpipe.

      Nope. A turbocharger uses exhaust gases and the pressure thereof to spin a turbine, driving an air pump, to increase atmospheric pressure on charge air. More air allows more fuel to be injected, more fuel and more air equals a larger bang.

      http://auto.howstuffworks.com/turbo.htm

    5. Re:Fuel Efficiency by TigerNut · · Score: 1
      Thanks... 'howstuffworks' is a good name - it explains HOW things work but not WHY. The reason you can use a turbine on the exhaust gases and thereby extract the 20 to 30 horsepower required to drive the compressor (assuming a 200 or so HP engine) is because the exhaust is hot and it's under pressure. The gas leaving the turbine is cooler and at lower pressure than the gas entering the turbine - it's lost both heat and pressure on its trip through the turbine, and that energy has gone into producing torque on the shaft driving the compressor.

      Take several engineering courses on thermodynamics and properties of materials, design and build your own turbosystem, and then drive it without problems for a couple of years. When we're on even ground you can explain to me again how turbos work.

      --

      Less is more.

    6. Re:Fuel Efficiency by HeliosTrick · · Score: 1

      Sorry, wrong. Turbochargers aren't sapping the heat from the exhaust to use as energy. We are not driving around in steam-powered cars anymore. You are using the pressure and speed of the exhaust gases to spin a turbine. Works the same as wind power from a windmill.

      It does use the pressure, but the heat is waste. You don't want the heat in the charge air, hot air cannot hold as much fuel, therefore we have intercoolers.

      I'll tell you what. You toss turbochargers on a few cars. Study the systems a bit more. Then you can explain to me how turbochargers work.

  42. The adventure lies not in the destination... by TeeJayHoward · · Score: 1

    ...but rather in the trip. For many people, modifying their car is a chance to show off their mechanical skills. I relate these people to those who can take a crappy computer and make it run like a scalded cat. Then, of course, there's those people who just want a faster, more stable ride. These are the people who buy a new Alienware system for the latest games. And then there's the ricers. These are the people with the large spoiler on a(normally Honda) front-wheel drive car. These people are kinda like a person that would buy a Lian Li and put a P2-300 in it, and then claim that it could best the Earth Simulator. Oh, and... For reference... Yes, at one time, I had a Celery 300A (OC'd to something or another) running in my Cooler Master ATC-710. Almost forgot... There's also the hot-rod guys, who would be perfectly happy building their computer from a lump of silicon :)

    1. Re:The adventure lies not in the destination... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      It is possible to get performance and handling from a front wheel drive car that's almost indistinguishable from a good rear wheel drive layout.

      Just pop in a limited slip differential and tune and stiffen your suspension to keep weight over the front tires.

      If you're starting from scratch, it's better to get a rear wheel drive car. But if you want to modify something you already own to perform better, it works nearly as well.

    2. Re:The adventure lies not in the destination... by nolife · · Score: 1

      A question on the front wheel drives..

      I've never seen a a sub 11 second FWD car at any of the tracks I go to. I know they exist but I only see them on TV. My question. Why do they have a wheelie bar on the back? I doubt it is used to prevent the car from flipping over. It appears that it COULD be used to limit the transfer of weight to the back tires on launch. IMHO, If that is what it is really used for, that is kind of cheating isnt it? It effectively turns the car into a 6 wheel vehicle and changes the whole perspective and concept of using a FWD to begin with.

      --
      Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
    3. Re:The adventure lies not in the destination... by DuckDodgers · · Score: 1

      I don't know what they're for, and I agree it's unfair. If you can only - boo hoo hoo - get an 11.5 second quarter mile without the extra wheels, that should be your official rating.

    4. Re:The adventure lies not in the destination... by einTier · · Score: 1
      It's exactly what you think it's there for -- to prevent weight transfer to the rear wheels. Think of it less as two extra wheels and more as two wheels with a suspension that won't compress.

      I wouldn't call it cheating, but I would say that it shows the inherent disadvantage of FWD in a drag racing application. Fact of the matter is, FWD is not as good a platform for racing as AWD or RWD. With FWD, you must split all the driving forces (braking, acceleration, turning) with the front tires. It's very hard to fully utilize the rear wheel's traction, and often, they do little more than hold up the rear of the car. This is why front tires on FWD platforms wear so much quicker than rear ones.

      Also note that you almost never see FWD race cars, unless it's specifically mandated by the class. The inherent disadvantages of FWD in a racing application are extremely large obstacles to overcome.

      --
      -------------------------------------------------- $665.95 -- retail price of the beast.
    5. Re:The adventure lies not in the destination... by JoeHunt · · Score: 0

      Here in NZ Ronnie Lim has done a 9.88 @ 147mph in his turbo FWD honda http://www.performancecar.co.nz/race_results.php The wheelie bar is definately to limit weight transfer - works well too Although it just doesn't seem right in a front driver!

    6. Re:The adventure lies not in the destination... by maddskillz · · Score: 1

      Isn't it unfair for the rear wheel cars to have a wheelie bar? It is also stopping the trasnfer of weight around around a different pivot point

    7. Re:The adventure lies not in the destination... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A wheelie bar on a rear wheel drive does nothing for the transfer of weight and traction. It keeps the front of the car from coming to far off of or just barely before coming off the ground. It keeps the car from flipping over. The weight is already off the front of the car at that point. I do not know how stong they are but based on the position and the rear wheels providing the power, the wheelie bar would actually lift the back of the car also causing the car to have less traction --> the front end would come back down due to the decreased acceleration. It is strickly a safety device.

    8. Re:The adventure lies not in the destination... by maddskillz · · Score: 1

      It's not help keeping the weight on the tires, but if it flips over, it's not going to have a good 1/4 mile time. I am just saying it has this "cheat", so what is the problem with FWD using it, even if they use it differently?

  43. Oops ! I am member of both forums ? by flyingace · · Score: 1

    I am a Slashdot geek or WRX newbie ?

  44. Just like slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A wealth of information is available, but the data is surrounded by noise. For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk.

    Amazing how much that sounds like slashdot.

  45. Scares me by Colonel+Failure · · Score: 0

    Ok, I've moded my PCs and alot of other equipment. But I'm a little leary of moding something I travel 70mph down the freeway in. If I forget to secure the clips on my water block it doesn't cause a 20 car pile up on the 405.

  46. High performance... by dj245 · · Score: 5, Funny
    I recently bought a high-performance automobile that has a reputation for its tuning potential.

    You've got the Civic DX too eh?

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  47. Fast by PenGun · · Score: 0

    Actual content:

    If you are having steering troubles with your older US auto, 66 - 72 the sweet years, listen up.

    Over 120 mph you will experience wandering with a convential front end setup. The secret is NO toe-in. All the old time NASCAR racers ran thios way.
    It's a bit squirrly under 'bout 80 mph but all else being good it'll improve your high speed handling a lot.

    PenGun
    Do What Now ??? ... Standards and Practices !

  48. Good Car Mod Site by gtshafted · · Score: 1
    This is a pretty good site with some step by step picture tutorials.

    http://www.overboost.com

    Car modding is definitely not cheap though...

  49. For Weird VW Lovers with a TDI... by NardofDoom · · Score: 0, Redundant
    --
    You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
  50. Very knowledgable author :) by jstockdale · · Score: 5, Informative

    Wow, didn't see this one coming on Slashdot.

    About a year ago I delt with David at length while he was working for WORKS, a tuning shop in San Francisco. We were discussing the details of the power, handling, etc. modifications that they would be making to my Mitsubishi Evolution (the car they in which they specialize). For the entire time I delt with David (before he left WORKS to pursue other things, like the book) I was consistantly impressed by his comprehensive knoweledge of both the technical and legal aspects of vehical modifications (especially impressive in good ole California thanks to strict emission standards).

    His expertise and professionalism have resulted in him gaining much respect within the Evolution community, and although I have not yet had a chance to review his book, if it's anything like the conversations I've had with him, you'll be amazed by just how far car tuning has come.

    Before talking with him, I didn't think it was safely possible to take a $32000 car, $7k of tuning, and end up just a hair short of a supercar*. Amazing.

    Hope the book sells well.

    -S ...

    * by which I mean a 2.0L 340hp 4WD beast that sprints from 0-60 in 4.4 seconds, skidpad tests to 1g, and through the twisties can out perform anything short of a 911 Turbo

    --
    **AA: a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes
    1. Re:Very knowledgable author :) by JamesTRexx · · Score: 1

      Before talking with him, I didn't think it was safely possible to take a $32000 car, $7k of tuning, and end up just a hair short of a supercar

      Not that fast, but a lot cheaper; I've driven Alfa Romeo 164 V6 and Mitsubishi Sigma, costing me around ?2000, and they go 140mph and do 0-60 around 7 seconds I think. Low cost, high funfactor outrunning all those -dime-a-dozen mobile discos and sportscars. Plus these sedans give you more respect from the general public.
      It always makes me laugh at movies like 2 Fast 2 Furious where they go to so much trouble reaching 100mph.

      --
      home
    2. Re:Very knowledgable author :) by Zebbers · · Score: 1

      wow, kudos to you but thats still one damn ugly car.

    3. Re:Very knowledgable author :) by Minstrel+Boy · · Score: 1

      Or, basically a stock Corvette. ;) KeS

    4. Re:Very knowledgable author :) by spindizzy · · Score: 1

      He said twisties.
      Of course as a sports bike rider I'm dismissive of any of these 4 wheeled things. ;) My bike stock will do 10 second passes with me riding it (and I'm not the best at launches).
      Motorcycles are the purists version of automotive fun. There's nothing more minimalist than a current generation litre bike and little that can get near it; road, strip or track.
      And then you can mod them as well :)

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
  51. Just great by bigjnsa500 · · Score: 1

    Like we really need more rice grinders that sound like a pack of flies mating.

    --
    This is a test. This is a test of the emergency sig system. This has been only a test.
  52. Arm chair car mechanics by nolife · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For every knowledgeable enthusiast, there are many more misinformed or incorrect speculators whose opinions usually spring from personal preference or a need to hear themselves talk.

    The whole reason for test and tune day at the track.

    That grouping can be catorigized into two types of people. Those that actually race and those that do not. People have many different goals when it comes to building a car: looks, straight line speed, handling, and durability and almost always some mixture of each. With that, you get different opinions on what works and what does not.

    There is some gray area.. Examples.. Some people remove the cooling water supply from the throttle body on cars so equiped. Some think it heats up the incoming air to much and others think it is required to cool the throttle body. Another one. At a 1/4 or 1/8 mile track, many people are pushing their cars to the line and apply ice to the intake, others run it to the line and have the car at normal operating temperature. For some, the colder denser air seems to be an advantage, for others, having the temperatures in the normal range puts the cars computer in a closed loop and running at its peak as it is not compensating for lower temperatures (retarded timing, incease in idle, higher or lower fuel/air ratio etc...) Each of these examples are really effected by what else the person has on the car and some are opinions. The actual indicator of advantage is the clocks time.

    My point..
    The people that actually race the car and can compare before and after times are the only ones that really know the true effect of a modification. 10 degrees advanced timing or 15 degrees? You will only know the true difference between the two on a track with a timer. Optimum tire pressure for your tire and suspension setup? Who the hell really knows without repeated timed laps.
    People that NEVER go to an actual track or an event are not the ones you want to blindly take advice from, those are probably the same people that put a new muffler on the car and swear they can actually feel the difference. I doubt anyone in the world can actually feel the difference between a real world difference of .01 to .1 seconds in a 1/4 mile let alone from one stop sign to the third telephone poll.

    The time clock should be treated the same as running a doom3 timed demo after changing your memory timings. Does it just feel faster or do you have something indicated to back it up? That can seperate FUD from speculation.

    --
    Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
  53. OMG!!! by NorthDude · · Score: 1

    It's modded informative!!!

    --


    I'd rather be sailing...
    1. Re:OMG!!! by dykofone · · Score: 1

      I know, I wish I could take it back now. I'm sorry world, I forgot the [BLATANT DUMBASS SARCASM] tags.

  54. It's the simple things that get overlooked... by EtherAlchemist · · Score: 1


    What engineer decided a 1/4" depression would be suitable to hold a cup? Especially in an off-road vehicle, they're useless.

    One solution

    Not all hacks are hard :)

    --
    R(k)
  55. Yup by Andy+Dodd · · Score: 1

    If you want something done right, often you have to do it yourself. Finding a good tuner shop is TOUGH.

    And in some cases, you might have a car where you'll need to do all the research and fabrication yourself. Some cars have impressive performance potential, but for various reasons were ignored by the aftermarket.

    Plus in some cases, the challenge is to produce a sleeper car that no one expects to be fast.

    http://www.turbovan.net/ and http://www.thedodgegarage.com/ are good examples of people who REALLY know their stuff modifying cars you would never expect to be fast.

    Once I have the space for a beater car (with my current car being the project car) or a project car (keeping my current one stock), I do plan on having some fun. I'm an electrical engineer, and I'm fascinated with projects such as the Megasquirt and Megasquirt-AVR. I also consider myself quite competent with my garage tools. :)

    --
    retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
    1. Re:Yup by Enigma_Man · · Score: 1

      You sound like a like minded kinda guy!

      I knew a guy (who died in an unfortunate motorcycle accident) who had a turbocharged Dodge Caravan that was ridiculously fast on a drag strip.

      I'm also an Electrical Engineer with a mind to tinker. I only have one car, but it's also my project car, heh. I can't leave well enough alone, even if it leaves me stranded sometimes. It's been a lot of fun working on it though (AWD Turbo Plymouth Laser).

      Those Nye turbine guys are great, I love their videos. Did you see the turbocharged wood stove?

      -Jesse

      --
      Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
  56. Here you go: by temojen · · Score: 1
  57. put the book down by Alarion · · Score: 1
    " There are 26 chapters spread across 360 pages. As you can see, chapters are short and can be tackled easily during lunch or a short taxi ride to retrieve your broken car. "

    Methinks you should leave the modding to the experts...
  58. Gentoo And Ricers? by devphaeton · · Score: 1

    Where's the obligatory Gentoo && Ricers comment?

    http://www.funroll-loops.org/

    --


    do() || do_not(); // try();
    1. Re:Gentoo And Ricers? by devphaeton · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah, i forgot my disclaimer:

      I have a degree in the Automotive/Diesel Technology field and used to race, and I took 6 years of architectural and mechanical drafting between junior and high schools.

      I can build amazing stuff out of Lego Technic, I run Debian and Freebsd.

      And i still say Gentoo is for Ricers! :-D

      --


      do() || do_not(); // try();
  59. I love the internet by Zordok · · Score: 1

    For every topic of interest, there are many forums. Some have high s/n ratio, some low. You just gotta know how to find the good ones.

    Unfortunately for the submitter, it seems like the more "reputation for its tuning potential" a car has, the lower the s/n ratio of all the forums.

    Go quattro!

  60. Natural fit by digitalhermit · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Man, I've been a computer geek all my life. Recently I've started playing around with cars (got a couple non-turbo 3000GTs and a VR-4 coming next week). It's a tremendous amount of fun... As with the computer groups, there are a bunch of newbie folks and those in it just for the image... but for every ten of those there seems to be one or two knowledgeable folks.

    I'm the first to admit that I know very little about modern cars. Just as with computers, however, there are things that seem to make sense but can be bad for your cars. I'm still in the fix it stage -- trying to put a car back to complete stock condition. It's almost like restoring an old Atari ST or Amiga to full functionality. E.g., the other day it took me a couple hours to change the front fog lights. The bolts had frozen up and grime had covered one of the screw holes so it wasn't immediately obvious how to remove them. After lots of cleaning I got them off, changed the bulbs, and got the housings repainted. The second time around it was a fifteen minute job. So, like learning some weird bash shell construct or new awk script, it was satisfying.

    1. Re:Natural fit by gash · · Score: 1

      I had a 3000GT SL. It was a fun car. Not a lot of horsepower but it gripped the road like a slot car.

      I finally got rid of it for a 2002 Trans Am ... a LOT more HP but the handling sucks...

      Wish you well with your 3000's, they are fun..

    2. Re:Natural fit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Much better choice, though for raw speed. A 45K 3000GT is about on par with an LT1 Z28...from '96.

    3. Re:Natural fit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Prices on the 3000GTs are pretty good. You can pick up a 94-95 non-turbo 3KGT for about $4500. I bought a 94 back in 1999 for $7500 and I still see the same model going for around $6500 in many Autotrader ads. The VR4 ranges anywhere from $3500 for the earlier years to around $26K for a near-pristine later model.

  61. another server fire by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    This site is temporarily down for maintenance Please try again later.......

    How lucky are you?: you coincidentally performed maintenance just before you got severely Slashdotted. Most servers aren't that lucky.

  62. Team NABR by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    www.teamnabr.com

    Best automotive community available.
    Best Signal:Noise by far.

  63. haha yeah by sinner0423 · · Score: 1

    I read tons of geek message boards (go figure), as well as car enthusiast sites. I tune my Celica, read all kinds of boards, and I'm a CS student. So, I get to see the differences of the sub-cultures first hand. I have gearhead friends, and computer geek friends.

    They are ONE IN THE SAME - believe me. The faster the better, and whoever has the best & biggest toys win.

    You may write code or be an admin to prove to the world how smart you are. The tuner guys drive fast to prove to the world how fast they are.

    The only difference between these two groups of people, is that they use different machines in seperate ways to express individuality & creativity. Otherwise, tuning a car properly, or maintaining a nice sized network / program are exactly the same thing.

  64. What? Informative? Insightful? by sickmtbnutcase · · Score: 1

    I'd like to smack whoever modded this Informative and Insightful, jeez. I guess ricers must be moderators on /. too.

    1. Re:What? Informative? Insightful? by dmanny · · Score: 1

      You can always hope to be allowed to meta mod that particular stroke of genius

      --
      All my previous sigs now look like this one, I wish they were permanetly recorded when used. :-(
  65. Mod my Car up, please. by Mulletproof · · Score: 1

    Come on now. There are mods even a noob can do with high degree of success, cold air bypass being one. It's simple, inexpensive and will yield a few more horsepower quite easily. You learn by doing, the trick being not swimming out of your depth.

    --
    You need a FREE iPod Nano
  66. No. by DG · · Score: 4, Informative

    Disclaimer: I'm a race car engineer. I make race cars go faster. It's my day job.

    If we work under the assumption that the wing in question actually produces signifigant downforce (not a trivial assumption, given the typical aluminum extrusion pretending to be a wing from most rice shops) the download generated by the wing will be borne by all 4 tires.

    Depending on a number of parameters, the rears may carry a larger share of that download, but the net effect will be increased normal force on the front tires, which in turn increases grip.

    Now if our boy was smart enough to use a real airfoil on his wing, he was probably smart enough to fit a front airdam and splitter, which means he probably has way more FRONT downforce than rear, and is probably using the wing to help balance out a high-speed oversteer condition. On production-based cars, building front downforce is much easier than building rear downforce.

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
    1. Re:No. by silicon+not+in+the+v · · Score: 1
      If we work under the assumption that the wing in question actually produces signifigant downforce (not a trivial assumption, given the typical aluminum extrusion pretending to be a wing from most rice shops) the download generated by the wing will be borne by all 4 tires.
      I heard the part about this being your day job, but you'll have to explain the physics of that specific part to me because that doesn't make sense. If the wing is on the rear deck of the car (behind the rear wheels), it is going to act as a lever with the rear wheels acting as the fulcrum. Any downward force applied behind the rear wheels will necessarily lift weight off the front wheels. If the force is applied anywhere in between the axles, then you would have it distributed between all four tires.
      --
      We may experience some slight turbulence and then...explode. -Capt. Mal Reynolds
    2. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Any downward force applied behind the rear wheels will necessarily lift weight off the front wheels."

      If the car had no tires and no springs, that would be the case. In reality, it is not a fulcrum because of the suspension.

    3. Re:No. by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      If this was a rigid structure, you would be correct.

      As it is, there is this whole spring/suspension system designed to distribute the forces across the wheelbase, even under different motions.

      The same suspension that keeps the weight over the tires during cornering.

    4. Re:No. by duncanbojangles · · Score: 1

      You can't just take the man's word for it? He has a Slashdot ID under 1000 for Jebus' sake!

    5. Re:No. by qqaz · · Score: 1

      I'm a race car engineer.

      Is this what ricers prefer to be called now?

      --
      sup :cool:
  67. Rear wing w/o front dam, ground effects by Cumstien · · Score: 1

    As bconway noted spoilers (plural) help with downforce in both turns and straigh aways. I'm always amused by the Honda or Toyota that has some moster wing on the back of it and no air dam in the front. Basically at high speeds the front of the car will start to lift off the ground depriving it of power, stearing, and control. These things can come in handy while driving. Of course this depends on the angle of the wing, design, placement, etc.

    Thus when making aerodynamic modifications to a car it ought be done to the entire car i.e. dam, wing, ground effects, not just the rear. I have seen some well done ricers that look like they would suck down to the ground pretty well. I have also seen some as previously mentioned, that would be hilarious at 100 MPH provided no one was around to be the victim of a horific wreck.

  68. If you want some REALLY good information... by DG · · Score: 1

    A little bit of self promotion here. :)

    Amongst my other racing-oriented duties, I maintain a web page full of links to books on Amazon that will teach you a LOT about race car engineeering

    Yes, I make a little kickback from Amazon on this, but that helps to offset the bandwidth costs. It's main purpose is to educate.

    See The Street Modified Engineering Resources page for more info. I've also got a smattering of techical articles on the team home page at Far North Racing

    Have fun!

    DG
    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
  69. Speed holes? by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1

    Does the book mention anything about speed holes and how they make the car go faster?

    (hint: Simpsons)

    --
    We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
  70. Expensive asset by cwest · · Score: 1

    "the second most expensive asset a person's going to get (after a supercomputer),"

    I'm guessing you're not married.

  71. Watch out for the Evo... by EaTiN+cOfFeE+bEaNs · · Score: 1

    1) The car's transmission is not exactly one of the most solid-built car components in the world. I know someone who had a GTI, traded it in for an Evo, had multiple transmission problems, sold the Evo back to the dealer, and got his GTI back. Another friend of mine has a Lancer Ralliart, which is the non-turbo, front wheel drive version with the same transmission, and he went in for his second transmission rebuild earlier this week after buying the car in June.
    2) Be careful with modding the Evo. There were stories in both Car and Driver and Motor Trend about Evo owners having their warranty violated because of modding and/or evidence of racing.

    --
    No TiVo and no caffeine make me something something...
    1. Re:Watch out for the Evo... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because the everyone knows the AWD Evo has the same transmission as the FWD Lancer.

      Try again.

    2. Re:Watch out for the Evo... by EaTiN+cOfFeE+bEaNs · · Score: 1

      It is the same gearbox that is in the EVO. Get your facts straight.

      --
      No TiVo and no caffeine make me something something...
  72. For air-cooled VWs... (overclocking a putt-putt) by sczimme · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the best place to start might be the local car club. The folks in the club can direct you to race tracks that have a fairly large VW contingent. Go to these tracks and talk to people - drivers and builders - in the pits (but don't be a nuisance).

    Years ago I was fortunate enough to find a VW shop run by a) a close-to-retirement gentleman who had everything and knew everything and b) his assistant who drag-raced VWs professionally (i.e. for money). Through them I bought an engine w/ the following specs:

    1835cc (stock is 1585cc, also called a 1600)

    044 heads, 40mm intake and 25mm exhaust [stainless] valves with high-RPM valve springs

    an Engle 120 cam, 294 degrees duration and .435" lift

    a pair of Weber 48IDA carburetors, velocity stacks only - no air filters (I was young+stupid but it seemed like a good idea at the time)
    The carbs, heads, and cam worked together to make rather a lot of midrange to top end power. I ran a 16.65 quarter mile but had trouble getting first and second gear to hook up. (The tires were 195/50-15 street radials.)

    Anyway, the point - besides a bit of bragging about my old car :-) - is that a book might help in certain areas, but the real in-depth knowledge usually comes from people who are already doing what you want to do. These folks can help you be sure the whole will be better than the sum of the parts, or at least that the individual parts will work together satisfactorily.

    --
    I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
  73. illegal? How to get open source tuners? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After all, there is always the DMCA hanging around the neck of potential car modder... And BTW, any open source tuning software yet? I don't want to pay $200 for Superchips when it is basically just down/uploading vehicles' firmware settings.

  74. Re:Spoliers! (sic) by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1
    Not really. Rear spoilers are only really useful on rear-wheel drive cars. The idea is to produce downforce, which is a term much bandied about by people without any real idea of what it actually means. What you are trying to do is get the rear wheels to stick to the road more firmly. Now, I can remember my father sticking a few paving slabs in the boot of his old Mk.II Ford Escort in the winter (back when we used to have winters) so the driven rear axle wouldn't slide about in the snow. Adding a spoiler produces the same effect - weight over the back axle - without adding any mass to the car (although it's only effective above a certain speed).


    Now, with a front wheel drive car, you've got enough weight over the front axle from the engine and gearbox (perhaps up to 250kg, or even more). In my car, a 1988 Citroen CX, 80% of the car's weight is supported by the front axle. You can take a rear wheel off and drive the car about on three wheels (which means that a blowout at speed on a rear wheel takes skill to even *notice*, never mind control). The fastest model of that car, the 2.5 GTi Turbo 2 can be taken up to around 400bhp. The nutters that do that (I know one, I've been in his car, and it's the first time I've ever been scared in a car since I got my old Volvo into a four-wheel drift on a freshly-chipped road about a week after I passed my driving test) stick with the tiny little foamy rubber spoiler thing on the back (GTi spoilers have groovy vents in the middle), and don't seem to have any handling problems.


    Adding a large rear spoiler to a front-wheel drive car will just slow it down. You've got more drag ('cos you stuck a big flappy thing into the airflow), and higher rolling friction on an undriven axle. Of course, if the spoiler helps unstick the airflow from the back of the car and *reduce* drag from the Coanda effect, without increasing form drag too much, then you have a net gain.

  75. Be careful... by Darth+Maul · · Score: 1

    I have a sports car, and am wary to do any performance upgrades for the simple reason that if the car was meant to be tuned like that, I would trust the carmaker in Germany to do have done those mods when designing the car. Basically, the car is designed that way for a reason.

    Now, there are upgrades that can be done, but most of the upgrades that try to get more horsepower out of a stock car end up wearing out the engine very quickly. Engine blocks, cylinders, pistons, and heads are designed to accept a certain amount of stress. Putting "more power!" into it can do more harm than good.

    I'm definitely of the school that believes a stock, well-designed and respected sports car is much more desirable than any suped-up ricer you'll find.

    It's funny when ricers try to race me in my 911. I feel sorry for them, really.

    --
    --- witty signature
    1. Re:Be careful... by Adrenochrome · · Score: 1

      Engines are considered "wear items" like brake pads and tires.

      If you can't afford to replace shortblocks, you can't afford to mod it.

    2. Re:Be careful... by Darth+Maul · · Score: 1

      Absolutely, and your average teenager with a suped-up civic doesn't have the money to replace an engine, that's for sure.

      --
      --- witty signature
    3. Re:Be careful... by donour · · Score: 1

      While this is true, the book makes a very important point. A lot of vehicles are over engineered. The example Mr. Vespremi gives is a the mkiv supra which can make twice the factory rated power pretty easily. Since the argument has turned to low-cost japanese cars, lets look at those. Case in point, mitsubishi evolution. Most people look and see a 10k econobox lancer, but that's really not what it is.

      1) It has an iron block and forged internals. LOTS of people are making >400whp, reliably, with the stock bottom end.
      2) It has been detuned for the us market. It must meet california emmissions (as well as crappy 91 octane fuel) _and_ it must be cheap enough to be considered by us buyers. For example, the top-of-the-line UK market Evo VII MR FQ-400 (400bhp) lists at nearly US$80k after currency conversion. Here's one thing I will give you, though. At the end of the day, I'm driving a mitsubishi. You're driving a porsche. Wanna trade :)

      donour

    4. Re:Be careful... by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      It's funny when ricers try to race me in my 911. I feel sorry for them, really.

      Which 911? Give me about another 2 years and I'll have a worthy opponent for anything short of a turbo. Best part is, it's a toyota - repairs are cheap(er).

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    5. Re:Be careful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My cheapy motorcycle will smoke ya ;)

    6. Re:Be careful... by HeyLaughingBoy · · Score: 1
      Basically, the car is designed that way for a reason

      And that reason includes cost. Face it, for all but a select few cars, cost is a constraint. Take a well designed vehicle, make improvements, and you can end up with something substantially better. Especially since only *you* know exactly what you need changed, unlike the manufacturer who has to please thousands of people.

      Sure, it's true that some mods can sacrifice reliability for performance, but the genius of the aftermarket is that the owner of the vehicle gets to make that decision. Look, I used to own a 4x4 pickup modified for offroading. Common sense must prevail, especially on a vehicle that can take you places no tow truck would have a chance of getting to! If you install large, heavy mud tires, you need lighter alloy wheel to keep unsprung weight down, you need to be sure your drivetrain can take the additional load that it might not have been designed for, correct final drive ratio, etc..

      I think you assume that most people doing this are clueless, when my experience tells me that we were amateurs interested in learning as much as possible.

      Right now I have a "stock, well-designed and respected" sports car that cost a lot less than your 911, and as soon as I can spare the money, I plan on some serious modding to get even more power (stock is just under 300hp) out of that engine. Part of my reason for spending less on the car than I could afford was that it would leave me with more money for aftermarket goodies!
  76. Forget hacking the car... by OhHellWithIt · · Score: 1
    ... I wanna hack a key!

    Wife bought a new car (Toyota Corolla). Dealer only gave her one key and promised her another one. She dropped the car for service (minor, non-key things) and picked it up. The labor charges on the bill (for internal billing purposes) were something like a hundred bucks for programming the key and remote. It seems this car has keys with RFID chips in them, to cut down on the chances of the car being stolen.

    We are in the practice of socking away one of the original keys and making a duplicate for daily use, but that's from the days when one could stroll into any hardware store and get a key cut for a couple of dollars.

    Does anyone have any recommendation on a way to replicate "smart" keys that costs less than the exorbitant cost of getting one made and "programmed" by the dealer? (All of a sudden, my 15-year-old VW is looking a lot better.)

    --
    "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." -- George Orwell
    1. Re:Forget hacking the car... by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      If they only gave her one key, she's not getting very good service.

      My new VW came with 3 keys, 2 full keys and one "valet" key that can run the vehicle, but not open the glovebox, fuel lock, or trunk.

      Yes, it's a bit of a pain in a way.. it's also safer. You might not care where you are, but having had my previous vehicle stolen, I like the idea of computerized keys.

    2. Re:Forget hacking the car... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think GM started with 'smart' keys in 2000, as my 99 S-10 is normally keyed.

  77. Cosmetics? by superdan2k · · Score: 2, Funny

    That whole chapter should have been nothing more than a warning regarding the "Gay Batmobile Effect"...which can only be explained by example. In this case, the example is a kid who lived not far from my now-ex-girlfriend when I lived out in Philly.

    Specifically, a Hydundai Tiburon. Metalflake purple, with ground effects. Gold rims. Big non-functional scoop on the hood. Type-R stickers everywhere. And two -- yes, two spoilers, stacked one on top of the other. Some sort of bad airbrush art on the hood. When I first saw the thing, my first words, were, "Jesus Christ! It's the Gay Batmobile!"

    --
    blog |
  78. Eh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Man, I hope you're trolling...

  79. "Sticker-Charging" -- The missing chapter! by JonTurner · · Score: 2, Funny

    >>Does the book cover proper application of Type R decals?

    Somehow this critical chapter was left out... editors these days! (sigh)

    Addendum.
    Chapter 31: "Sticker-charging" your Rice Rocket
    Subtitled: If you can't go fast, make up for it by looking silly.

    To increase the co-efficient of drag, add weight, reduce ETs and gain street cred with your peeps consider plastering your POS ragged-out pathetic bomb of an economy car with stickers. More is better, especially on four-door models. Our testing has found that stickers containing deliberate misspellings or pictographic words in an Asian lauguage you cannot speak are of particular, uh, "value."
    (End of chapter)

    1. Re:"Sticker-Charging" -- The missing chapter! by DaveJay · · Score: 1

      Remember: flames make it faster, as does painting it yellow.

    2. Re:"Sticker-Charging" -- The missing chapter! by protohiro1 · · Score: 1

      If you have a mid 90s cavalier or neon there is only one way to make it go faster:

      Step 1: Apply huge after marker rear wing on FWD car

      Step 2: After buying cheap new springs to lower it and a primer-colored front air dam and/or ground effects bottom out on the first speed bump you see and smash up your new air dam. This makes a fast car.

      --
      Sig removed because it was obnoxious
    3. Re:"Sticker-Charging" -- The missing chapter! by sidmystic · · Score: 1

      Step 3: Profit?

  80. Car Mods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My car's been modded to +5 Funny.

  81. DIY is good by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Well-maintained older cars actually produce less pollution than a lot of newer cars. Strange but true (hint - the stuff from catalytic converters is incredibly nasty, the stuff from non-cat is less nasty but there's more of it). Plus, they're easy to work on, parts are cheap, and you can always get good used expensive bits from the scrapyard.


    If you put your car into a "Kwik-fit" type place for an oil change (£15 oil change offers are pretty common in tyre and exhaust centres round here) then that is all they will do - change the oil. No oil filter (or a cheap shitty one if you're lucky), and the cheapest, crappiest oil they can get away with. Now, I use fairly expensive oil (about a tenner a gallon), and real, genuine, Citroen-approved Purflux filters, which costs me about £15-£20 (I don't know exactly, because I usually wait until I need about £100-worth of stuff for various jobs and buy the lot all at once). It takes about 30 minutes of actual work to change the oil (I take the oil and filter off, let it drain for an hour or so while I clean the car, then refit the plug and filter and fill up again). Half an hour and twenty quid, and I know the job's done *right*. Same thing with the hydraulic system - every 10,000 miles (should be 30,000 but the oil was very gunky when I got the car), out goes the shitty old stuff and in goes a gallon of fresh, green LHM. Next time I'm going to bleed the brakes and steering block, because I didn't do that last time, so it'll take about an afternoon, but once again I'll know it's done properly.


    There's something very satisfying about knowing you can fix very nearly any problem that crops up with your car...

    1. Re:DIY is good by hb253 · · Score: 1

      What exactly is nastier that comes out of a catalytic converter? Methinks you know not what you speak of.

      Other than easy routine maintenance (which is what you describe), modern cars are much harder for the average person to "fix nearly any problem that crops up."

      --
      Self awareness - try it!
    2. Re:DIY is good by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1
      Hydrogen Sulphide is incredibly poisonous. It's produced *only* by catalyst-equipped cars. That's what the "rotten egg" smell you get is - and ironically it's worse when the exhaust never gets properly hot (for example, when you're driving in town). The air in built-up areas was a lot cleaner in the UK before cars were fitted with catalytic converters.


      I know modern cars are harder to work on, that's why I think people should get older cars. Just think of it - buy a car for maybe a tenth of the price of a new car, keep it for a couple of years, and sell it for about the same as what you paid for it. And all the time you own it, it's actually *yours*, bought and paid for.

    3. Re:DIY is good by hb253 · · Score: 1

      It only happens when something is very wrong with the engine or emissions system. I've never smelled it in any of my cars, and only a handful of times from other cars on the road over the last 25 years. The human nose is extremely sensitive to H2S, even trace amounts are detectable. What you perceive is a very insignificant amount. You make it sound like cars are discharging plumes of H2S - they are not. Face it, no matter what you may think, new cars pollute much much less than any old car. Don't get me wrong, I like older cars. I have a 1979 911SC and I love it.

      --
      Self awareness - try it!
    4. Re:DIY is good by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      I've got figures to prove it. My 1988 2.2 litre Citroen CX, non-cat, carb-fed, big old cast iron tractor engine produces *less* CO and NOx than a 2001 VW Passat. Got both sets of emissions figures, tested about two months ago, right here on the workbench.

    5. Re:DIY is good by dasunt · · Score: 1

      Well-maintained older cars actually produce less pollution than a lot of newer cars. Strange but true (hint - the stuff from catalytic converters is incredibly nasty, the stuff from non-cat is less nasty but there's more of it). Plus, they're easy to work on, parts are cheap, and you can always get good used expensive bits from the scrapyard.

      I recently calculated the pollution caused the manufacture of a brand new fuel-efficient Japanese car, and the pollution caused by the horrible (8) mpg my 1979 V8 truck gets.

      I'd have to drive that truck 10 years to match the pollution caused by the manufacture of the new car.

    6. Re:DIY is good by sjwt · · Score: 1

      is that *your* citroen, or is that the average Citroen.

      also what other facters are involed, size of engein, power output.

      --
      You have 5 Moderator Points!
      Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
    7. Re:DIY is good by Gordonjcp · · Score: 1

      Well, probably specifically mine, since I spend an hour or so a month servicing it. Not a lot to pay for easy starting even in the pissing wet awful weather we've had this month (car sitting in 6" of water one evening when I finished work, because the car park had flooded), and 36mpg if I'm not being too badly behaved on the motorway. The Passat is a 2001, 1.8 litre. I don't know what its power output is, but the Citroen is 2.2 litres and around 115bhp book figures. In view of the car's age and mileage, I'd say it's probably lost a bit of that, giving perhaps 100-110bhp.

  82. Everything's relative I guess by Bill+Dog · · Score: 1

    "I recently bought a high-performance automobile...", and then later on references Evo and Lancer web sites! Holy cow, batman, this site must be dominated by college kids more than I realized. Sorry, I'm not that old, but when I saw "high-performance", I was thinking, cool, someone got a Vette or Viper or 911 Turbo or something! With SUV's seemingly commonly having 300+ hp these days, I guess when I think "high-performance" I think of 400 hp as the bar nowadays (with the braking and handling and styling to go with it). Oh well, "scaled-down" high-performance is probably safer -- one is less likely to kill themself in a Subaru.

    --
    Attention zealots and haters: 00100 00100
    1. Re:Everything's relative I guess by donour · · Score: 1

      So you're saying a lotus elise, with its puny 190bhp, is not high-performance? donour

    2. Re:Everything's relative I guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are old. Yes a WRX Sti has a 4 cylinder engine... with 300 horsepower. Being a 4 cylinder that means the car weighs very little. As most intelligent people know, low weight and high power means one thing: SPEED. And the WRX Sti goes fast. Very fast. This all applies to the Lancer EVO as well, which has a similar setup in addition to being one of the best handling cars ever made. Period. In stock form, the WRX and Lancer can beat most cars on the road today. With some relatively inexpensive mods, these cars are world beaters, easily producing well over 400 horsepower and doing 0-60 and quarter mile times that nearly match far more expensive, heavily modded 800+ horsepower Hennessey Venom Viper's and Lingenfelter Corvette's. Don't beleive me? Ask Car and Driver, that particular Lancer EVO pumps nearly 500 horsepower out of it's 4 banger.

    3. Re:Everything's relative I guess by donour · · Score: 1

      "Ask Car and Driver, that particular Lancer EVO pumps nearly 500 horsepower out of it's 4 banger." .... on pump gas....

      :)

      donour

    4. Re:Everything's relative I guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, with sufficient mods you can make a Honda Civic blow the doors off a Viper.

      But basically, I agree with you - I never quite saw the point behind taking a little tiny engine, spending lots of time and money, and producing a high stress, unreliable and prone to breakage engine that still won't hang with my factory stock car that *started* life as a sportscar.

      But I also don't fool myself - people who put serious time and money into it can beat me in the 1/4 mile. They just routinely have their engines ingest themselves, while I'll drive mine for 150 Kmiles with naught but oil changes.

      I also significantly out-handle them unless they put yet more time and money into handling mods.

    5. Re:Everything's relative I guess by donour · · Score: 1

      I've your significantly outhandling my Evo and Elise, then you must be driving something than I can never, ever afford.

      And I at leat hope you change your timing belt before 150k miles.

      donour

    6. Re:Everything's relative I guess by donour · · Score: 1

      your->you're
      leat->least

  83. Owner Speaking with mods by n3z0rf · · Score: 1

    A modded WRX is amazing car to drive. I am now pushing about 40 more Horse power over the stock vehicle. Other things Mods are not only cosmetic or performance in the means of speed it's also menas all around handling or maybe sound systems the list goes on.

    These sites offer a wealth of reviews and installation practices to help people choose what they feel comfortable doing as much as what specialists to go to for what type of upgrade. Tires, yes they need to be rotated and changed, but putting some M2 or M3 Dunlop winter tires on are as much of a mod as putting 3/16 inch hose connector in the boost line to the pressure solnoid. Reprogramming the ECU does take expertise and yes the engine life will probably decrease, but when your pushing 200k for most vehicles with no problem I think a 10k to 50k of miles is not going to make much of difference. When refer to ECU programming I am speaking of the ART in it's self not the devices that do it those are made so just any one can use them for the most part with some basic knowledge.

    Another aspect of "Mods" keep in mind efficiency. When I run my car between long distances I run my car in a economy mode give the WRX between 28 to 32 mpg which under my normal driving never happened.

    I hope this bring another light on this topic from owner with no problems and have been running "modded" for over 10,000 miles.

  84. Myth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is illegal in the USA for a vehicle manufacturer to "void" your waranty for any reason. They do not have to honor the waranty for any new parts you install, but any stock parts MUST BE COVERED.

    1. Re:Myth by EaTiN+cOfFeE+bEaNs · · Score: 1

      Once again: Wrong! If there is any, way, shape, or form that there is evidence that the car has been raced, it can be considered not a road car, and the roadgoing warranty can be voided.

      --
      No TiVo and no caffeine make me something something...
  85. driver safety by steelshadow · · Score: 1
    The author gets high marks for addressing safety -- both the driver's and the vehicle's -- before any modification. The emphasis on maintaining legal and effective safety devices on a tuner car is something you are not likely to get during an argument about which upgrade path is optimal, nor is it obvious that many safety 'upgrades' -- 4-point harnesses, flashy roll-bars -- actually decrease driver safety when used on the street. In addition the author consistently gives warning when introducing a mod that could put added stress on a vehicle.

    Just curious - how can 4-point harnesses and roll-bars decrease safety? I can understand how a "style bar" which is something that looks like a roll bar but without the true structural strength, can be dangerous, but not how harnesses and real roll bars.

    1. Re:driver safety by donour · · Score: 1

      A 3-point harness will allow your head to move to the center of the car in a rollover. A 4 point harness will hold you in place. If the roof collapses, the weight will be transferred to your head and neck.

      And unwrapped harness can be very dangerous on the street as you probably don't wear a helmet when going to get groceries.

      donour

    2. Re:driver safety by donour · · Score: 1

      unwrapped rollcage -- not harness.

    3. Re:driver safety by mindstrm · · Score: 1

      Don't they go together?

      THe 4 point harness keeps you from smashing your head into the rollcage, which keeps your head from getting crushed when you roll?

    4. Re:driver safety by donour · · Score: 1

      In the case yes...except for people in the back seat.

      donour

  86. Re:You're Old by xtermin8 · · Score: 1

    This has been explained on Slashdot before. Of course, maybe "giant" spoilers are different from smaller spoilers- but spoilers (in general)do give aerodynamic advantages. That is why many manufacturers are putting (admittedly small, unobtrusive) spoilers on fron wheel drive cars. So today's kids rate one or two reallys, grandpa

  87. What about hearse drivers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    oh you mean you bought the new hearse.

    if you want more downforce in your deadbody wagon, add another casket. the weight above the rear wheels will also help you drive in the snow.

    make sure that you get the windows tinted so that your (live) passengers wont feel as embarrased to be in it.

  88. When the green flag drops... by TigerNut · · Score: 1
    the bullsh!t stops.

    About a decade and a half ago a group of us were heavily involved in club racing at the local road course. There were many onlookers with no end of advice on how our cars weren't as suitable for racing as their (whatever), and that if they came out they'd keep up no problem. From time to time one of the onlookers would actually put in the time and effort to race-prep their cars, and then they'd find out that there was a reason why we spent a lot of evenings and weekends doing fabrication and dyno tests. Going fast is hard, and figuring out what works takes time and money.

    --

    Less is more.

  89. GALANT VR4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IF you have a Galant/eclips in the '89-94 range go to www.thegalantcentre.net Or galantVR4.org

    A LOT of info regarding these cars, as well as a very nice community.

  90. One at a time is the way to go!! by gosand · · Score: 1
    The people that actually race the car and can compare before and after times are the only ones that really know the true effect of a modification.

    Let me really emphasize something you just said: *A* modification.

    Now all of the stuff you talked about was mainly for drag racing - which isn't really my bag. I am (was) more into road racing on tracks that are of the twisty variety. I had a 1988 BMW M3, the winningest touring car in history. It was born and bred to race. Produced in 1987 for that very purpose, it was a 2.3 liter naturally aspirated 4-cyl that put out just shy of 200 HP stock. They were modified to 2.5 liter and over 300 HP for racing.

    Anyhoo, my point is that racers will make ONE AND ONLY ONE modification between testing. Otherwise, how do you know what caused the resulting effect? Another side of this is that HP ratings on parts, like mufflers/spark plugs/air filters/cold air blah blah, etc is all about max HP from stock. This is usually the best case, whereas a lot of claims are BS. My point though is that if you add 3 components that each claim to give you 10 HP, you are most certainly NOT adding 30 HP.

    And if you add that huge wing, it may not have any effect on the dyno, but it will have an effect in the real world. The E30 M3 had a stock wing that provided measurable downforce (I can't remember the numbers right now), and there were the Evo3 wings that added more. They will hurt your times if you want to drag-race, and will hurt your top-end speed - but you'll stick to the track and will probably get faster lap times. Of course, that is if you can already do consistent lap times down to within a second or two. If you can't, keep practicing before making any mods. I have seen guys constantly mod their cars yet they can get spanked on the track by someone with 1/2 the HP because of one thing - seat time. I went out with one of my instructors who was driving his wife's BMW 530i wagon, with an automatic trans, and he was passing M3s. I was by no means that good, but in the intermediate group once with the Porsche club, I was passing 911s in my M3. That was cool, passing cars worth about 5x as much as mine, with 2x the HP.

    Hey, you want to mod your car, knock yourself out. But if someone were to ask me what I thought was the way to go, I would say to buy a decent, inexpensive, track-ready (full roll-cage) car and really learn how to drive the snot out of it. It is fun as hell, you can learn a lot, and it is totally legal.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    1. Re:One at a time is the way to go!! by Epi-man · · Score: 1

      Anyhoo, my point is that racers will make ONE AND ONLY ONE modification between testing. Otherwise, how do you know what caused the resulting effect?

      Never heard of Taguchi, have you? You are outlining the OFAT (One Factor at A Time) method of testing. There are numerous statistical methods for multiple factor testing at a time. It requires multiple runs, but it will also give you information about interactions between your factors.

    2. Re:One at a time is the way to go!! by TigerNut · · Score: 1

      Based on doing a LOT of dyno testing and a couple thousand laps of track time at the local road course, I would suggest that unless you have a large crew and the budget to build multiple versions of things that you want to test with, keeping it to 'one factor at a time' is by far the fastest way to get results. At the track, a one percent improvement in lap speed is pretty significant, but there are many factors that can make more than one percent difference in engine power or available traction, and then any improvement you're looking for will be lost in the noise, skewed by incidental factors, or they'll be so correlated that you can't tell what caused what. Even if you're testing on the dyno, which eliminates driver errors, nobody will ever suggest that you should go do a set of runs where you're changing the timing and the mixture at the same time. At least part of the reason for that is that engine tuning is not a linear problem - just because the engine likes 38 degrees BTDC on a lean mixture doesn't mean that it will work best at 38 degrees when you have the mixture right.
      The other think about multiple factor testing is that it can take serious time to prepare multiple items to test. For example, if you're trying to adjust sway bars, then ideally you'd have a range of bars ready at the track and you could swap them out and do tests. The problem with that is that a lot of practice time at tracks is limited to 15 or 20 minute sessions, and it's hard to do multiple bar swaps in that time.

      --

      Less is more.

    3. Re:One at a time is the way to go!! by gosand · · Score: 1
      Never heard of Taguchi, have you? You are outlining the OFAT (One Factor at A Time) method of testing. There are numerous statistical methods for multiple factor testing at a time. It requires multiple runs, but it will also give you information about interactions between your factors.

      No, I can't say that I have heard of Taguchi. But I know the simplest way to figure this stuff out. Not so much from personal experience, but from listening to people who do know what they are doing. Also, I am a software tester by profession and have been doing it for 12 years. The same principle applies. I would much rather solve a 1 variable problem than a multi-variable problem. Sure, it CAN be done, but which is easier? I am all for making things easy.

      --

      My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

    4. Re:One at a time is the way to go!! by Epi-man · · Score: 1

      Sorry, my original post sounded quite snooty. Actually, when you have a problem with many factors, the Taguchi method of DOE (Design Of Experiment) can ease many headaches and let you focus on the factors that count the most more quickly. It is the preferred method of yield enhancement in the semiconductor world (where I come from and learned about it) where we had more factors than I could shake a stick at, and running them OFAT was out of the question (only 25 wafers/lot!). If you only have 2 or 3 factors, then running OFAT (or full factorial) is feasible, but I suspect most people want to look at more than just 2 or 3 factors. Check it out sometime, it was a life saver for me.

  91. Re: 10s Grand Prix GTP by Llama_STi · · Score: 1

    I've only been to the track once myself but my first time out (last weekend) I saw at Pontiac Grand Prix GTP (~2002?) run low 10's. The car looked completely stock. After the guy ran, the tech inspection guys were flipping out saying they had to have a chat with him since he didn't disclose he had something hidden in the car. He must have had NOS or something in the cabin...

  92. Re: 10s Grand Prix GTP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Say it with me

    "Nitrous"

    again!

    "Nitrous"

    See? its not so hard, and besides you dont sound like a rice boy thats seen the Fast and Furious too many times. :P

    I would like to see that GTP though, running tens in any FWD car is fucking hard, especially an overweight pig like that one, and that goes double if it actually looked stock.

  93. High-performance automobile with tuning potential by caryw · · Score: 1

    I recently bought a Mitsubishi Eclipse which fits this description perfectly. It has a very strong iron block, factory turbo setup, and an all-wheel-drive model. The 1990-1999 Eclipse's are referred to as DSM's (Diamond Star Motors). Diamond Star Motors is(was) a partnership between Mitsubishi, Eagle (Chrysler), and Plymouth. The Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon, and Plymouth Laser (90-94 only) are all the exact same car with very subtle external "branding differences." Many of these cars are available today for less than $5000, and up to 100hp can be added for as little as $1000. Sure beats modding a civic!

    For more information the forums on dsmtuners.com and dsmtalk.com are an invaluable reference.

    - Cary
    --Fairfax Underground: Where Fairfax County comes out to play

  94. Rice Rice Baby by spike2131 · · Score: 1
    --
    SpyDock: Scientific Python in a Docker container
    1. Re:Rice Rice Baby by JonTurner · · Score: 1

      Oh.

      My.

      God.

      It's worse than I imagined. If it weren't for the laughter, I'd be speechless! I love the shots of people posing next to the cars, laughing. Awesome!!
      (e.g. http://www.laughatrice.com/gallery20/g20p2.htm )

      Can't wait to share this with the co-workers tomorrow! Thanks!

  95. Another 'Me too' post... by Country_hacker · · Score: 1

    I got caught off my guard when my FWD Probe started throwing it's rear end around when I was going around a corner, but then I WAS going 60, and on a dirt road. It suprised me because I always thought it was 'impossible' to lose rear traction on a FWD, but I'm glad I learned the easy way.

    --
    Never give any object more potential energy than you want it to have.
  96. Re: 10s Grand Prix GTP by Llama_STi · · Score: 1

    No, actually I meant NOS - you know, the brand-name? That's right, say it with me: *fucktard* that's right, again: *fucktard*

    There we go, now we can all get along again, your eliteness... :rolleyes:

  97. Go for it and end up like me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had perfect driving record for the last couple years.
    Since I joined one of the car mods forums, speeding tickets and court appearance for reckless driving.
    Having powerful car you are constantly challenged on the road by others. It hard to resist not to race.
    Now I'm selling that car. It's not worthy to have it and not able to use it except maybe closed tracks.

  98. go ahead... admit it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... you really work for NASA, don't you? Huh? Huh? Huh?

    don't feel bad, I got suckered in by a goatse redirect link coupla weeks ago...

  99. Re: 10s Grand Prix GTP by nolife · · Score: 1

    I've seen quite a few people get kicked off of tracks. Tracks/locations/events have safety rules for cars and drivers that can obtain certain times. An example is a requirement for a full roll cage on anything under 12 seconds or a helmet under 13, a drive shaft safety loop under 11 blah blah. If the techs were scrambling, and the car really looked stock, it may have been a case of non disclosure. Running mid 10's is not a fluke, the original inspection may not have been for such a time.

    That specific car engine combo would require more then nitrous to get a time like that, or at the end of that run, the engine would be a glob of molten metal. Using a rough estimate HP calculator, it would take ~630 HP to get a 3700lb car and driver down the 1/4 mile in the mid 10's. Considering the 2002 GTP has 260HP stock, nitrous would have to make up that difference, although an effective "power adder" when used responsibly, it can not do miracles!

    --
    Bad boys rape our young girls but Violet gives willingly.
  100. The fact that you say "tuning potential" says... by RiffRafff · · Score: 1

    The fact that you say "tuning potential" tells me it's a four cylinder import that you're going to try and wring out some more horsepower from. Be advised that neon chassis lights and LED shift knobs do not reduce your ETs.

    It's an old adage, but it remains true: there ain't no substitute for cubic inches.

    Now, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with Jap imports...at least, nothing that FOUR MORE CYLINDERS wouldn't cure.

    http://www.riffraffs.net/mustang/1995MustangGT.gif

    --
    "I might have made a tactical error in not going to a physician for 20 years." -- Warren Zevon
  101. Re:The fact that you say "tuning potential" says.. by donour · · Score: 1

    Hm...So you're saying that my 4cyclinder import should have two engines!? That sounds like something I saw at the chicago auto show last year.

    From the class you're thinking, there a many other cars I would also consider to have tuning potential: Caddy CTS-V, Vipers, GTOs... d

  102. Re:The fact that you say "tuning potential" says.. by timpaton · · Score: 1
    It's an old adage, but it remains true: there ain't no substitute for cubic inches.

    ...of air (at standard temperature and pressure).

    The most critical thing is how many moles of oxygen your engine is ingesting.

    It's a matter of personal preference whether you choose to let that air "leak" into a big engine at STP, or whether you choose to force them into a smaller engine at higher pressure.

    Of course, the other option is to let the air "leak" into a small engine at STP, but run that engine at frightening speed to get more air through in less time...which is how Honda and BMW tend to get big power out of their hi-po engines. #include

    I read a great interview once with a senior engineer at Saab, who was quizzed on "new" technology such as displacement-on-demand [1]. His reply was (excuse my misquoting and paraphrasing): "Saab has used displacement-on-demand for many years. We call it a turbocharger. Under light loads, we use a small engine. Under heavy loads, we force air into the engine at higher pressure, giving the same effect as using a much larger engine"

    A small engine with a turbo is lighter than a big engine of the same power and torque. ET that :-P

    tim

    [1] Displacement-on-demand, where a big (6- or 8- cylinder engine) has fuel and spark cut off from cylinders at light loads - making it run as a small (usually 4-cylinder) engine - which has better fuel efficiency.

  103. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  104. My fav mod by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My fav mod would be to rebuild the engine so that I could fill up the tank with my lawn hose, instead of at the gas station.
    Everything else just does not qualify as real mod.

  105. Re: 10s Grand Prix GTP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not to say this car doesn't exist but....Uhhmmm, as a gear head myself I'm still gonna have to back up the 630hp statement. You'll need to have a semi trailer full of balls to pull off 10s in any Pontiac. Nevermind 260 ponies will motivate a GTP but you can't slap on 400hp and have anyone, let alone track tech with a mechanic background, not take one look ask 'what all is in that ride?'
    To get that kind of power (yeah its possible, even on that motor) mandates a minimum 3.25 inch headers dumping into unobstructed straight pipes out the back, tuned cams, rods, pistons, heads, fuck the factory timing, NOS (brand name or not, anyway you say it its still the same gas, Nitrous Oxide, which merely tricks your O2 sensor into thinking its getting more oxygen and therefore more gas is rammed into your cylinders resulting in a bigger bang) don't forget atleast a 3 inch cold air intake (not a K&N package) a high output ignition box, BTW the factory tranny, axles, and diff are gonna get smoked into molten steel in 2 runs so they add to the already painfully obvious non stock status.
    Anyone adding this much power to their ride would not ignore brakes, tires, wheels, and suspension so add more stand out parts. And anyone who has ever heard a 400+hp motor (even idling) would never mistake it for 260hp purring silently.
    And by the way even if you had all this assembled in working order you would need to be sponsored or independently wealthy to completely rebuilt the whole package every 3-5 runs, a horribly conservative estimate given that anyone seriously racing this setup would be rebuilding nearly every run to get the best performance, amounting to more painfully obvious flags.

  106. Re: 10s Grand Prix GTP by Llama_STi · · Score: 1

    no man, seriously, i'm not telling bullshit. it was fucking unbelievable and a complete shock to everyone on the track. we see this guy warming up his front tires of his GTP and we kinda chuckle - hey, it looked totally stock! then he runs pretty quick and i ask my buddy "wtf did that guy just run?!!" "mid-10's!" *WTF?!!* i would NOT make something like this up!! :D i only saw him run that one time, tho. it was a champagne coloured one.

  107. Re: 10s Grand Prix GTP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that is total crazyniess man, Althought I'm in disbelife, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. What you'll have to give me is that it wasn't legit track techs that missed this setup in the pre race inspection. Yeah I know those guys aren't totally thorough but they could not miss the mods needed to post those figures.

  108. Dummies own cars? I thougth they just test them! by Shulai · · Score: 1


    Easy joke :-)

  109. Re: 10s Grand Prix GTP by Llama_STi · · Score: 1

    Well maybe the /.'ers can find out who this guy is. there were people in the stands with video cameras so maybe a combined effort could get some info from one of the major car forums. The time this run went down was ~1pm on saturday Oct 23 at Cayuga raceway (Toronto International Speedway). let's get the machine rolling! :)

  110. Yay! by MasTRE · · Score: 1

    > evolutionm.net and nasioc.com

    Ricers of the world, unite!

    --
    Must-not-watch TV!
  111. Re: Picking up a wrench... by Llama_STi · · Score: 1

    Yes, I agree - if the kid picks up some tools and actually does something, that's to be applauded. Too many times tho the kid just picks up his keys and drives it down to the "tuning shop" and has them do it. I'm all for modifying your car - but the props only roll out for those that do it or at least help out.

  112. Re: 10s Grand Prix GTP by nogrocerygetter · · Score: 1

    There are quite a few 11 sec GTP's running around on clubgp.com but not too many in the 10s. I only know of one in the low 10's and it is the INTENSE Turbo GTP (www.intense-racing.com). It's white and looks pretty stock but dyno'd 535 HP to the wheels, ~670 at the crank. I'll see if I can find out who this is...

  113. Physics behind the FWD wheelie bars by DG · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Actually, there's some pretty sound physics behind those wheelie bars on FWD drag cars.

    The amount of rearward weight transfer is a function of CG height, wheelbase and longnitudnal acceleration amount - that's it.

    The resultant pitch ANGLE that the sprung mass adopts as a result of the weight transfer is a function of weight transfer, pitch stiffness (driven primarily by spring rate) and jacking geometry (anti-squat) and you'd be suprised how many people confuse pitch angle with weight transfer.... anyway...

    The amount of grip produced by a tire is a function of the normal load on it - more load, more grip - and when accelerating, weight is transfered rearward, reducing the grip on the fronts and increasing the grip on the rears. If you are a FWD, this is bad news, as the harder you accelerate, the more weight you lose from your drive weheels, the less grip you get.

    You can change springs all day, and you can't change this fact. You CAN change the pitch angle, but not the weight transfer amount.

    But by attaching wheelie bars, when the bars contact the ground the wheelbase lengthens - and a longer wheelbase actually REDUCES the amount of rearward weight transfer. Tada! Magic!

    Where some cars were getting into trouble though is that the wheelie bars tend to be pretty close together, which give a narrow track width - the analogue of wheelbase, but in roll. The front tires, being low pressure slicks, are very soft in roll as well. So if something happened to induce a roll movement (like a steering input) there was very little force to oppose the roll, and the car would suddenly hook in a random direction. VERY directionally unstable. Much more exciting for the driver than is probably healthy.

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
  114. Re: Please post if anything from that day is found by Llama_STi · · Score: 1

    Actually, if you (or anyone else) finds ANY footage from Cayuga on October 23, please post! I ran myself but my buddies were still figuring out how to work my digicam's video record function. :( Post 'em if ya got 'em! :D

  115. Re:For air-cooled VWs... (overclocking a putt-putt by Buran · · Score: 1

    Oh for sure. The people in my local club are great.

    http://www.stlvw.org is our site.

  116. Keeping track of things by gambitdis · · Score: 1

    Once you start getting into modifications and making sure that you are maintaining your car perfectly, it's nice to keep track of all of this information. I started a really simple site http://thecartracker.com/ where you can enter this information and look at other user information.

  117. Author Here -- Hello Everyone by DummiesAuthor · · Score: 1

    It is exciting to see this level of enthusiasm for the book. I had hoped that the Car Hacks and Mods book would reach an wider audience of technical-minded people, and it would appear that this has been the case. Please feel free to post questions and comments, and I will do my best to answer/address them. Thanks, David

    --
    www.carhacksandmods.com
    1. Re:Author Here -- Hello Everyone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MR2s are sexy.

  118. Re: 10s Grand Prix GTP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not going to waste my time making an account for this. You obviously know NOTHING about Grand Prixs. I have spoken to and personally know the owner of the Champange (actually, the correct colour is BRONZEMIST) Grand Prix. Its incredibly FAR from stock... meaning he is running a 454+ cubic inch engine on a rear wheel drive platform (stock is FRONT wheel drive, dude!). With the old motor it ran 10.2's, new engine is a touch quicker.

    Here are a few links:
    http://img45.photobucket.com/albums/v138/z jay158/d ragster_008.jpg

    http://img45.photobucket.com/albums/v138/zjay158 /d ragster_012.jpg

    http://img45.photobucket.com/albums/v138/zjay158 /d ragster_015.jpg

    Please note the Quebec plates on the car and the REAR wheels spinning up in the 2nd pic. Yes its street driven, but runs on race fuel only and is based in Quebec, Canada (though he does run up in Toronto on the drag strips there as well).

    By the way, I am a member of the US and Ontario/Quebec Grand Prix club and at the Canadian club we have many 13 second GPs and a few 12 second GPs that are entirely street legal. One (of several) of our GPs is turbocharged (silvermist in colour)and can get high 12's for as long as the FWD tranny lives (which isn't long, let me tell you).

    This guy is another case of internet BS. I just wanted to set things straight.