Hiro

Wow, forgot how long ago I posted in here.... Unofficial remains, although calling me a "hack" at badminton has always been a bit of a joke, I'm A-grade (when in form) and also represented Uni at the Eastern and Australian Uni Games. Official now stands at: Graduated B Eng (Mechanical) in 2009 after 7 1/2 years at uni Mechanical Engineer at Caterpillar Global Mining (formerly Bucyrus), coming up on 2 years now, currently deployed on a 12 month rotation in longwall shearers (last rotation was diesel vehicles and continuous miners)

Sounds like he might mean a 7K (the C series is a diesel, and there never was a 7C, just 1C, 2C, 3C). They were around longer than just one year though...what year is the Liteace? Petrol or diesel?

I'm out......of bed. Time to go clean the Soarer out and see how much petrol Cara left me...

I prefer this one, it's wity as well as relevant

F/S: 1988 Toyota Celica ST162 SX, Series 2, burgundy GenI Series 2 3SGE w/ TVIS Cat-back exhaust (I believe, unsure on spec, nice subtle sound) 5-speed manual Power Steering Power Windows Central locking Factory Sunroof 17x7" Momo Twins w/ Toyo Proxes 4 tyres, lots of tread. Little/no gutter rash, however missing 1 centre cap and at least one wheel has a flat spot (does not lose air and is balanced) +15mm rear spacers, slip-on but hubcentric both on hub and wheel, custom machined, longer wheel studs included Pros: Running car, all mechanical functions present, does not overheat or blow white smoke Uncracked Series 2 front grille w/ CELICA logo Still has factory front lip extension (w/ some damage however) Full interior New front brake pads Almost full tread on tyres Cons: Suspension is well overdue for replacement, rides OK on stock wheels but very crashy on 17s Engine does blow a bit of black/blue smoke, runs a little rich, rough on cold startup when low on oil. Recommend full service as it has been sitting in shed for 12 months Excessive rust in sunroof (enough to leak when it rains) Sunroof slide function does not currently work, could possibly be due to rust jamming it but unsure Small bubbles of rust in A-pillar Hatch seal needs replacing near boot lock Hatch gas struts need replacing, will not hold hatch on anything other than flat ground or downhill Paint scrapes + crazing on front and rear bumper, faded paint on spoiler Aerial snapped Central locking sticky on passenger's side door Rego expired/cancelled, would need blue-slip to be re-registered (not provided, no guarantee it will pass without work either) Battery utterly dead Selling car complete, recommeded it be bought as a parts car or complete restoration due to condition. Car is driveable (with new battery) and can be shown running Wheels/spacers can be bought seperately, however longer studs will stay with the car. If car does not sell as a whole, will be parting out on request Photos: Further pictures available on request Price: $750 w/ Momos, $500 w/ stockies (with varying tread) Located in Newcastle, NSW Contact via PM/reply here, or SMS only on 0401207794

2003 Corolla is 4-stud (4x100), not 5-stud...

The north side of the ferry is worse though..... Currently taking votes, JZZ30 (if I can wrangle the keys) or AE102?

It's sealed, but it ain't smooth...

Going to try and make it down for this

Now if only I had a decent shot of the Soarer....

If/when we build our own house, I'm going to deliberately make my balustrades horizontal just to screw with people's heads...

Rare find at a wreckers, there was only 110 of them made, and I think that includes the crashtest units...

18mm over what? What is the stock size?

If you're that worried about it, maybe consider going up to a 215/40/17 as you can get them in greater than 85, and you're only putting your speedo out by 1.3%. 215 is perfectly fine for a 7" wheel too.

Followed by

He says that the revs are going up though, which doesn't seem like fly-by-wire lag. Sounds more like the torque converter is slipping, tried a transmission fluid service?

Does not compute. Assuming the torque converter is locked, the engine will run at the same RPM at a particular speed regardless of how much (or little) power the engine is making. It may get to that RPM faster, and use less fuel to keep it at that speed, but the RPM-speed relationship is fixed by the gearbox.

Bring a couple of boxes of Favourites. Apparently, they are what you are supposed to bring when you're asked not to bring a thing....

1) BG Pete (Iron Chef) 2) Riverandlakes 3) juvenile 4) ZR6XY + the twins 5) Seby123 6) Dazzle [Depending on date] 7) Ronny (Maybe) 8) LFT-00F Pending my car gets fixed 9) flipsta24 10)ohy34h 11)Offzide93 12)red05tivo 13)cruzer + cuz 14)Ben Yip (maybe) 15) mou55a 16)Plytme 17)ohy34h 18)riversandlakes 19)GTfour_turbo90 20)Ascendant Rice 21)Lift18 22)TA71VO 23) JE-55-EA 24) M.C 25) Hiro (tentative)

Mine is due at the end of the year (21st Dec really sucks for insurance and rego smack bang before Xmas), probably going to switch over to Shannons after being a loyal NRMA customer for life, NRMA don't exactly ask about mods and I'd hate for something that I've done to screw anything up. Quotes from Shannons for the 102 with mods seem to be about the same as NRMA anyway, and I'm over 25 (approaching 30 too) so premiums across the board for an agreed $6k value aren't that bad.

My mistake, I forgot they did end up bringing to to Japan eventually, bit surprising as it'd overlap significantly with the Caldina

Set of Lews split dumps (with seperate wastegate piping) bought, should hopefully be getting them + adjustable cam gears installed before dyno day in Jan/Feb, along with BFI should be looking at ~220kw at the wheels with any luck

Nah the Axio is the Japanese Super GT GT300 racer, the BTCC model would be the Avensis NGTC (Next Gen Touring Car) Short answer is No, the Avensis is not sold here, Euro only (not even sold or made in Japan)

You'll find a lot of mirrors will break when hit vertically or directly to the glass but be fine if side-swiped - they're designed to pivot when hit from the front or back but there is no freedom of movement in the other directions.

It never went into production because a proper production model was never produced, the prototype never demonstrably ran under load, and had major technical issues/downfalls. Also, BHP poured money into the engine long before it ever got close to being a production model - initial invention and investment was in the early '70s, the technology failed to deliver and by the 90's BHP had actually DIVESTED themselves - ie they got OUT of the investment. They didn't buy the patent and squash it, they wiped their hands of it, because they knew there was no money in it. So many conspiracy theorists/paranoid people out there that think every failed invention has been squashed by either "the man" or "big oil". Excuse me? Are you saying "big oil" would not quash anything that infringed on their massive profits? I'm sorry man... youre living in fairy tale land if you think they wouldnt.. Every business no matter what line of product, will try and outdo the competition.. Big Oil is no different.. in fact they are much, much worse. There is a way to run a car on Hydrogen, converted from Water. Check out this Youtube Video before you say BS.. watch ALL of it. http://www.youtube.c...77AB90EB0750C0C I didn't say they wouldn't TRY to quash things. Whether or not they succeed depends a lot on the media, governments and the people. Besides, if the oil companies try to take a monopoly on fuel sources, then how different is it from now? When the oil runs out (and it will run out, at some stage), where do you think you'll be buying your hydrogen/recharge at? Chances are it'll be a BP, Shell or Caltex - the oil companies know that their main source of income is limited and this will cause them to divest into future-proofing their "massive profits". Necessity is the mother of invention, remember - this is why BHP invested money initially in the orbital engine (long before they supposedly "quashed it") because they saw a possible future (and thus possible profit) in it - when that future didn't materialise, they got out like any reasonable investor would. Even the guy who INVENTED the thing got out For every quack theory with dubious engineering claims that has been supposedly quashed by the oil companies, take a look at how many other alternate fuel theories are alive and well in the scientific community - hydrogen, LNG, biodiesel, electric, hell even nuclear. And if you believe the claims in the Youtube clip (I haven't had a chance to watch it fully, but it looks like every other free energy pseudoscience), then you're a muppet. Seperating hydrogen from water takes a significant amount of energy, and that cannot be fully reclaimed by burning the hydrogen - to put it simply, you are losing energy. If you got more energy out of the reaction than you spent splitting it in the first place, you'd be violating both the first and second laws of thermodynamics. Therefore, you might as well just take the energy you were going to use to split the water, and just use that to power an electric motor. The reason why you would use hydrogen created from electrolysis as a fuel is for one main reason - portability. It is much easier to store X amount of energy in the form of compressed hydrogen than it is to store the same amount of energy as electricity - this is why electric cars have such ****ty range in comparison to petrol. So by having an on-board electrolysis system AS WELL as a fuel cell, you are shooting yourself in the foot TWICE - you're adding extra weight to the car AND reducing range. Do you see cars driving around with oil refineries in their boot? NO, of course you don't (and the principal is the same) - the refining is done at a remote source in bulk and then the fuel stored in manageable amounts on the in tanks and in the vehicle itself. The main perpetuator of the water-as-a-fuel free energy myth was a guy called Stanley Meyer, who was found guilty of fraud a good 15 years ago (and has since died, which was "apparently" murder to quash his theories....FFS can't a person die these days without people thinking that it's a coverup?).