The Mw Automotive Thread Ii

[David Hingtgen]

I never clean my windshield with anything dedicated--it gets the same soap and water as the rest of the car. It gets windshield washer fluid almost every day though. (Prestone at the moment, doesn't freeze up in winter quite so easily as generic blue stuff)

[Lightning]

well, this thread took a weird turn, lol. what do y'all recommend to get small flecks of paint off of a windshield? My Toyota has small bits of paint left on my windshield, and even my work's degreaser cant get the stuff off.

[David Hingtgen]

Assuming you don't want to use actual paint stripper for risk of damaging your finish---scrape it off. The only issue is how sharp a scraper you can use without damaging the windshield. I've found most glass to be surprisingly resistant to your basic razor-blade scraper.

[areaseven]

This may be a longshot, but try using a clay bar. Many car owners use it to remove overspray on some panels.

[David Hingtgen]

But doesn't that require/assume you've got a nicely polished/waxed finish beneath it to start? A clay bar will take paint spots off of a waxed surface because the wax prevented the paint from adhering well to start with. AFAIK. A winshield won't have that. (unless you went to a touchless car wash and got the wax option, which usually puts it EVERYWHERE--few things worse than a waxed windshield IMHO)

I do need to clay my car some day, any remants of its last waxing are long gone, and I've got (I think) rail dust and a bit of road tar all over behind the rear wheels and bumper. It's amazing how many things you can find when you get 3 inches away and REALLY scrutinize your paint...

Edited May 15, 2006 by David Hingtgen

[yellowlightman]

A winshield won't have that.  (unless you went to a touchless car wash and got the wax option, which usually puts it EVERYWHERE--few things worse than a waxed windshield IMHO)

399524[/snapback]

Waxing windshields is actually pretty common as it helps make water bead off.

[pfunk]

well, this thread took a weird turn, lol.  what do y'all recommend to get small flecks of paint off of a windshield? My Toyota has small bits of paint left on my windshield, and even my work's degreaser cant get the stuff off.

399470[/snapback]

razor blade, claybar, last resort fine steel wool. The claybar's initial use was for removing overspray.

Allways wax the windshield when waxing the car, it helps prevent the wipers from marring the safty glass, not to mention the above statement as a plus

[David Hingtgen]

I must just have weird preferences. I hate the effect Rain-X, wax, silicone, etc have on a windshield. Beading=bad IMHO. Just give me "natural clean glass".

[Raptor]

Here are some more pictures of my RX-7...

http://s30.photobucket.com/albums/c337/Busted7/

The newest ones are from just a few days ago... It was running while I took them

It's running at about 60%, though. Can't use much throttle or it makes wierd noises and doesn't have any power...

BUT, it's registered and insured now, and it runs well enough to drive it, so it's now active duty....so to speak.

I went and bought some groceries in it... all of them were scattered around the back of the car by the time I go back :-D (damn handling is sooo tempting to fling it around corners and stop on a dime).

I'm gonna add some new ground wires and see if that makes it drive better. It seemed to get a little better when I cleaned the crappy stock grounds...

Edited May 17, 2006 by Raptor

[areaseven]

Nice FC you got there.

[areaseven]

Time to shift gears for a moment...

The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift

I know there are a lot of people here who hate the first two F&F movies merely because they're ricer films, but this one actually seems promising, especially with no Paul Walker or Vin Diesel around. I will definitely see this on opening day and possibly post a review on it.

Edited May 18, 2006 by areaseven

[myk]

Speaking of which, any of you guys hear the claim of a supposed cameo appearance of a former F&F alumni in the movie?

[yellowlightman]

Time to shift gears for a moment...

The Fast and the Furious: Tokyo Drift

I know there are a lot of people here who hate the first two F&F movies merely because they're ricer films, but this one actually seems promising, especially with no Paul Walker or Vin Diesel around. I will definitely see this on opening day and possibly post a review on it.

400286[/snapback]

People who hate the first F&TF movie are dumb. It's hilarious and fairly competent as an action movie as long as you don't expect too much of the car sequences. The script is amazing quoteable.

[areaseven]

I enjoyed the first movie, even though both Walker and Diesel are in it. It actually has a good storyline and the stunts are well-choreographed, especially the drag race between the Supra and the Charger.

2 Fast 2 Furious wasn't as good because it got too cartoonish. The first race would've been okay, had they not relied too heavily on CG. The mobster race scene got really cheesy when the EVO spun around and floored it in reverse. And the whole ricer scramble towards the end of the film...no comment.

Speaking of which, any of you guys hear the claim of a supposed cameo appearance of a former F&F alumni in the movie?

Nope. Didn't hear about that. Wouldn't be surprised if it's a minor character, though.

[Lightning]

I enjoyed the first movie, even though both Walker and Diesel are in it. It actually has a good storyline and the stunts are well-choreographed, especially the drag race between the Supra and the Charger.

2 Fast 2 Furious wasn't as good because it got too cartoonish. The first race would've been okay, had they not relied too heavily on CG. The mobster race scene got really cheesy when the EVO spun around and floored it in reverse. And the whole ricer scramble towards the end of the film...no comment.

Speaking of which, any of you guys hear the claim of a supposed cameo appearance of a former F&F alumni in the movie?

Nope. Didn't hear about that. Wouldn't be surprised if it's a minor character, though.

400349[/snapback]

agreed. I just wish they hadn't totalled the Charger though...

[reddsun1]

wasn't there some sort of legal bru-ha-ha over the destroyed Charger in the 1st movie? IIRC, I read somewhere [may have been the old thread even] that the owner wasn't informed about the planned fate of the car in the film, and was [understandably] righteously pissed when his car was wrecked, and sued? What did happen to the car actually? I still refuse to watch that movie based on prinicple; after watching the 2F2F and thoroughly disliking it, I figured why bother?

[emajnthis]

Here are some more pictures of my RX-7...

http://s30.photobucket.com/albums/c337/Busted7/

The newest ones are from just a few days ago... It was running while I took them

It's running at about 60%, though.  Can't use much throttle or it makes wierd noises and doesn't have any power...

BUT, it's registered and insured now, and it runs well enough to drive it, so it's now active duty....so to speak.

I went and bought some groceries in it...  all of them were scattered around the back of the car by the time I go back :-D  (damn handling is sooo tempting to fling it around corners and stop on a dime).

I'm gonna add some new ground wires and see if that makes it drive better.  It seemed to get a little better when I cleaned the crappy stock grounds...

400053[/snapback]

Did you buy this car used or salvaged. If it's used, then the previous owner(s) really gave the motor (and i'm assuming drivetrain) a real beating. The interior and body actually don't look so bad considering how poor a shape the motor is in.

The first F&F really wasn't that bad, it did get you very involved in the action and some of the stuff that was cheesy actually made the movie better (10 minute quarter miles; Charger launching through the air; Most of the Supra scenes) as opposed to the second one where the cheese factor just ruined the movie (but then again Mitsubishi did help sponsor it... and we all know what's happening to them).

[yellowlightman]

(but then again Mitsubishi did help sponsor it... and we all know what's happening to them).

400441[/snapback]

Retribution for building the Zero fighters that attacked Pearl Harbor, that's what.

[myk]

F&F is good, dumb fun/entertainment-take it or leave it.

As for that cameo appearance in the new movie, someone led me to it over at AICN's site, but the pictures I found were made by Yamato's 1/48 box designers-100 % photo-chop magic.

Oh well, it would have been a cool thing to happen...

Edited May 19, 2006 by myk

[Raptor]

Did you buy this car used or salvaged.  If it's used, then the previous owner(s) really gave the motor (and i'm assuming drivetrain) a real beating.  The interior and body actually don't look so bad considering how poor a shape the motor is in.

The first F&F really wasn't that bad, it did get you very involved in the action and some of the stuff that was cheesy actually made the movie better (10 minute quarter miles; Charger launching through the air; Most of the Supra scenes) as opposed to the second one where the cheese factor just ruined the movie (but then again Mitsubishi did help sponsor it... and we all know what's happening to them).

400441[/snapback]

There's nothing wrong with the motor... it was rebuilt around 7K miles ago, and the only problem it had when I got it was that the coolant seals were blown.

There wasn't anything wrong with the internals either (as far as I could tell. No extreme wear on them. What you see in those pics is RIGHT as a took it apart, so it's just a little dirty in the inside due to the coolant leak (if I had waited any longer to take it apart it would have started to rust up. The exhaust manifold was full of coolant!).

Even just after I put it back together, it has decent compression.

The clutch looked almost new...

Although I do admit the inside of the bell housing was attrocious (although a few cans of degreaser fixed that).

I'm sure an idiot owned it somewhere down the line (i'm probably the 4th or 5th owner), since they cut a whole in the engine bay for the air filter to get air (and trashed the brake ducting while they were at it), took out the washer bottle, broke off the antenna, and generally made a mess of things (like not properly installing the exhaust).

Of course, I paid 400 bucks for it anyway

Edited May 19, 2006 by Raptor

[areaseven]

Here are some pics of the cars used in the movie.

[myk]

As for that cameo appearance in the new movie, someone led me to it over at AICN's site, but the pictures I found were made by Yamato's 1/48 box designers-100 % photo-chop magic.

Yeah, I know, I should've posted the 'pics. Here they are:

http://www.aintitcool.com/images2006/drift1.jpg

and

http://www.aintitcool.com/images2006/drift2.jpg

As I said earlier, that would've been a cool thing to have in the movie, but alas...

[reddsun1]

Here are some pics of the cars used in the movie.

400605[/snapback]

Interesting. So what usually becomes of the cars for films like this after production wraps up? Are some of them leased/rented from individual owners I wonder?

Edited May 19, 2006 by reddsun1

[reddsun1]

Gran Turismo games: "The Real Driving Simulator"

Indeed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tTQijdc3SI&search=GT4

Funny Top Gear clip that asks: just how does the newest PS2 game compare to real life? Jeremy Clarkson sets a 1:41 at Laguna Seca in the GT4 game, then tries it for real in the same car. How close did he get? Well, see for yourself.

Edited May 20, 2006 by reddsun1

[myk]

That was cool to see. I wonder if a professional driver could have done better on the track.

I really hope there aren't people out there who fancy themselves as race drivers based on their 'Tourismo experiences...

[Raptor]

Yeah... I'm damn goon in GT4, but I'd never be able to do that kind of driving in real life because:

1. I don't want to die.

and

2. The sensation of speed in GT4 seems to be about half of that in real life. 100 in GT4 feels like 50 IRL... and 200 in GT4 is like 100 in real life. Or at least that's how it feels, even in my RX-7...lol

Also, Top Gear ignored the fact that when you have a car in GT4, it's assumed that they're fitted with high-grip semi-slick tires (like, Yokohama AO48's, which are EXTREMELY high grip), and probably high-performance brake fluid and pads, whereas that NSX was stock.

(For the record, I beat Clarkson's time by one second, but only by taking shortcuts through the dirt )

Edited May 20, 2006 by Raptor

[areaseven]

Gran Turismo games: "The Real Driving Simulator"

Indeed.    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tTQijdc3SI&search=GT4

Funny Top Gear clip that asks: just how does the newest PS2 game compare to real life?  Jeremy Clarkson sets a 1:41 at Laguna Seca in the GT4 game, then tries it for real in the same car.  How close did he get?  Well, see for yourself. 

400738[/snapback]

Clarkson would've shaved off a couple of seconds had he used the analog stick instead of the D-Pad. Besides, who uses the D-Pad on a racing game?

[ComicKaze]

Here are some pics of the cars used in the movie.

400605[/snapback]

Bah all look like giant spoilered crap. They ruined those exotics and that Silvia.

[ComicKaze]

(but then again Mitsubishi did help sponsor it... and we all know what's happening to them).

400441[/snapback]

Retribution for building the Zero fighters that attacked Pearl Harbor, that's what.

400444[/snapback]

So, Toyota built trucks for the Japanese army in WWII. They only managed to survive because the war ended right before a scheduled allied bombing of their factories.

[Lightning]

So that's the reason for it. Didn't they miss Mitsu's factories too?

[David Hingtgen]

Semi OT, but basically EVERY Japanese manufacturing company built war equipment in WWII. But Mitsubishi was certainly #1, they built a lot more than just planes. (Notably the Yamato-class battleships)

No different than here---Chrysler and GM built tanks, and some car companies even built B-25's.

[Retracting Head Ter Ter]

Also, Top Gear ignored the fact that when you have a car in GT4, it's assumed that they're fitted with high-grip semi-slick tires (like, Yokohama AO48's, which are EXTREMELY high grip), and probably high-performance brake fluid and pads, whereas that NSX was stock.

400749[/snapback]

The GT4 programmers probably also modelled the game physics based on the assumption of a 16 year old driver called Takumi who weighs 125 pounds instead of that 260 pound fatso Clarkson.

[reddsun1]

Also, Top Gear ignored the fact that when you have a car in GT4, it's assumed that they're fitted with high-grip semi-slick tires (like, Yokohama AO48's, which are EXTREMELY high grip), and probably high-performance brake fluid and pads, whereas that NSX was stock.

400749[/snapback]

The GT4 programmers probably also modelled the game physics based on the assumption of a 16 year old driver called Takumi who weighs 125 pounds instead of that 260 pound fatso Clarkson.

400837[/snapback]

Still, I don't know if even a "pro" driver could make up over 18 seconds difference in the same car. We'll just chalk that up to making the compromise between acheiving absolute "realism" and making the gameplay exciting and providing sensation of speed [w/in the limitations of TV]. There's some stuff that you can do with a car in the games [aside from the rediculous stuff like, ping-ponging off the armco, etc] that just wouldn't fly in the real world; like taking given corners at speeds that just wouldn't be possible in the same car in the real world--street tires, slicks or otherwise. Is it safe to assume this latest game also doesn't have vehicle damage modeling?

Edited May 21, 2006 by reddsun1

[ComicKaze]

Also, Top Gear ignored the fact that when you have a car in GT4, it's assumed that they're fitted with high-grip semi-slick tires (like, Yokohama AO48's, which are EXTREMELY high grip), and probably high-performance brake fluid and pads, whereas that NSX was stock.

400749[/snapback]

The GT4 programmers probably also modelled the game physics based on the assumption of a 16 year old driver called Takumi who weighs 125 pounds instead of that 260 pound fatso Clarkson.

400837[/snapback]

Still, I don't know if even a "pro" driver could make up over 18 seconds difference in the same car. We'll just chalk that up to making the compromise between acheiving absolute "realism" and making the gameplay exciting and providing sensation of speed [w/in the limitations of TV]. There's some stuff that you can do with a car in the games [aside from the rediculous stuff like, ping-ponging off the armco, etc] that just wouldn't fly in the real world; like taking given corners at speeds that just wouldn't be possible in the same car in the real world--street tires, slicks or otherwise. Is it safe to assume this latest game also doesn't have vehicle damage modeling?

400886[/snapback]

I also highly doubt that the game has air physics and aerodynamics and the effects of heat on tires and brakes, etc. 18 seconds is a VERY LONG time.

[Raptor]

There's tire wear, and aerodynamics (you can draft, but the effect of drag at high speeds is barely noticeable, unless you play around with downforce), but no noticeable brake fade...

18 seconds IS a long time, but 1:41 seconds is already a VERY fast lap around the track (although you CAN go faster), even in the game.