Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

Look i just got the weekly autospeed newsletter and browsing through the new articles, there looked like there is some half decent stuff to read. Now considering that it now costs money (bastards) to see these articles, do u think the quality of articles and usefulness is justified to spend my hard earned money?

IS anyone else a subscriber? And what are your thoughts on it? Ive read a few older articles which wer utter crap. I just dont want to pay then start reading these things and realise what a waste of money.

Look forward to your replies

THanks

Dean

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/10700-autospeed/
Share on other sites

I'm a subscriber. I think there's a lot of crap there, mainly all the new car reviews, but there's the occassional good technical article (and that's really the only reason I'm there).

For about 80 cents per week, its good value (certainly compared to the newstand variety, at $2 per week)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/10700-autospeed/#findComment-172904
Share on other sites

some of the technical articles (like the temp sender and knock detection kits) have been useful

having access to the archives is better value than plonking the money for a car mag at the newstand.

but new subscribers do not have access to the entire archives anymore, there are different pricing schemes as of last week. existing subscribers still get access to everything

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/10700-autospeed/#findComment-173032
Share on other sites

I only went to their site to get some parts... a bit expensive but their service is good and goods usually arrives within 1 week, and they call you if something went wrong or gonna b delayed...

For performance info... I read HPI, and of course, the SAU...

SAU rocks!!!!!! yeah!!!!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/10700-autospeed/#findComment-173258
Share on other sites

I like Autospeed, obviously reviews of new corallas aren't too interesting, but there's some good performance/race stuff, and they're not afraid to piss of manufacturers in their articles.

There was a classic article when they were invited to the Tickford factory to check it out, and then panned what they saw :lol: I don't think they get given cars by Ford anymore

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/10700-autospeed/#findComment-178287
Share on other sites

Guest Oz Elitesport

I'm a subscriber. I agree with Duncan in that at least when they review any car, a product or a workshop they tell you exactly how it is. Some of the stuff is boring as, but that goes with all mags. I mean HPI do jap car comparisons with locally made cars, which are completely biased.

Oz.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/10700-autospeed/#findComment-178413
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Latest Posts

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...