Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

They make bodykits out of mesh?

Fibreglass is cheap and light, but in most cases very brittle, after a while you'll get cracks and it will look like shit.

The OEM front bars are the strongest, because they bend, instead of cracking

FRP (fibreglass reinforced plastic) is what you should look for, but it's a lot more expensive than fibreglass, and usually only is available if you buy the original kit from japan

stock bumpers = polyurethane

of course fibreglass doesn't crack unless its been stressed...

but there's no doubt that its brittle.. even the stress of the chassis flexing when cornering over a long period of time can show on thin bumpers...

FRP sounds great.. anyone in oz make kits out of this??

you could probably get a kit made out of carbon fibre, but they would be weaker than glass.

a lot of mass produced glass kits are made really thin to save money, so they break easier.

the advantage of glass is that it can be repaired easy. i bought a front bar from a wreckers for $100 that was cracked down 1 side and it cost me $50 to fix it and repaint it (did it myself). the plastic kits cost a bit to get plastic welded, but they don't brake as easy to start with.

Personaly I love fiberglass kits as most aftermarket kits are fiberglass. I ve just finshed making a veilside kit fit a carmy 91 model (carby fed ) . It took 8 kilos of fiberglass but it looks very different .

Is anyone interented in seeing pictures?

why?

Well its not my job to ask why, it was brought to me and he asked me to make the modifications to make it fit to his car. I dont get to pick the cars i work on, its my job to fit the bodykit to it .

And also why not?

Im in the same boat and searching for a S15 kit perhaps the only way to get quality is to buy an origianal japanese kit ? im thinking about getting a kit from jetspeed or mxfly if all there kits are made of frp.

If this isnt a good idea feel free to pm a reason

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...