Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

This forum is great, and I know not all the clubs are up and running yet, but whats happening with the front page?

If anyone wants a hand at doing it.. let me know..

Ive done designs for,

www.speedworx.net

www.calaisturbo.com

www.exstatic.cjb.net

and heaps of others...

Give me a yell if any help is needed.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/1364-main-website/
Share on other sites

Hey Man, the sites only temporary... we just needed to get something up on the space... we will review it and get a new site up there once we have more content and a need for new stuff.

Thanks for the offer.

Christian

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/1364-main-website/#findComment-27427
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

PranK, dude, is the site EVER gonna be up? Sure we don't have much content.. but seriously, i could get a good site up within 1-2days.. it's taking forever, rightly so because you're busy, but theres plenty of content

- we've had a heap of cruises now, so we've got alot of pics and we can just do a short write up on each event

- we've got a heap of members - put an announcement on the forums about member bios

- organise this photoshoot (or i can, if u like) so our state members can have some more nice pics

- we've got plenty of events coming up to put up on the main page

- i can get some wallpapers done, make some screen savers and whatnot

and then let it grow from there, in which it will if we've at least got a decent page up!

what do you think?

ryan

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/1364-main-website/#findComment-39945
Share on other sites

i can go dig up all my sdu

how to threads and pics.

i think Prank sees the website as his baby as its his $$$ paying for it till the memberships are sorted.

theres nothing wrong with that i just think if we've got so many people wanting to help why don't we utilise them?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/1364-main-website/#findComment-40717
Share on other sites

Skyzer, i agree.

Ryan, if you want to contribute, do a write-up of the cruises you have been to and the pictures and i will put them on the site and will give you full credit for it.

That goes to all of you, if you want something on the site - email me: [email protected]

i keep telling people to email me their car pics and i have only had a handful sent to me, i have 2 more to put up.

Christian.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/1364-main-website/#findComment-42762
Share on other sites

Originally posted by PranK

i still dig euros... love em!!

if i dont get an R34 next year, i think i'll get a BMW 330ci... grrrrr.

Just whatever, piccys and a bit of a story will be great.

Prankster a 330CI,,,,,I gotta sit you down boy and have words....

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/1364-main-website/#findComment-43505
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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...