Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 508
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i dont think it ever will be. it wont meet any sevs criteria. unless you could argue it's shape as a unique design feature, and then get HPI to run a feature article on it. then it would satisfy sevs to get put on the list. BUT then you still need a RAW to apply for compliance for it. atm your only hope is move to japan for a year. buy one. then bring it back. or just go for a holiday in japan and rent one.

edit: I've been in one a couple of times now. :happy:

I agree that the Cube will almost certainly never be allowed because it fails to meet the minimum power to weight ratio required for the SEVS scheme, that means it would have to have some sort of outstanding design features which is doesn't appear to have, so it would almost certainly be rejected if an application was to be submitted.

minimum power to weight ratio?

lol I think he wanted to know why that was a restriction Baron.

For a vehicle like the Cube to be considered for addition to the SEVS register (the list of the cars that could possibly be imported under SEVS), it must satisfy at least two of the following criteria: Appearance, Unusual Design Features, Performance, and Featured in specialist motoring magazines in factory condition..

Under the performance category, one of the requirements is a power to weight ratio greater 105 kw/tonne.

What J-Spec and Baron are trying to get at is that it could be featured in a magazine, but it would most likely not meet the appearance or unusual design features tests and hence be ineligible.

I'm working on the Toyota bB at the moment, using the appearance criteria. One aspect of it is silhouette, and I think it should qualify fairly well, as would the Cube.

Will see how we go with the bB first.

i like the green ones with an army type look. wink if you want one bad enough send me some cash and ill look after it for you for a year :D

Haha. Let me look at some prices on the auctions. :)

You need one of these. Daihatsu Naked. They look worse in the flesh, and they are K.

I have to say they don't even look half as good as the Cube.

I'm working on the Toyota bB at the moment, using the appearance criteria. One aspect of it is silhouette, and I think it should qualify fairly well, as would the Cube.

Will see how we go with the bB first.

saw a dark blue in Adelaide. Would love to buy a Bb open deck if they are available

  • 1 year later...

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

    • I've got the rear ones, they're certainly beefy. I need to take them to my driveshaft guru to check over, he's very fussy about the quality of components so I'll let you know if they are made of cheese by a blind man.   Are you in Australia? A mate just had a set of EN26 shafts made for his K20 Lotus by our fabricator which were quite cheap (compared to Driveshaft Shop) so if you can procure the CV's and draw what you need he'd make them for ~$800 for the pair.
    • Had I known the diff between R32 and R33 suspension I would have R33 suspension. That ship has sailed so I'm doing my best to replicate a drop spindle without spending $4k on a Billet one.
    • OEM suspension starts to bind as soon as the car gets away from stock height. I locked in the caster and camber before cutting off the kingpin. I then let the upright down in a natural (unbound) state before re-attaching it. Now it moves freely in bump and droop relative to the new ride height. My plan is to add GKTech arms before the car is finished so I can dial camber and caster further. It will be fine. This isn't rocket science. Caster looks good, camber is good, upper arm doesn't cause crazy gain and it is now closer to the stock angle and bump steer checks out. Send it.
    • Pay careful attention to the kinematics of that upper arm. The bloody things don't work properly even on a normal stock height R32. Nissan really screwed the pooch on that one. The fixes have included changing the hole locations on the bracket to change the angle of the inner pivot (which was fairly successful but usually makes it impossible to install or remove the arm without unbolting the bracket from the tower, which sucks) and various swivelling upper arm designs. ALL the swivelling upper arm designs that look like a capital I (with serifs) suck. All of them. Some of them are in fact terribly unsafe. Even the best one of them (the old UAS design) shat itself in short order on my car. The only upper arm that works as advertised and is pretty safe is the GKTech one. But it is high maintenance on a street car. I'm guessing that a 600HP car as (stupidly, IMO) low as you are going is not going to be a regular driver. So the maintenance issues on suspension parts are probably not going to be a problem. But you really must make sure that however your fairly drastically modded suspension ends up, that the upper arms swing through an arc that wants to keep the inner and outer bolts parallel. If the outer end travels through an arc that makes that end's bolt want to skew away from parallel with the inner bolt, you will build up enormous binding and compressing forces in the bushes, chew them out and hate life. The suspension compliance can actually be dominated by the bush binding, not the spring rate! It may be the case that even something like the GKTech arm won't work if your suspension kinematics become too weird, courtesy of all the cut and shut going on. Although you at least say there's no binding now, so maybe you're OK. Seeing as you're in the build phase, you could consider using R33/4 type upper arms (either that actual arm, OEM or aftermarket) or any similar wishbone designed to suit your available space, so alleviate the silliness of the R32 design. Then you can locate your inner pivots to provide the correct kinematics (camber gain on compression, etc).
    • The frontend wouldn't go low enough because the coilover was max low and the upper control arm would collapse into itself and potentially bottom out in the strut tower. I made a brace and cut off the kingpin and then moved the upright down 1.25" and welded. i still have to finish but this gives an idea. Now I can have a normal 3.25" of shock travel and things aren't binding. I'm also dropping the lower arm and tie rod 1.25".
×
×
  • Create New...