Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Some prick used a screwdriver and tried plying the two handles off my r33 fortunately wasnt successful. i m staying in a unit with an open car poach.

My car is equipped with an alarm and wheel lock and they have the guts to break in.

I need some advice guys, should i need to report an attempted break in to the cops?

One reason for reporting it to the police would be if you intend to make an insurance claim for the repairs to your car. From what you've written the only info you have is that someone tried to break into your car. They could test for fingerprints if you haven't touched the area but in all honesty there is nothing that they can do. You have done the right thing by fitting an alarm (& hopefully an immobilisor) and a wheel lock as a visible deterant. Not really sure of what to advise you but the outcome is pretty obvious either way - next to nothing.

thanks writeoff, what i really hate was the prick plys the handles softly so that he does not trigger the alarm. i was hoping that the alarm was triggered and i have a pager alarm which i normally have it beside the bed so that i could beat the shit out of him.

he also did it to the passenger 's door handle.

I'd love to put shit under my door handles one night and leave it in a dodgy area just to see some thief get their just rewards!

What kind of shit :laughing-smiley-014: ?

Or shit literally :thumbsup:

Edited by jm4mp
I'd love to put shit under my door handles one night and leave it in a dodgy area just to see some thief get their just rewards!

or on your mates skyline and leave it in a dodgy area :) don't want to ruin yours :thumbsup:

Edited by Whiplash

Report it!

They will be interested to log it, and im sure if there are this many skylines getting stolen, sapol will be aware and assign someone to the job. Any intell they can get will help, including attempted thefts.

I'd love to put shit under my door handles one night and leave it in a dodgy area just to see some thief get their just rewards!

:laughing-smiley-014: My Sisters's Boyfriend did that to some wanker... its funny shit!

+1 for stake out

I'll bring an assortment of ghetto weapons such as bats (cricket AND baseball), poles, 4x4s (with and without rusty nails), shovels, burning torches, giant wrenches, sock with an 8 ball(my fav) and ice cream

seriously... ummm yeah...

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...