Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

If people think this is an attitude unique to ferrari they are a little misguided.

Often you hear of magazines being unable to replicated the performance figures given by the factory.

Pretty much every car maker does it.

Like when you hear of subaru getting both their WRC drivers down to the drag strip for the day with 10+ WRX's for them to simply abuse till they break in an attempt to set the performance target they want.

No great suprises in Chris' rant, but it's nice to have it off his chest I bet.

Seems someone within Ferrari is keen to keep the bullshit of "The Old Man", otherwise known as a 100% arsehole, alive and well.

I've never once longed to own a Ferrari, well ok, I do ache for an F40, but their marketing machine is just too contrived for me, always has been really, even when the F40 was new, it's asking price and claims of "composite contruction techniques" were mildly laughable :)

Besides, I've never met a Fezz driver that wasn't a 100% pure unadulterated Cock. And I'm not a cock..... or am I?

the F40 is alright but its predecessor, the 288 GTO, is the one to lust after.

1984_ferrari_288_gto_03_m.jpg

Ferrari_288_GTO_92.jpg

the F40 is alright but its predecessor, the 288 GTO, is the one to lust after.

1984_ferrari_288_gto_03_m.jpg

Ferrari_288_GTO_92.jpg

Very sexy car indeed.

I Do have a real soft spot for a 250 Lusso or a long nose 275...but good luck ever finding one lol

nup, F40 for me too. even better go the hardcore F40 GTR or LM or whatever gay letters they put on the hardcorey one.

for many years I wanted an F40 bad enough to make my balls ache. then I turned 13 and it got better. but I do still have the odd urge to sell my house and live in an F40. as I constantly remind my girlfriend you can sleep in a car but you can't fking drive a house.....

  • Like 1

288, no doubt, gorgeous thing, but a little before "my time".

A few years ago I remember seeing a 288, F40, and Enzo on display together, and was left thinking , "where did they go wrong?!"

They went wrong when they realised they can make more money out of selling crap merchandise than from making cars. I put it about the same period as when Schumacher started driving for them but some argue it was slightly previous to that.

Anyway the 288 was one of the last of the good cars they made. It looks well hard & isnt tarnished by the crap engineering the F40 has in it. They were still trying in those days - not just selling junk to rich fkrs who dont know any better.

Lets all go to Ferrari world and puke in their roller coaster.

Edited by djr81

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

    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
    • You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...