Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

If there's no claim on fuel, with rego/tires/maintenance of ~$1500, I'd be better off claiming the $3700 no?

sum up all fuel for financial year

sum up all rego / insurance / maintenence fo the year

Total all * 0.92 = your claim

if you have no log book, you will multiply everything by 0.74 instead and only have a maximum claim of $3700. (even if all your expenses * 0.74 is greater than $3700, you can only get back $3700)

fuel: $50 * 52weeks = $2600

Insur: $500

Rego/tyres/maint: $1500

Total: $4600

With Logbook:

4600 x 0.92 = $4232 back

Without logbook

4600 x 0.74 = $3404 ; maximum claim is $3700, so 3404 less than 3700, so you get all of $3404 back.

PM Sent

Also Pat is on the money. Come apply for a Grad Accountant position brah

haha pays to have accountants in the family /seewhatididther

Unfortunately, my accounting knowledge stops with the above and a bit of negative gearing knowledge. Wont be much help as a grad accountant haha

Ive probably said too much now, will be getting hassled by all the wastelanders now haha

Lets say

Rego/tyres/maint: $1500

with logbook

1500 x 0.92 = $1380 back

without logbook

1500 x 0.74 = $1110 back

Logbook got you an extra $270

Yeah but surely if you're under $3700 you'd just claim the max which is $3700? So the above examples are irrelevant, unless I'm not understanding it which is highly likely.

fuel: $50 * 52weeks = $2600

Insur: $500

Rego/tyres/maint: $1500

Total: $4600

With Logbook:

4600 x 0.92 = $4232 back

Without logbook

4600 x 0.74 = $3404 ; maximum claim is $3700, so 3404 less than 3700, so you get all of $3404 back.

Is there a cap on fuel/week cost? Coz 600+ kms a week for work, $50 will not cover lol

Yeah but surely if you're under $3700 you'd just claim the max which is $3700? So the above examples are irrelevant, unless I'm not understanding it which is highly likely.

unfortunately that means you can claim to a maximum of $3700, doesnt mean you will get $3700 always.

For example; you had $6000 worth of expenses and didnt have a log book.

$6000 x 0.74 = $4,440 claim HOWEVER $3700 is the max, so they will give you $3700 instead of $4440.

If you had logbook @ 92%

$6000 x 0.92 = $5520 claim, which you get back all as there is no cap with logbook.

Is there a cap on fuel/week cost? Coz 600+ kms a week for work, $50 will not cover lol

as long as the fuel consumption for 600+km is reasonable, dont believe there is any cap.

Have you emailed the stuff? Just checked and nothing received. Probably gone to my junk mail.

Ill get working on it first thing tomorrow morning brah

Nah haven't sent it yet, was waiting til I got the rest of my tool receipts. Got em now so I'll send it off shortly.

unfortunately that means you can claim to a maximum of $3700, doesnt mean you will get $3700 always.

For example; you had $6000 worth of expenses and didnt have a log book.

$6000 x 0.74 = $4,440 claim HOWEVER $3700 is the max, so they will give you $3700 instead of $4440.

If you had logbook @ 92%

$6000 x 0.92 = $5520 claim, which you get back all as there is no cap with logbook.

as long as the fuel consumption for 600+km is reasonable, dont believe there is any cap.

Yeah got that, just though it meant for me personally that the log book was un neccessary as my maintenance & rego is well under $3700, but with fuel it should be well over $3700, so should be ok..

600kms a week for work, that's about a tank a week just for work, so $70/$80 a week in fuel...

If I was a guy I wouldn't be impressed with a chick who likes pics taken of her kissing another girl that then get posted up in places like these. If a chick is bicurious that's cool, but out in public is clearly for attention, there are plenty of opportunities to do that in private.

Well each to theirs...but if you were a guy you could get with them and never even know they've had that photo taken and posted here. This is what I was getting at, you can't know everything someone has done...everyone has their secrets, and people change/mature, so why judge on a single photo of something you don't like? One of those girls in the pic is still a virgin...so I find it a bit hard to accept the virgin-slut oxymoron. As for attention, plenty of heterosexuals hook up in public too...is that for attention? Even if it's for attention, who cares? Everyone is an attention whore...look at every single FB status update ever made. Every revealing dress or loud joke/call. People just have different ways of getting it.

Had a shit load of the posts quoted but cbf. Agree with everyone disagreeing with Birds on this one. They're attention seeking whores, full stop. If that's what they do for fun, they're whores. Period.

Times that logic by infinity if that's what she wants in her wedding photos.

As above...everyone is an attention seeking whore IMO. But a girl kissing another girl doesn't = any less of a wife for me. I know plenty who would never kiss a girl and yet have cheated on their boyfriends, meanwhile those girls in the pic have never cheated on theirs. But each to theirs, if it's a turn off for you, it's a turn off, that's fine. It just wouldn't bother me, as I can't see the run on effects for it - to me there's more to be concerned about in a girl than if she has ever kissed a girl for a photo or not.

And thanks birds for the opinion on my missus

Welcome, stick with her :)

none of the girls i've been with have had previous sexual relations hence my interest in them in the first place. and yes i am 110% sure of it so stfu

yes they do exist but don't ever expect to end up with one when your idea of a good/clean girl is one who makes out with other chicks for "fun" and takes photos of it for the record.

standards brah, raise em.

end of the day, act like a slapper and you'll get treated like one. don't care what your past is like or how much of a goodie you are you'll never get my attention by acting broad minded personty.

but hey, that's just me

newman2.jpg

I've been in relationships with virgins before, I've been with girls who have had sex before. I'll take the latter over the former each and every time and I'd have missed out on some awesome relationships if i'd knocked back the girls who had lost their virginity. It's not about standards because virginity doesn't play a part in standards for me...it obviously does for you which is fine...just makes it harder to find "Mrs. Right".

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • My first car was a HG. I'm very familiar with them. A mild cam upgrade is a good idea. The 186 is a very flexible engine - meaning it has good torque from down low. You can give up a little torque down low for quite a lot more excitement in the mid range, and a bit more up top - but they are not exactly a rev monster. You need to upgrade valve springs at the minimum. For a bigger cam, you'd want to make sure it wasn't still running the original fibre cam gear. That would be unlikely, given that most of them shat themselves in the 70s and 80s, but still within the realms of possibility. Metal cam gear required. Carbies are a huge issue. The classic upgrade was always a Holley 350, which works, but is usually pretty bad for fuel consumption. The 186S had a 2 barrel Stromberg on it that was very similar to the one on the 253, and is a reasonable thing if you can find one, and find someone to help you get it set up (which is the same issue with setting up a 350 to work nice). The more classic upgrade was twin sidedraught CD type carbs, or triples of same, or triple Webers. The XU-1 triple Webers being the best example. You can still buy all this stuff new, I think, but it's a lot of coin to drop. And then the people able to set them up are getting fewer and further in between. There's still some, but it used to be everyone's** dad and uncle could do it. **Not everyone's! But a lot. All in all, I wouldn't get too carried away with the engine. Anything you do to it without a full rebuild for power and revs will only make it slightly faster. I am all in favour of a complete teardown rebuild, with nice rods and pistons, 10 or 10.5:1 compression, and a clean port job with at least a big enough cam to run 98 with that compression, if not bigger. And if I did that to a dirty old red motor, I'd want to inject it too, which I'd struggle to fight against the devil on my shoulder that would argue for ITBs and trumpets. But the bills would start to mount up, and it will still never make stupid power. OK, a few people still know how to build absolutely mental red motors, courtesy of the work that went into HQ racing and modern knowledge being applied. But even a 300HP red motor is no match for an RB20 with a TD06. So you have to decide what it's worth to you. I'd just put a set of 6>2>1 extractors, a 2.5" exhaust and an electronic ignition conversion/dizzy on it and just run the old girl like the fairly slow old girl that she really is.
    • Thank you so much for the comments.  This is very interesting and gives me some great ideas to think about. Keen to keep it simple and relatively classic looking. That said, i am not too worried about staying 100% period correct.  A little extra performance and relatively good (or improved) economy is just what i am looking for. Ill be keeping any parts i swap out so if i get nostalgic i can always swap it all back in.  Right now just trying to get some good ideas from people in the know (I still have a lot to learn in this space). Thank you again!  
    • Wrt the engine, you're very much limited by 'production quality' as to how much extra power you can extract from them (I'm talking i6 red-motor) -- a lot here depends on how 'authentic' or 'period correct' you want the modifications to be... ...I'm too old... <grin>...the first true performance engine Holden made, was in the HD/HR models ~ this was the 'X2' performance pack...it came with twin downdraft strombergs on an otherwise unimproved intake manifold, with a two piece exhaust manifold (reckoned to be as good as extractors)... ....these engines were built upon the '179HP' cylinder block, which included extra webbing in the casting to make it stronger and less susceptible to block distortion... The next performance i6 came out with the HK Monaro (also found it's way into the LJ GTR Torana ... the car I wish I hadn't sold)...it had pretty much the same manifold setup, but was built against the '186S' block...this block retained all the extra webbing of the 179HP block, but added a forged steel crankshaft (instead of the stock cast crankshaft), because it was possible to snap the crank... ...apart from the inherent weaknesses in the stock (cast crank) blocks, the next limiting factor is the cylinder head porting & combustion chamber design, and the actual valve sizes. Back in the day, you could buy a 'yella terra' cylinder head (from stage 1 to stage 5 gradients), and this was the way to get serious power out of them -- with the extra breathing of these heads, you could fit a triple SU or DCOE Weber setup... ...obviously, these mods were a waste of time on a stock cylinder head/camshaft grind. My housemate rebuilt the i6 in his VH dunnydore about 6 months back -- this is a 186S block with the 12port 2850 blue motor head and intake/exhaust manifolds, with a dual throat Weber off an XF Falcon mounted on an adapter plate ; it's not a bad makeup...got more torque & fuel economy just light-footing it about on the first throat, but stand on it and it makes more giddy-up than the standard 2850 blue motor that it replaced. Personal note: I'd just fit an RB30 and be done it it 😃  
    • Thanks for sharing. That's a great video! My buddy is doing the same thing on his build (S chassis struts and towers). He's building an S14 with billet RB30 shooting for 2000whp... a race car with a TH400 just like this video. For a road car I just couldn't go this route as the strut has to be almost vertical and the caster is not going to pivot correctly (let alone camber gain). You think the R32 frontend is bad, wait till you put a MacPherson strut on without modeling it all in Solidworks to check geometry. I'm not saying it's a bad way to do it but I'd be really curious to see how it affects the geometry.
    • Hey Christof and welcome!  Sounds like an awesome project! I'm not sure many of the regular users on here would know much about the HK but I could be wrong.  Looking forward to updates.
×
×
  • Create New...