Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

What a day!

So tired. Thanks everyone for putting up with my yelling-we got off to a late start and yeah no sleep.

Anyway, here's a great iPhone pic from early on haha

0ffbb27e.jpg

Also we usually finish around 445pm-the rain wasn't a drama it was the wind out there in the open that meant we had to stop early. Sorry about that guys, can't help mother nature and I'm sure you all had more driving time up till 330pm than a normal (and more expensive) skid pan day :)

Lastly but most importantly; thankyou to the volunteers who do setup, bbq, timing, cleaning up-without you these days will come to a screeching halt. Thankyou so much!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/391432-texi-wrap-up-thread/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 167
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

yeah another awesome day with SAU despite the early finish due to hail, got lots of runs in and i didnt even care that i forgot the course by the second cone in, thanks again to the organisers and volunteers for coming out and making it all happen.

Was a great teaser and warm up for the track day in march which im looking forward to even MORE now!

pics and vids up soon

Great day everyone, been a while since i've been to an event however it was as good as I remember them..

Some of the shots from today..

Full albumn can be found here: https://picasaweb.google.com/104461113046769712535/TexikhanaFeb2012?authuser=0&feat=directlink

SAU-Texikhana-Feb-2012-767.jpg

SAU-Texikhana-Feb-2012-103.jpgSAU-Texikhana-Feb-2012-120.jpg

SAU-Texikhana-Feb-2012-155.jpgSAU-Texikhana-Feb-2012-180.jpg

SAU-Texikhana-Feb-2012-079.jpg

SAU-Texikhana-Feb-2012-878.jpg

SAU-Texikhana-Feb-2012-497.jpg

nice pics links, lol was worried i wouldnt be able to save a few of them but thankfully its not like the evil 'flickr' which doesnt allow me to 'save as'..picasa for the win!

again awesome pics, uploading a few myself to the SAU facebook group now. 324 to be precise..anyone got a reeaally Sunday evening? go nuts..

http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=oa.10150604701742446&type=1

heres some examples

425025_10150540694521537_511696536_9162100_972707377_n.jpg

431671_10150540701736537_511696536_9162207_970239727_n.jpg

424511_10150540698571537_511696536_9162158_2044102022_n.jpg

What a great day!!! Great to meet n greet afew Stagea owners. Even my 1yr old daughter loved the action! Great effort to the organizers & participants!!! Will hopefully get on the cruise next weekend. Thanks for the pics of my "SEE RYC" Wagon Boy!! LOL.

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...