Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 41
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

we have a 73 convertible mustang. nice to have the wind in my long shiny silky hair. well not really. when discussing whether or not to get a 69 fastback restored for us, my dad complained about liking the open topped one with wind and noise etc. :rofl:

convertibles are nice to be in, but i don't really like the look of them over coupes/fastbacks (although, it depends on the car)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/44387-convertibles/#findComment-907980
Share on other sites

Convertibles look nice but there are far too many that don't have the go to match, ie they're just pose-mobiles. MX5 is a great car, but the asthmatic four banger doesn't do the chassis justice - my old 202 Commodore could beat them in a straight line. Work it hard, bolt on a turbo, or do an engine swap, and they're a formidable opponent at the track. Having not driven one, I'd guess an Elise would be similar - with a fantastic chassis like that, why oh why did they put such an underpowered engine in? Another 100 or so hp would make the car so much more enjoyable. Yes they're still quick point to point but for crying out loud, give it some power!

I've driven a few cars that have been really good in the corners and under brakes but seriously lacking under the bonnet, and although still plenty of fun, they end up just being frustrating.

I chopped a poser in an F355 convertible big time on my bike, had his missus in the car giving him a hard time too :rofl:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/44387-convertibles/#findComment-907998
Share on other sites

some people are led to thinking that convertibles are lighter and therefore a bit quicker, when in actual reality, they are a tiny bit heavier because the roof which holds the whole car structure is gone, and heavy steel struts have to be inserted into the sides to strengthen the chassis. also some roofs have electric motors which adds to the weight. but hey if u like the wank factor, go 4 it

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/44387-convertibles/#findComment-908006
Share on other sites

some people are led to thinking that convertibles are lighter and therefore a bit quicker, when in actual reality, they are a tiny bit heavier because the roof which holds the whole car structure is gone, and heavy steel struts have to be inserted into the sides to strengthen the chassis. also some roofs have electric motors which adds to the weight. but hey if u like the wank factor, go 4 it

bahahaha... yes indeed.

electric roof + reinforcement + air conditioning sitting in there doing nothing except being heavy = 73 mustang

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/44387-convertibles/#findComment-908041
Share on other sites

there's a ghey SAU NSW running around in a ghey 350zx convertible... what was his name... like he din have "i'm goin thru a midlife crisis" written all over him :rofl:

Heyyyy that him in the pic!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/44387-convertibles/#findComment-908058
Share on other sites

Dunno why but i think the S13 convertible with either an S15 front bar or a 180SX front bar looks HOT. There was on at prestige a while ago with the 180 nose... sexy.
Wait till you drive one of those cvnts... lol my mate has one (green S14 convertible, 180sx front, number plate "ONEVIA" and yeah its a bit sluggish to maneuvre...
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/44387-convertibles/#findComment-908190
Share on other sites

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

    • It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about. Reliability of everything in a 34 drops MASSIVELY above the 300kw mark. Keeping everything going great at beyond that value will cost ten times the $. Clutches become shit, gearboxes (and engines/bottom ends) become consumable, traction becomes crap. The good news is looking legalish/actually being legal is slighly under the 300kw mark. I would make the assumption you want to ditch the stock plenum too and want to go a front facing unit of some description due to the cross flow. Do the bends on a return flow hurt? Not really. A couple of bends do make a difference but not nearly as much in a forced induction situation. Add 1psi of boost to overcome it. Nobody has ever gone and done a track session monitoring IAT then done a different session on a different intercooler and monitored IAT to see the difference here. All of the benefits here are likely in the "My engine is a forged consumable that I drive once a year because it needs a rebuild every year which takes 9 months of the year to complete" territory. It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about with this car.
    • By "reverse flow", do you mean "return flow"? Being the IC having a return pipe back behind the bumper reo, or similar? If so... I am currently making ~250 rwkW on a Neo at ~17-18 psi. With a return flow. There's nothing to indicate that it is costing me a lot of power at this level, and I would be surprised if I could not push it harder. True, I have not measured pressure drop across it or IAT changes, but the car does not seem upset about it in any way. I won't be bothering to look into it unless it starts giving trouble or doesn't respond to boost increases when I next put it on the dyno. FWIW, it was tuned with the boost controller off, so achieving ~15-16 psi on the wastegate spring alone, and it is noticeably quicker with the boost controller on and yielding a couple of extra pounds. Hence why I think it is doing OK. So, no, I would not arbitrarily say that return flows are restrictive. Yes, they are certainly restrictive if you're aiming for higher power levels. But I also think that the happy place for a street car is <300 rwkW anyway, so I'm not going to be aiming for power levels that would require me to change the inlet pipework. My car looks very stock, even though everything is different. The turbo and inlet pipes all look stock and run in the stock locations, The airbox looks stock (apart from the inlet being opened up). The turbo looks stock, because it's in the stock location, is the stock housings and can't really be seen anyway. It makes enough power to be good to drive, but won't raise eyebrows if I ever f**k up enough for the cops to lift the bonnet.
    • There is a guy who said he can weld me piping without having to cut chassis, maybe I do that ? Or do I just go reverse flow but isn’t reverse flow very limited once again? 
    • I haven’t yet cut the chassis, maybe I switch to a reverse flow. I’ve got the Intercooler mounted as I already had it but not cut yet. Might have to speak to an engineer 
    • Yes that’s another issue, I always have a front mount, plus will be turbo plus intake will big hasstle. I’ve been told if it looks stock they’re fine with it by a couple others who have done it ahahaha.    I know @Kinkstaah said the stock gtt airbox is limiting but I might just have to do that to avoid a defect so it atleast looks legit. Or an enclosed pod so it’s hidden away and feed air from the snorkel and below Intercooler holes like kinstaah mentioned. Hmm what to do 
×
×
  • Create New...