Jump to content
SAU Community

  

170 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I know this is a trend, but I definately found the old system much easier to use.

the thing I dont particularly like about the new system is that items are arranged by the number of views??? or am I just imagineing it? I liked that with the old system, to keep up with what was new, you just had to check back regularly.

Am I missing something - if this could be addressed (ie, easier to find the latest offerings) I would like the new system alot better.

If I am missing something, an easy way to view new items, please let me know.

Either that, or would it be possible to be able to search for new items, perhaps by date, so time isnt spent sifting through things that have already been viewed.

Once again, if this is already possible, please disregard and sorry for wasting your time.

cheers

I can see the advantage of the new trading system where the ads are all displayed in a cleaner layout, with the ability to browse by pictures.. but I guess the old system works well and is what people are familiar with.

A good example is www.firesport.com - this site is nice and simple but it's designed well for quick, easy selling of your goods.

  • 1 month later...

Any possibility of getting a new link on the trader ratings page?

IE hellrazorettes trader ratings> 'current items for sale' (under 'send an email' tag perhaps?) etc. Like other auction type sites..

Once you leave positive feedback after a good transaction, you have to go through view profile>find all threads> etc etc to find what else they have on sale, kinda annoying.

(Unless I'm wrong). :D

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...