Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I had the factory Reinforcement bar modified to suit the FMIC. was a very neat job too.

However when I went to another place to get the front bumper painted and fitted they removed the Reinforcement bar to fit and attached the FMIC to the headlights.

Now the front end of the car is drooping and not looking good.

Some places will make a custom bar to support the intercooler and fit whatever bumper you have.

In my opinion in the long run it's best to have all the support you can.

Funny enough, i just discovered the other day that mine has been hacked off. I tool the front bar off (to do some repairs.... big chunk of skirt ripped off coming out of my driveway, as i had to turn sharper due to a c0ck in a 4wd opposite me!!!)

But yeah, middle section has been cut, between the headlights... my front bar hangs a bit too..

And i don't have a front mount!

I've seen a couple of bumpers on occasions where the original area where the number plate sits gets cut out to get more air flow to the FMIC and the number plate side mounted. This could only be done if the front end support bar is removed or hacked away.

I imagine leaving it off would not be the greatest idea because of the damage that could be sustained in a front end collision but it allows a FMIC to be fitted much more freely less weight in the front end and different bumpers can be fitted without exposing the front end support bar.

Wonder if I should remove mine....

i fitted my cooler over the wkend and i had to undo the two bolts on each side of the re inforcemnet bar n lift it slightly foward to get my cooler to site right...

Also to get it in with a stock front bar i had to cut out around the mouldings in the centre (where the actual cooler sits) and under the spot lights/blinkers i cut out a around 80mm out so the piping could run properly and the front bar sits as per factory

96086f16.jpg

4a2dcec6.jpg

I would suggest leaving the front reo bar on and just cutting it a LITTLE BIT.

If you run up someones arse while driving u are going to do untold damage without the bar in place.

Remove it at ur own risk but i know that i wont be doing it on my car :)

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...