|
Sweet Jesus: http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BMW-KOENIG-635CSI-AUTO-62000-EXCELLENT-CONDITION-/232124890752    People are bidding on it.
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 04:28 |
|
|
slidebite posted:I never really cared much for the 924 or 944 but for some bizarre reason I would like a 968.  924's really are loving awful though
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:Sweet Jesus: its like someone put an rs200 through a taffy puller
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
BraveUlysses posted:
The 924 is a thing of beauty and I won't hear an ill word said against it. it really should've been an Audi or VW though. F1DriverQuidenBerg fucked around with this message at 20:03 on Oct 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 20:00
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:Sweet Jesus: Koenigs rule. You are required to keep a YELLO cassette in the Blankput at all times at max volume while wearing mirror shades and at least 10 grams of cocaine in the center console.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
1500quidporsche posted:The 924 is a thing of beauty and I won't hear an ill word said against it. it really should've been an Audi or VW though. If the 924 were badged as a Volkswagen it would be sold used for way more money on Kijiji.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 20:17
|
|
|
The market for Mk1 Sciroccos is just stupid, so ya the Porsche badge is depressing the price of the 924 if anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
FatCow posted:Seriously, you know that one of the NASCAR "cars" is the Camry, right? And before Camry/Fusion/SS it was Taurus, (FWD in stock form) Monte Carlo, some derpy FWD Dodge sedan. When was the last time a NASCAR Cup car had any real* resemblance to the road car? Fox-body Thunderbird? *Let's say "RWD V8 mostly shaped like the racecar" -- Cup cars were full-on tube chassis/cage by the late '60s, but had stock bodies into the late '80s. Tangent: I remember reading back in the mid-'90s that the only parts interchangeable between a roadgoing Mustang and its Cam-Am (another nominally "stock" class) counterpart were the taillight lenses. 1500quidporsche posted:Yeah it's very rare they'll disqualify a car once it's run unless it's something blatantly in contravention of the rules. Reminder that literally half the NASCAR rulebook when Smokey Yunick retired was "poo poo Smokey got away with once, which was instantly banned upon discovery." Memento posted:Mulsanne Straight isn't as fast as it used to be. Yeah, they put a chicane in it when the GT40s started hitting 210+mph. Cf. NASCAR restrictor plates, or NHRA cutting the distance for top fuel races back from a quarter-mile to an even thousand feet, because the cars were getting too fast. And now all of 'em are again getting damned close to the speeds that prompted the changes. Edit: Mulsanne got two chicanes in 1990, because gently caress it, people die at Le Mans all the time. They slowed down the GT40s with engine-size rules, then the cars with small engines got too good. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_iyTsuvuWI&t=57s Eventually, that video will get to the end of the Old Mulsanne, but the point is theres a sharp curve at the end and they'd have to throw out the anchor and get it down from 200+mph to 45 or 50. 
Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 20:37 on Oct 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 20:25
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
I'd say the last NASCAR car that sorta was like it's road-going counterpart was the MN12 Thunderbird. But even then not really.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:If the 924 were badged as a Volkswagen it would be sold used for way more money on Kijiji. Ironic and true
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:Sweet Jesus: Throw some ridiculous boso exhaust pipes on this and I would drive it every single day
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
The only good Koenig is Walter.Seat Safety Switch posted:If the 924 were badged as a Volkswagen it would be sold used for way more money on Kijiji.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
 Also people who refuse to tun their lights on in the rain.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
The lack of overspray and rotor shaped boxes suggest it's a joke involving rotors which arrived with the temporary anti-corrosion coating with an unrelated can of plastidip placed between them for humor. I am therefore calling shenanigans.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
Powershift posted:The lack of overspray and rotor shaped boxes suggest it's a joke involving rotors which arrived with the temporary anti-corrosion coating with an unrelated can of plastidip placed between them for humor. I am therefore calling shenanigans. I can't find the source, but you are correct.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 22:11
|
|
|
1500quidporsche posted:No but calling it affordable is. The funny thing is that the 944 (especially the S and Turbo models) was just as fast as the contemporary 911 in a lot of ways, but because it doesn't have the body of history that the 911 has, it isn't fetishised the same way at all. The other neat thing about the 944 is that they are hot-dip galvanised; you could park one under the sea and it wouldn't corrode.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
Seat Safety Switch posted:If the 924 were badged as a Volkswagen it would be sold used for way more money on Kijiji. I know a guy that races a 924 for fun, he beats the crap out of that thing. Supposedly you can bolt in an Audi 5 cylinder into it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 03:21
|
|
|
MrChips posted:The funny thing is that the 944 (especially the S and Turbo models) was just as fast as the contemporary 911 in a lot of ways, but because it doesn't have the body of history that the 911 has, it isn't fetishised the same way at all. I don't think I knew that about the hot-dipping. I presume they didn't do that to the 924? I've seem some pretty ratty ones. Actually, now that I think of it I could swear I saw some rusty 944's too but maybe I am mistaken. IIRC rumour had it a 968 Turbo version was in the making in the early 90s but when they tested it, it obliterated the 928 and 911 and came way too close for comfort to the 930 of the time. Supposedly, that was the main reason they shitcanned it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
e: you can buy this right now http://www.gmundcars.com/cars/5075/Porsche_924_DP_Cargo ee: not new post gently caress sorry
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 03:44
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure it was just the 944s that got it, if you get in a crash or ding a door it'll rust from that spot though, Audi's of the the same vintage had the same thing. I think Porsche was kinda secretly expecting the 911 to still get killed off by legislation well into the 80s and was just trying to prolong it's life. The 928 was around long past its sell by date and I'm pretty sure that was just so they'd have something to sell as a flagship until they could figure out their next move.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 03:45
|
|
|
iospace posted:
Burnin' rubber!
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 03:56
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:
That definitely doesn't help matters, no. Code Jockey posted:Throw some ridiculous boso exhaust pipes on this and I would drive it every single day I was thinking it needed some deeeeeeeeeeeep section oldschool Japanese rims like these  and boso pipes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 08:31
|
|
|
kastein posted:PT Cruisers and HHRs are great because they are ugly rear end cars I don't mind people murdering for their drivetrains, and a beat up rusty granny-DUI K-car with a 2.4L turbo engine is something I want to see. I was all set to say the HHR never got anything interesting under the hood, but apparently they made an SS version with the 2.0 LNF. 260 loving horsepower with 260 ft/lbs from a 2.0, bone stock.  For some reason I thought the LNF put down similar numbers to the LSJ. Nope, 55 hp/60 ft/lb difference! So my own terrible car stuff bit, I guess... I knew Rolls Royce used GM transmissions for awhile. That's not terrible, TH400's were pretty robust and more than capable of that kind of weight. What I didn't know is RR also used GM radios in the mid 80s. Ran across an article yesterday about an 86 Silver Spirit, and the interior photos showed a GM corporate 1.5 DIN radio. Google revealed that.... this was by design.  It just looks so out of place...
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 11:24
|
|
|
One of my co-workers revealed that he doesn't use his high beams, ever. I don't need them much with all the surface streets that are lighted around here, but it's not that uncommon to be on a road without any.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 11:37
|
|
|
I once saw a coworker pulling in (at night) with just his parking lights and daytime running lights. DRLs on his vehicle were the headlights run at a very low brightness (Chevy S-10). I asked him why he was driving with just his parking lights. He said those were his low beams, and said the lights were so dim because "it's an old truck" (it was an early to mid 90s). So I asked him to show me how he switched between his high beams and low beams. He reached up to the dash and turned on the headlights and said those were his high beams, then turned them off (then turned the parking lights back on) when I asked him how he switched to low beams.  The look on his face when I showed him how to use the high beam switch...  Seems like these days everyone drives with their high beams on and doesn't give two shits about blinding everyone though. And of every car I see driving with high beams on, about 3/4 of them are 8th and 9th gen Civics for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 12:30
|
|
|
Everyone here drives lifted trucks with non-adjusted headlights, and get mad when they constantly get high-beamed by oncoming traffic. I've mentioned it to a couple guys I work with when they complain about it, and the answer is always "Oh well, gently caress it". In truth they like non physical confrontation to stroke their ego, and get satisfaction from blinding everyone.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 12:47
|
|
|
angryrobots posted:Everyone here drives lifted trucks with non-adjusted headlights, and get mad when they constantly get high-beamed by oncoming traffic. It's a shame that the states with inspections won't actually fail people for this. I suppose unless a state employee with no financial motive is on site nothing would change.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 13:00
|
|
|
I've noticed so many people driving without any lights recently, I mean mine are so lovely it's like they're off a lot of the time but I actually flick the switch so other cars can at least see me well enough.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 14:37
|
|
|
Olympic Mathlete posted:I've noticed so many people driving without any lights recently, I mean mine are so lovely it's like they're off a lot of the time but I actually flick the switch so other cars can at least see me well enough. I maintain this started when everyone's dash started being lit 24/7 whenever the car is on. Time was you could look down and go "I can't see my dash! Oh, the lights are off" and turn your headlights on. Now, with the dash lit all the time and DRLs you never know your headlights are off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 15:40
|
|
|
I'm terrible car stuff sometimes because I leave my lights on auto most of the time. Then, when it's borderline dark, or raining, I'll manually turn them on then forget that the switch is on for days. It's terrible because it's just absent mindedness due to me mostly relying on the auto sensing function. But at least it's absent minded in a safer direction.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
Which is why a phototransistor should be standard equipment that turns the drat things on when it gets dark. They can mandate DRLs, and they can mandate backup cameras, and they can mandate electric vehicles to play noises from a speaker when it's below 16 mph, but they can't mandate automatic headlights using technology that's existed since the 1940's? I know automatic headlights are out there and have been done with varying amounts of success but there's no reason for it to not be a solved problem here in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
Or it could be done like in Scandinavia, where you just have to have your lights on all the time. I believe they sell models there that can't even turn them off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
wayfinder posted:Or it could be done like in Scandinavia, where you just have to have your lights on all the time. I believe they sell models there that can't even turn them off. Would never fly in the US, when DRL's were up for regulation people legitimately made the argument that it shouldn't be done because of all the millions of dollars it would cost nationwide to replace lightbulbs that burnt out earlier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 16:47
|
|
|
Exploit the class-consciousness of the average consumer. Make vehicles with DRL always on unless you're running headlights. Then make the DRLs on all but the top-spec model obviously different but only when they're lit. Everyone else will run headlights all the time so as to hide their shame at not having the 'best' model.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 16:56
|
|
|
wayfinder posted:Or it could be done like in Scandinavia, where you just have to have your lights on all the time. I believe they sell models there that can't even turn them off. Yep, quite a few cars, even imported ones, sold in Sweden always have the low beams on, unless you set it to parking lights (which are not technically legal to drive with). Though Volvo for a long time (at least during 80s) didn't.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 17:02
|
|
|
I default to having dipped beans on most of the time, day or night. Sidelights on most cars (older, pre led at least) are night on useless at distance. I only tend to turn them off if I'm behind long row of cars that I'm not planning to overtake to save antagonising the person in front. It mostly comes from driving the a9 up to Inverness, which is wide, fast mostly single carriageway road but windy enough to make overtaking challenging, and prone to sketch manoeuvres. You can't typically see cars well round the long sweeping curves unless they have dipped beams on, so I like to be super visible in case somebody is doing something silly. I drive lots of single track stuff too, where being extra visible is a very good idea. Edit: I think in the UK you can legally drive at night with just sidelights in streetlit area, which is pretty stupid. stump fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Oct 27, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
HOW ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO HAVE A GHOST CAR IF THE LIGHTS DON'T TURN OFF?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 17:05
|
|
|
stump posted:I default to having dipped beans on most of the time, day or night. Sidelights on most cars (older, pre led at least) are night on useless at distance. I only tend to turn them off if I'm behind long row of cars that I'm not planning to overtake to save antagonising the person in front. I hate that road.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
One thing I've noticed whilst heading to work as it's darker later is that even when the street lights are off and I can see for a mile, cars that have auto headlights or LED DRLs still have them on, which causes cyclists without lights or with lovely ones to just disappear in the dazzle. ...which is dangerous.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 17:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 28, 2024 04:28 |
|
|
Olympic Mathlete posted:which causes cyclists without lights or with lovely ones to just disappear in the dazzle. They should get lights too, or don't be on the road during non-daylight. Cheap led bike lights are amazingly visible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 17:22
|
|