Terrible Car Stuff - Im sorry but in this thread we measure cargo capacity in shrimp

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > Terrible Car Stuff - Im sorry but in this thread we measure cargo capacity in shrimp

«‹›4 »

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

# ¿ Sep 30, 2012 07:18

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 10, 2024 00:49

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

ColdPie posted:

I know it's not very AI or whatever, but gently caress loud cars on the street. There's no excuse for a car or bike to be so loud that I can't carry on a conversation in my car when I'm driving next to yours.

Noise limits at the track are dumb, though.

I'm not a fan of lovely exhausts, but a nice mustang or something with a decent rumble is never a bad thing.

Maybe you should spend less time driving next to other people - safer, and you get to have a conversation too!

# ¿ Feb 14, 2014 02:38

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

That's ... downright lovely.

# ¿ Feb 14, 2014 03:05

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Brigdh posted:

The rare and elusive FDPreludeVette

All of which is all the sadder because

...

it's an MR2.

# ¿ Feb 14, 2014 07:47

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

# ¿ Feb 26, 2014 22:52

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

animeliker posted:

My MR2, 240SX, and Prelude don't it either? I agree that would be pretty abnormal.

My Jeep and Mustang don't either.

# ¿ Mar 28, 2014 22:04

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Das Volk posted:

That stupid ATM thing makes me think of

I just noticed that the dick has poo poo on it.

# ¿ Apr 19, 2014 18:11

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

atomicthumbs posted:

Pretty much any engine modification (unless the part is specifically approved by the California Air Review Board, for a specific model of car) is illegal. Motor swaps are fine.

No, they're not. How on earth did you get that idea?

# ¿ Apr 21, 2014 16:13

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

A very ugly Nissan Maxima; '04-'08.

# ¿ May 3, 2014 00:47

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Not gonna lie, I kinda hate you a little.

# ¿ May 5, 2014 21:49

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

They're certainly BIG fuckers.

# ¿ May 6, 2014 02:14

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Not running plates is illegal :confused:

Or are you just being sarcastic?

# ¿ May 16, 2014 16:08

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Crotch Fruit posted:

I was referring to the car to the left. Also, a combination of the colors in the middle of the plate area and extreme blurriness of the picture lead me to believe it was a covered plate.

Ah.

Not that it stops anybody, but they ARE illegal in California, at least:

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d03/vc5201.htm

# ¿ May 16, 2014 17:20

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

A Melted Tarp posted:

It's fine. Get rid of your beige 15" monitor.

It's actually pretty huge.

# ¿ May 16, 2014 17:45

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

SaNChEzZ posted:

I've had my dealer papers on for almost 3 years, which will be very hard to explain to an office if I get pulled over.

I see people doing this pretty frequently ( :ca:

here too) and I always wonder ... Why?

I drive like an absolute oval office (Das Volk amongst others here can testify to this) and I run plates. I can't imagine how not running plates (and, specifically, running the paper dealer logo plates) is a fashion statement or provides some legal benefit.

Unless ... Is it just so you can run red lights? (I ask because being able to get away with that seems to be the big selling point of the covers.)

# ¿ May 16, 2014 18:42

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Kill-9 posted:

Done this on more than one occasion during long road trips. Getting a bit hungry and you're somewhere in BFE Texas with no sign of civlization? Pop those leftover breakfast tacos on the manifold for 15 miles. Boom, a nice warm meal with notes of exhaust and engine coolant.

It's standard procedure during off-roading, too ... Mid to late morning you throw something wrapped in foil on your manifold, when you pull up to lunch everyone looks at you cross eyed because you just got there and your car smells more like food that whatever they're eating out of a plastic.

# ¿ May 25, 2014 17:02

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Yeah, my cousin shared it too. Basically.

I don't understand why people don't ever think these things through. It shows a picture of the wipers wiping (what I presume is supposed to be egg/water) and doing their job effectively.

Yep, sure can't see out of that truck.

# ¿ May 28, 2014 03:54

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Wasabi the J posted:

This has probably been posted before but it's never not funny.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4HSpx3aBq8

It's not funny.

It's hilarious.

# ¿ May 29, 2014 06:46

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

I don't care if he was speeding, this pedestrian better get the book thrown at them:

http://metro.co.uk/2014/05/30/angry-pedestrian-throws-rock-at-speeding-lamborghini-aventador-4744959/

# ¿ May 30, 2014 18:43

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Rhyno posted:

Something similar to this happened in Indianapolis last year but the dude used a BB gun instead of a rock. Kids kept using his street to race and he lost his poo poo one day.

Now, would we care as much if the dude was driving a Maxima?

I would still care just as much, yes. I have had people throw things at my car before, and it's not only severely uncool, it's dangerous.

The pedestrian might not have cared as much, which is a further reason they should be pressed with any and all charges which can be imagined.

# ¿ May 30, 2014 18:57

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Yeah, I'm not really sure a 0-60 run (looks like he did two gear changes then slowed down, but yes, a guess) on a 3 lanes each direction road qualifies as driving like a complete loving idiot.

Even if he was driving like a complete loving idiot, call the cops. Violence isn't the solution to this.

# ¿ May 30, 2014 19:20

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Geoj posted:

911 dispatcher: "did the speeding car cause an accident resulting in an injury? No? Have a nice day, sir. *click*"

*gets mad, attempts to hurt people*

It's up to the cops to enforce the law, not stupid men with rocks. That's part of the point of living in a civilized society.

Powershift posted:

If he launched properly after the lunatic with the rock stopped him, he could have outran the rock.

Probably. He was probably trying not to injure anybody :v:

# ¿ May 30, 2014 19:53

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Geoj posted:

Throwing a rock at the side of a car is infinitely worse than driving at highway speeds in a residential area.

I agree.

# ¿ May 30, 2014 20:01

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Geoj posted:

Have you ever been hit by a car, and spent over a week in the hospital as a result? I have. I've also had my car damaged before. I'll take having to have a window replaced over a skull fracture & concussion any day of the week. Not only is it cheaper, it's also a whole hell of a lot less painful.

I'm sure the elderly man throwing rocks at moving cars because he was angry has perfect aim, but what if he'd missed and hit the passenger?

Would you guys be all "yay vigilantism" then?

Violence is not the answer. Calling the cops and letting them handle it is. If you think they wouldn't handle it, you need to work on changing that process, not use violence to force your will on others.

# ¿ May 31, 2014 01:00

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Geoj posted:

If we're pulling hypotheticals out of our asses, if the driver had run over six children and their grandma would you be all "yay exotic car, driver gets a total pass for putting the public at risk" then?

The difference is that the Lambo driver chose a wide, clear street to do some non-specifically harmful behavior on, and the old man chose to specifically cause harm.

Intent matters quite a bit, and one of these scenarios is considerably more likely than the other.

I get you have a hard on about how dare someone speed NIMBY! but seriously, the lambo driver didn't deserve to be assaulted. Ticketed, yelled at? Absolutely.

# ¿ May 31, 2014 01:10

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Geoj posted:

This isn't a case of NIMBY. I simply do not deviate more than 5 MPH from the posted limit in residential zones, and I keep it within 10 MPH of the posted limit on the highway. Keeping my job - which requires I have a clean driving record - is a lot more important to me than inflating my ego or winning the red light to red light race.

And because you adhere to that, violence is warranted against anyone who doesn't?

Geoj posted:

So now having some minor physical damage done to your car is the same as being assaulted? Maybe we could keep stretching the law here and charge that guy with attempted murder...

No, throwing a rock at someone is assault.

Why are you guys so hung up on this "don't gently caress with someone's car" thing? It's not about the car getting damaged, it's not about the fact that it was a Lambo. Edit: of course, damaging the car is uncool and really, uncalled for, but it's not the problem.

It's about the fact that this cantankerous old gently caress (and, apparently, Geoj and SocketSeven) feels it appropriate to become violent when someone does something they don't like.

Krakkles fucked around with this message at 02:15 on May 31, 2014

# ¿ May 31, 2014 02:13

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

SocketSeven posted:

He threw a rock at a car. If it's alright for Palestinian children to do it, So can old dude.

Then take your attitude to Palestine. Here in the first world, there really isn't a place for it.

You cannot possibly pretend to know what he was trying to hit with the rock.

Edit: Here, enjoy a law I've successfully seen at least one person prosecuted under:

https://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc23110.htm

Note that it does not say "unless the driver of said vehicle was speeding or something". It's a loving felony for a loving reason, because it's loving dangerous.

Edit again: \/ good point. That SHOULD be an exclusion.

Krakkles fucked around with this message at 02:43 on May 31, 2014

# ¿ May 31, 2014 02:33

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

SocketSeven posted:

So why are you allowed to say he was throwing it at someone. Maybe he was throwing it at the ground and he just missed really badly.

He's an old man, he could have been demented and mad at the pavement.

gently caress that lambo and its driver. You know drat well nobody hauls off and throws a rock at a car or someones head because they did something once. The lambo is a habitual offender and finally got the wakeup call he deserved. Money doesn't make you invincible.

Hes lucky an old man taught him that, not a tree, or a cliff.

I don't have to, because the law does - he threw a rock at the car, he meant to, in California, at least, that would qualify as a felony.

And actually, I know drat well that people DO do poo poo like that. I had a guy throw a baseball bat at me in my car, because I (lawfully) passed him. I did not know him, I'd never met him before, I did not give him any reason to do this.

There is no reason to resort to violence as a result of someone speeding. If he was doing this habitually, it is trivial to get the police to enforce the law. They LOVE writing speeding tickets.

# ¿ May 31, 2014 02:59

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Is the irony that the car is Mini, but the picture is not?

e: Oh, sure, timg while I post. :mad:

# ¿ Jun 11, 2014 22:29

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Oh, I didn't realize the car had a leather interior.

# ¿ Jun 11, 2014 22:39

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

PCOS Bill posted:

I live in the ghetto, I doubt it was a goon. They die if removed from the suburbs.

Even from you, the utter lack of self-awareness is impressive.

# ¿ Aug 11, 2016 20:33

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

It must be because I own a Ford and a Chrysler (Jeep), but I can't remember the last time I used a 12mm.

10mm, 13mm all over the friggin' place. Not 12, though.

# ¿ Sep 15, 2016 05:59

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Memento posted:

The 10s and 12s in my toolbox are a disorganised mess, but every 13 is as clean as the driven snow.

I wonder if there's a clear reference somewhere for [x] car / brand uses [y] sizes. I know when I was putting my Jeep together, I spent about a year working on it, and spent a fair amount of time making sure I had a tool appropriate for every bolt on the thing.

The Mustang I know only because I keep breaking poo poo, so it's slightly less precise, but I still can't think of a single 12mm on it. What car(s) do you have that don't have 13s?

# ¿ Sep 15, 2016 07:04

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

um excuse me posted:

Haha I was rear ended a month into my WRX ownership. I'm part of the reason your insurance is so god drat expensive.

I'd be curious to see the actuarial justification for how a WRX is more likely to be rear-ended. I guess maybe if you have a tendency to tailgate and brake at the last minute? I'd think that would still be on the other driver behind you.

# ¿ Sep 15, 2016 19:54

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Raluek posted:

All I know is that a 1/2" wrench barely catches the tips of the nut, and will start to slip if I put any real force on it, whereas a 12mm wrench feels "correct" and will actually tighten down the fastener.

You're not wrong, his claim of interchangeable is. 12.7mm is 1/2". A 13mm wrench will generally work fine on a 1/2" nut/bolt. A 1/2" wrench may work on a 13mm nut/bolt, sometimes.

A 1/2" wrench should not ever work fine on a 12mm nut/bolt. But it's closer than a 13mm wrench!

# ¿ Sep 15, 2016 21:17

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

um excuse me posted:

The way insurance stats work, at least in CT is that is doesn't matter who hit who when making rates. Only when people submit claims.

That's terrible. Is there some benefit to the legislation that lead to that?

# ¿ Sep 16, 2016 01:47

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

drgitlin posted:

On top of that, i reckon 60% of Americans would fail a UK driving test. The parallel parking would be hard enough, but reversing around a corner? No chance.

The only part of this that I disagree with is the percentage. I�m positive it�s much higher.

# ¿ Jul 10, 2018 04:39

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

TotalLossBrain posted:

Jeep owners bring me never-ending material.

A bunch of Jeep owners are suing FCA over death wobble in Wranglers

Choice quotes:

The majority of these morons have bought some garbage rear end lift before the end of the first week, get their buddy Travis to install it, and then get rear end-mad over piss-poor handling.
Other Jeep morons, offering helpful advice: "It's a Jeep thing"

Agreed. I've got an XJ Cherokee with ~4-4.5" lift, and it will confidently pin the speedometer, and flex ~2'. But not, you know, at the same time. Meanwhile, everybody else, as you said ... "It couldn't possibly go over 60mph, it's a jeep thing, lol"

maybe I should put on that calvin sticker that says "I've got that jeep thing and it burns when I pee"

edit to add: I say this by way of - it's the difference between a "... garbage rear end lift ... [installed by] Travis ..." and "I spent 10k and a year of weekends building this with a professional 4x4 fabricator"

# ¿ Jun 14, 2019 20:23

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

angryrobots posted:

Is the doorless see Wrangler with booster seats really terrible car stuff? I feel like I would probably do that.

But I've also taken our family of 4 in the seat belt-less '65 C10 into town on the bench seat so my perspective may be skewed. I also live in BFE.

I'd do the doorless thing, in the right conditions (BFE being a solid part of that). The seat belt less thing is pretty terrible, though.

# ¿ Jun 14, 2019 23:36

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 10, 2024 00:49

Krakkles: May 5, 2003

Elviscat posted:

Real men don't wear full face helmets, they just chow down on that rock wall when they go into it head first

This was a vape pen: (GORE) (link redirected to hopefully block forum autorender: https://bit.ly/2J2V7mg )

# ¿ Jun 21, 2019 20:03

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > Terrible Car Stuff - Im sorry but in this thread we measure cargo capacity in shrimp

«‹›4 »