Unsafe Mods - Extreme Dubs / Drifters / Stance etc.
Discussion
I have no issue with people modding their cars like this. However when they turn round and say they still handle etc I just laugh.
I think the stretched tyres, which more often than not are cheap or part worns, are dangerous. There is a member of a club I'm in, it's a euro club, and we suggested a meet up and drive. Apparently his car handles like it's on rails. Mk3 golf, slammed on the floor and massive wheels with stretch.
I had to resist facepalming.
The other thing that puzzles me is those who spend thousands on turbos, engine upgrades etc but then put nangkangs or part worns on and put the car on the floor so it scrapes.
Why go to the effort of the doing the performance side of things when you can't, in most not all cases, drive it at normal road speeds let alone at higher speeds.
I think the stretched tyres, which more often than not are cheap or part worns, are dangerous. There is a member of a club I'm in, it's a euro club, and we suggested a meet up and drive. Apparently his car handles like it's on rails. Mk3 golf, slammed on the floor and massive wheels with stretch.
I had to resist facepalming.
The other thing that puzzles me is those who spend thousands on turbos, engine upgrades etc but then put nangkangs or part worns on and put the car on the floor so it scrapes.
Why go to the effort of the doing the performance side of things when you can't, in most not all cases, drive it at normal road speeds let alone at higher speeds.
Reechard said:
The other thing that puzzles me is those who spend thousands on turbos, engine upgrades etc but then put nangkangs or part worns on and put the car on the floor so it scrapes.
The minute your car leaves the ramp on it's new tyres they become part worn, so I'm not sure what the issue is with part worns.Surprised no-one has posted this car yet:
My apologies if someone has already posted it, its after 1:30am, Im off work tomo, and Ive had one or two Johnnie Walkers.
This has to be one of the silliest 'stance' cars out there.
Having owned 2 Gen 7 Celicas (one of which was 'tastefully' modified with Tein coilovers, Work split-rims etc), I know that they are one of the sweeter 90s/00s Jap coupes when it comes to handling, and it makes me kind of sad knowing that someone would care little enough about Toyotas efforts to make it drive nicely to do this to it.
For me it comes down to deliberately making the contact patch too small, and therefore reducing practicality/ drivability/ safety. Like anything in the 'modding' world, there is a spectrum with a point at which the car transitions from functional to purely fashion. This point will be different for different people according to taste/ intelligence.
Ive seen cars with large camber/ stretch/ stance that look great and suit the car, and may actually still drive reasonably well.
The only excuse I can see for something like the car above is if it is used as a marketing/ advertising/ attention grabbing tool for a garage of parts manufacturer. To drive something like that daily or try to defend the way it drives or how safe it is would make me consider the driver a bit of a silly sausage.
As mentioned already, the fact that anyone driving something heavily stanced will likely be using relatively poor tyres due to excessive wear also diminishes any credibility for 'scene' cars like this. Having said that, Im not sure Id have any more respect for someone with a stance like that running really good tyres either...
My apologies if someone has already posted it, its after 1:30am, Im off work tomo, and Ive had one or two Johnnie Walkers.
This has to be one of the silliest 'stance' cars out there.
Having owned 2 Gen 7 Celicas (one of which was 'tastefully' modified with Tein coilovers, Work split-rims etc), I know that they are one of the sweeter 90s/00s Jap coupes when it comes to handling, and it makes me kind of sad knowing that someone would care little enough about Toyotas efforts to make it drive nicely to do this to it.
For me it comes down to deliberately making the contact patch too small, and therefore reducing practicality/ drivability/ safety. Like anything in the 'modding' world, there is a spectrum with a point at which the car transitions from functional to purely fashion. This point will be different for different people according to taste/ intelligence.
Ive seen cars with large camber/ stretch/ stance that look great and suit the car, and may actually still drive reasonably well.
The only excuse I can see for something like the car above is if it is used as a marketing/ advertising/ attention grabbing tool for a garage of parts manufacturer. To drive something like that daily or try to defend the way it drives or how safe it is would make me consider the driver a bit of a silly sausage.
As mentioned already, the fact that anyone driving something heavily stanced will likely be using relatively poor tyres due to excessive wear also diminishes any credibility for 'scene' cars like this. Having said that, Im not sure Id have any more respect for someone with a stance like that running really good tyres either...
SMcP114 said:
The minute your car leaves the ramp on it's new tyres they become part worn, so I'm not sure what the issue is with part worns.
They're a known quantity. I'd sooner have a 'part worn' Michelin on my car that I had worn in myself from new, than a Nankang slider special, picked up as part of a mismatched set with 3mm of tread left on it.But then I wouldn't countenance driving one of those 'dub' heaps of st on the road either.
AER said:
Anyone got reliable statistics on how much of a risk/problem this actually is?
Yeah.. going by the previous post where the guy said his mate had his tyres pop off the rims several times: let's take "several times" to be at least 5, and compare it to my tyres, which have popped off the rims 0 times, you're 500% more likely to have your tyres pop off when stretched to buggery. You're also 17 million times more likely to look like a complete tool.
AER said:
This argument is more about the anally retentive and control freakery wanting the world to conform to their own views. There should be a law against it!
Nice oxymoron. It isn't about that, though.. it's about modifications that make a car completely impractical, if not downright dangerous to drive; all for the sake of a "look". I'm all for freedom of expression, but there has to be a limit of what is acceptable on a public road. Other people don't have to like your silly look, but they do have to drive in the vicinity of it, and if your tyres are going to explode off the rims the moment you exceed 35mph or clip a cat's eye then you're being pretty irresponsible at best.
Edited by CamMoreRon on Wednesday 11th June 08:02
CamMoreRon said:
Yeah.. going by the previous post where the guy said his mate had his tyres pop off the rims several times: let's take "several times" to be at least 5, and compare it to my tyres, which have popped off the rims 0 times, you're 500% more likely to have your tyres pop off when stretched to buggery.
Umm, not to be pedantic or anything - but if yours had popped off once, and his five times - THEN his would be 500% more likely. Since yours haven't popped off at all, it's not possible to calculate a percentage.You're right! Ok let's take the one blow-out I had out of some 2,000 motorway journeys to make a probability of failure with properly fitted tyres to be 0.0005, then let's make a conservative guess that the guy's rims pop off once every 100 journeys - based on the "every now and then" - to make a probability of 0.01; His 0.01 divided by my 0.0005 = 2000% more likely to fail.
mwstewart said:
There's quite enough governance and bureaucracy at the minute thank you. I certainly don't want another check each ear that would ruin it for people like me who modify cars sensibly.
Since your car already gets a check each year - and since you modify sensibly - is there really much to worry about? It's not like it's any extra effort or requirement on your part, and it's not as if your sensible mods would fail...I like the look of race cars, so i can understand how people have sought to replicate the look for the road. It's the same reason why concept cars tend to have big wheels and no arch gaps. If people are willing to put up with the compromise, then fair play to them in my book.
I've also never personally never seen a car over here take it to the extremes the Japanese and Americans do. Also, worth pointing out in Japan they make it look ridiculous on purpose; they know it looks silly - that's the point!
So, really, this thread sounds like a bunch of old men making a fuss about nothing, in my view.
I've also never personally never seen a car over here take it to the extremes the Japanese and Americans do. Also, worth pointing out in Japan they make it look ridiculous on purpose; they know it looks silly - that's the point!
So, really, this thread sounds like a bunch of old men making a fuss about nothing, in my view.
Lawbags said:
Not all suspension reduces travel as you lower them.
This is what I run and regardless of how low, the travel stays the same.
Your potential travel is still reduced though, governed by the wheels fouling on stuff In the wheel arch or the car scraping on the road after every speed bump, which is what the dubsters seem to do. This is what I run and regardless of how low, the travel stays the same.
It's a shame people equate 'lower' to mean 'better handling' when it is pretty much always going to be worse.
daveofedinburgh said:
Surprised no-one has posted this car yet:
My apologies if someone has already posted it, its after 1:30am, Im off work tomo, and Ive had one or two Johnnie Walkers.
This has to be one of the silliest 'stance' cars out there.
Having owned 2 Gen 7 Celicas (one of which was 'tastefully' modified with Tein coilovers, Work split-rims etc), I know that they are one of the sweeter 90s/00s Jap coupes when it comes to handling, and it makes me kind of sad knowing that someone would care little enough about Toyotas efforts to make it drive nicely to do this to it.
For me it comes down to deliberately making the contact patch too small, and therefore reducing practicality/ drivability/ safety. Like anything in the 'modding' world, there is a spectrum with a point at which the car transitions from functional to purely fashion. This point will be different for different people according to taste/ intelligence.
Ive seen cars with large camber/ stretch/ stance that look great and suit the car, and may actually still drive reasonably well.
The only excuse I can see for something like the car above is if it is used as a marketing/ advertising/ attention grabbing tool for a garage of parts manufacturer. To drive something like that daily or try to defend the way it drives or how safe it is would make me consider the driver a bit of a silly sausage.
As mentioned already, the fact that anyone driving something heavily stanced will likely be using relatively poor tyres due to excessive wear also diminishes any credibility for 'scene' cars like this. Having said that, Im not sure Id have any more respect for someone with a stance like that running really good tyres either...
It's been updated since those photos:My apologies if someone has already posted it, its after 1:30am, Im off work tomo, and Ive had one or two Johnnie Walkers.
This has to be one of the silliest 'stance' cars out there.
Having owned 2 Gen 7 Celicas (one of which was 'tastefully' modified with Tein coilovers, Work split-rims etc), I know that they are one of the sweeter 90s/00s Jap coupes when it comes to handling, and it makes me kind of sad knowing that someone would care little enough about Toyotas efforts to make it drive nicely to do this to it.
For me it comes down to deliberately making the contact patch too small, and therefore reducing practicality/ drivability/ safety. Like anything in the 'modding' world, there is a spectrum with a point at which the car transitions from functional to purely fashion. This point will be different for different people according to taste/ intelligence.
Ive seen cars with large camber/ stretch/ stance that look great and suit the car, and may actually still drive reasonably well.
The only excuse I can see for something like the car above is if it is used as a marketing/ advertising/ attention grabbing tool for a garage of parts manufacturer. To drive something like that daily or try to defend the way it drives or how safe it is would make me consider the driver a bit of a silly sausage.
As mentioned already, the fact that anyone driving something heavily stanced will likely be using relatively poor tyres due to excessive wear also diminishes any credibility for 'scene' cars like this. Having said that, Im not sure Id have any more respect for someone with a stance like that running really good tyres either...
I've often wondered what it's like to drive.
Trustmeimadoctor said:
bring the german mot thing over here that would sort it out not our half arsed mot that you dont even need an engine in the car to pass if teh car is pre god know what
If we bring in that german test most cars with engine mods will fail so let the germans keep it in Japan the MOT is much more stringent than ours so if they're passing then leave them to it.Being an Individual doesn't make you a cretin probably costs a fortune in suspension & drivetrain upgrades.
TooMany2cvs said:
Andy616 said:
I've often wondered what it's like to drive.
Still not as silly as this one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgIrDyUEBjY
Andy616 said:
What on earth will his mum say.Andy616 said:
That was just left over after they took the protective tape off as it was rushed to make the Tokyo Auto Salon. It gets driven: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhT3C9mHLZ4
Note only does it look like st, it sounds like it's trying to have one but only succeeds in a wet fart.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff