Pictures of 'Stanced' cars
Discussion
It's easy to understand why "stanced" cars appeal...Every modification takes its "inspiration" from race cars!
Race cars are extremely low, to lower the centre of gravity. Most race cars run quite a bit of negative camber for better traction through corners. A stretched tyre comes from the drifting scene as the sidewall behaviour will affect the tyre to be more predictable whilst undergoing hard work.
They've just taken all of the above to much more extreme levels to be a cartoonesque feature of the above. It's just a bit of fun after all...
It may just be for aesthetics, for those who appreciate such a thing, and nice cars are nice to look at regardless of if they're meant to be driven hard. How many of the central London owned supercars are bought to be used to their full potential, rather than as mobile works of art for people to enjoy watching?
And yes, I do own a stanced car (lol) with adjustable air suspension. I have three heights programmed in, High, to avoid speed bumps and dips in the road, although the handling is awful due to the POSITIVE camber that occurs. Medium which is low, but perfect for fast road driving (have a 400hp single turbo'd Toyota Aristo, and then "Slammed y0!" (lol) for hard parking.
Race cars are extremely low, to lower the centre of gravity. Most race cars run quite a bit of negative camber for better traction through corners. A stretched tyre comes from the drifting scene as the sidewall behaviour will affect the tyre to be more predictable whilst undergoing hard work.
They've just taken all of the above to much more extreme levels to be a cartoonesque feature of the above. It's just a bit of fun after all...
It may just be for aesthetics, for those who appreciate such a thing, and nice cars are nice to look at regardless of if they're meant to be driven hard. How many of the central London owned supercars are bought to be used to their full potential, rather than as mobile works of art for people to enjoy watching?
And yes, I do own a stanced car (lol) with adjustable air suspension. I have three heights programmed in, High, to avoid speed bumps and dips in the road, although the handling is awful due to the POSITIVE camber that occurs. Medium which is low, but perfect for fast road driving (have a 400hp single turbo'd Toyota Aristo, and then "Slammed y0!" (lol) for hard parking.
lamduong said:
It's easy to understand why "stanced" cars appeal...Every modification takes its "inspiration" from race cars!
Race cars are extremely low, to lower the centre of gravity. Most race cars run quite a bit of negative camber for better traction through corners. A stretched tyre comes from the drifting scene as the sidewall behaviour will affect the tyre to be more predictable whilst undergoing hard work.
They've just taken all of the above to much more extreme levels to be a cartoonesque feature of the above. It's just a bit of fun after all...
It may just be for aesthetics, for those who appreciate such a thing, and nice cars are nice to look at regardless of if they're meant to be driven hard. How many of the central London owned supercars are bought to be used to their full potential, rather than as mobile works of art for people to enjoy watching?
And yes, I do own a stanced car (lol) with adjustable air suspension. I have three heights programmed in, High, to avoid speed bumps and dips in the road, although the handling is awful due to the POSITIVE camber that occurs. Medium which is low, but perfect for fast road driving (have a 400hp single turbo'd Toyota Aristo, and then "Slammed y0!" (lol) for hard parking.
Throw up some pictures, sounds pretty mega!Race cars are extremely low, to lower the centre of gravity. Most race cars run quite a bit of negative camber for better traction through corners. A stretched tyre comes from the drifting scene as the sidewall behaviour will affect the tyre to be more predictable whilst undergoing hard work.
They've just taken all of the above to much more extreme levels to be a cartoonesque feature of the above. It's just a bit of fun after all...
It may just be for aesthetics, for those who appreciate such a thing, and nice cars are nice to look at regardless of if they're meant to be driven hard. How many of the central London owned supercars are bought to be used to their full potential, rather than as mobile works of art for people to enjoy watching?
And yes, I do own a stanced car (lol) with adjustable air suspension. I have three heights programmed in, High, to avoid speed bumps and dips in the road, although the handling is awful due to the POSITIVE camber that occurs. Medium which is low, but perfect for fast road driving (have a 400hp single turbo'd Toyota Aristo, and then "Slammed y0!" (lol) for hard parking.
Scrambled said:
Trying to twist my words in a vague attempt to make them support your views. Re-read my comment and try again.
No i'm not, i'm simply saying that cars that have been made to be drivers cars, 90% of the time, look a lot better in standard form than a lower spec car. Take the Clio you mentioned. A 172/182/197 looks a lot better in standard form than a low spec 1.2 due to the bumpers, arches, sills and exhausts etc. So you might as well start with something that already looks good. And before you start, I haven't dismissed your point, I've simply explained why some people might stance so called 'drivers' cars.
Some Sunday afternoons I collect a friend from a local market where he works; as such I wait for him in the adjoining McDonald's car park.
There are quite regularly a fairly sizeable collection of these abominations present. What strikes me above everything else is the age of the attendees; there are very few present not late 20s and above. I find it quite sad that men of such age are still up to such limited means attention whoring. It's pathetic.
For the under 25s, I can empathise; we were all young once and did stupid things in the name of rebellion and seeking attention (whether positive or negative).
There are quite regularly a fairly sizeable collection of these abominations present. What strikes me above everything else is the age of the attendees; there are very few present not late 20s and above. I find it quite sad that men of such age are still up to such limited means attention whoring. It's pathetic.
For the under 25s, I can empathise; we were all young once and did stupid things in the name of rebellion and seeking attention (whether positive or negative).
I find this entire scene fascinating and it's something I'm really on board with.
Let me start one observation: from the "stancers" (urgh, terrible word, I use it for lack of a better way of saying it) I see huge enthusiasm, encouragement of diversity, appreciation for the work being done properly, constant strive to improve, and an overall extremely welcoming feel.
From the "non-stancers" I see hate, derision, discouragement of striving for better, assuming the worst of people with no evidence whatsoever, and an overall feeling of intolerance.
I consider myself something of an outsider, I've not fitted coilovers and slammed my car because I value its driveability too much, but I very much appreciate those who are willing to put up with it in the name of aesthetics.
First things first: the end goal of the stance theme is NOT "lower the car to touch the ground, fit huge wheels with tiny tyres, camber as much as possible, who cares how it drives".
It is simply "build a car with a great stance on the road". Hence, the name. Now this is achieved using the methods above, but it's not about the method, it's about the end goal.
Let me give you an example with two STANDARD cars:
This A6 has a weak stance. Its wheels are sunken into the body and very small, its ride height is high. It looks like a purely functional car for going to the shops.
This car has a much stronger stance - and yet it's completely standard. Its wheels are larger and sit out further (making them optically slightly bigger than if they were as sunken as before), and its ride height is slightly lower (also visually emphasising the wheel size).
So you can see this is the start of a particular path of progression, and the stance cars build from here. As I said the goal is not to simply have as big a wheel as possible or as much negative camber as possible - although that does come into it when people start pushing the limits of what's possible on the particular chassis, but for me that's just playful competition that you get in any group of likeminded individuals - the end goal is that it must always LOOK good.
For me, the ideal look is when the full wheel and tyre is just about visible. When the wheel starts getting obscured by the arch, that's too much for me. But no hate or derision goes on - some people like that and some people don't, that's OK. I start to mentally class them in with traditional lowriders.
With regards to unsafe fitment by tyres rubbing all over the shop, doing it on the cheap, and undriveability, I don't find that's really the case. People fitting budget coilovers are generally encouraged toward the better (yet more expensive) models with proven track records. People doing it hugely on the cheap (like that one strut top spaced out with about 8 nuts, posted a few pages ago) are heavily looked down upon. On the subject of driveability, a large percentage of these guys drive the cars daily (perfectly possible for most folk, you just have to take a bit more care on speedbumps, perhaps plot a route that avoids them) and lots of them enjoy thrashing them - at least, those who aren't in VWs. Nothing personal, just an observation - I don't think there's anything wrong with just enjoying looking at the car.
This guy:
Daily drives this MR2 on potholed LA freeways - 20,000 miles a year if I recall correctly - and enjoys driving hard; his car is tuned to 300hp. No blowouts or issues since he started running this kind of extreme stance several years ago. It's a little too much for me, personally - I love how high the wheels sit relative to the body, but I would cut the wheelarches higher to expose the tyre - that's just me.
This car, which many will be familiar with:
Drove nowhere except at 10/10ths - maximum attack on canyon roads.
I think those who assume the lowered car cannot be driven properly have not really experienced it being executed properly. Most people who have lowered a car have stuck lowering springs on standard dampers, felt how terrible that can be, and never gone back. But modern adjustable coilovers are very very good, the ride quality (as I understand it) is controlled independently from the ride height meaning no compromise is made there - so it's just a case of how low you dare to go.
These guys don't tolerate rubbing - especially not dangerous rubbing - and go to great lengths to maximise the space inside the arches, so even these absurd fitments don't rub on anything - although the ones that tuck the wheel lip outside the arch and the tyre inside the arch are probably an exception and have to run very stiff suspension to avoid rub - most of them are carefully calculated so that with the camber on the wheel and the slight angle to the sidewall, as the wheel travels upward it rotates and clears the body by a hair's breadth.
The scene is very tolerant and appreciates diversity - for example these guys idolise racing cars as much as any "standard" petrolhead does, it's not inward-looking. Stanceworks for example has in the last few months run articles on the new Z4 GTE racer, slightly older BMW V12 LMR, and a 1925 Bugatti Type 35 (none of these were "slammed" by a scenester, for the record!). The church welcomes not just tatty VW Golfs but everything from that 1925 Bugatti to hot rods to people carriers - if it looks great, it is appreciated. And that's the general vibe of the scene. Yes there may be some intolerant sub-sets but broadly I find that's not the case.
Oh, and why do they "ruin" great cars like 911s and NSXs? Because those are great looking and driving cars already, and they want to make them look even better (and drive just as well)!
Let me start one observation: from the "stancers" (urgh, terrible word, I use it for lack of a better way of saying it) I see huge enthusiasm, encouragement of diversity, appreciation for the work being done properly, constant strive to improve, and an overall extremely welcoming feel.
From the "non-stancers" I see hate, derision, discouragement of striving for better, assuming the worst of people with no evidence whatsoever, and an overall feeling of intolerance.
I consider myself something of an outsider, I've not fitted coilovers and slammed my car because I value its driveability too much, but I very much appreciate those who are willing to put up with it in the name of aesthetics.
First things first: the end goal of the stance theme is NOT "lower the car to touch the ground, fit huge wheels with tiny tyres, camber as much as possible, who cares how it drives".
It is simply "build a car with a great stance on the road". Hence, the name. Now this is achieved using the methods above, but it's not about the method, it's about the end goal.
Let me give you an example with two STANDARD cars:
This A6 has a weak stance. Its wheels are sunken into the body and very small, its ride height is high. It looks like a purely functional car for going to the shops.
This car has a much stronger stance - and yet it's completely standard. Its wheels are larger and sit out further (making them optically slightly bigger than if they were as sunken as before), and its ride height is slightly lower (also visually emphasising the wheel size).
So you can see this is the start of a particular path of progression, and the stance cars build from here. As I said the goal is not to simply have as big a wheel as possible or as much negative camber as possible - although that does come into it when people start pushing the limits of what's possible on the particular chassis, but for me that's just playful competition that you get in any group of likeminded individuals - the end goal is that it must always LOOK good.
For me, the ideal look is when the full wheel and tyre is just about visible. When the wheel starts getting obscured by the arch, that's too much for me. But no hate or derision goes on - some people like that and some people don't, that's OK. I start to mentally class them in with traditional lowriders.
With regards to unsafe fitment by tyres rubbing all over the shop, doing it on the cheap, and undriveability, I don't find that's really the case. People fitting budget coilovers are generally encouraged toward the better (yet more expensive) models with proven track records. People doing it hugely on the cheap (like that one strut top spaced out with about 8 nuts, posted a few pages ago) are heavily looked down upon. On the subject of driveability, a large percentage of these guys drive the cars daily (perfectly possible for most folk, you just have to take a bit more care on speedbumps, perhaps plot a route that avoids them) and lots of them enjoy thrashing them - at least, those who aren't in VWs. Nothing personal, just an observation - I don't think there's anything wrong with just enjoying looking at the car.
This guy:
Daily drives this MR2 on potholed LA freeways - 20,000 miles a year if I recall correctly - and enjoys driving hard; his car is tuned to 300hp. No blowouts or issues since he started running this kind of extreme stance several years ago. It's a little too much for me, personally - I love how high the wheels sit relative to the body, but I would cut the wheelarches higher to expose the tyre - that's just me.
This car, which many will be familiar with:
Drove nowhere except at 10/10ths - maximum attack on canyon roads.
I think those who assume the lowered car cannot be driven properly have not really experienced it being executed properly. Most people who have lowered a car have stuck lowering springs on standard dampers, felt how terrible that can be, and never gone back. But modern adjustable coilovers are very very good, the ride quality (as I understand it) is controlled independently from the ride height meaning no compromise is made there - so it's just a case of how low you dare to go.
These guys don't tolerate rubbing - especially not dangerous rubbing - and go to great lengths to maximise the space inside the arches, so even these absurd fitments don't rub on anything - although the ones that tuck the wheel lip outside the arch and the tyre inside the arch are probably an exception and have to run very stiff suspension to avoid rub - most of them are carefully calculated so that with the camber on the wheel and the slight angle to the sidewall, as the wheel travels upward it rotates and clears the body by a hair's breadth.
The scene is very tolerant and appreciates diversity - for example these guys idolise racing cars as much as any "standard" petrolhead does, it's not inward-looking. Stanceworks for example has in the last few months run articles on the new Z4 GTE racer, slightly older BMW V12 LMR, and a 1925 Bugatti Type 35 (none of these were "slammed" by a scenester, for the record!). The church welcomes not just tatty VW Golfs but everything from that 1925 Bugatti to hot rods to people carriers - if it looks great, it is appreciated. And that's the general vibe of the scene. Yes there may be some intolerant sub-sets but broadly I find that's not the case.
Oh, and why do they "ruin" great cars like 911s and NSXs? Because those are great looking and driving cars already, and they want to make them look even better (and drive just as well)!
In my mind, there seems to be a pretty general theme in all the images, the cars where you can still see the top of the tyre all look good, the ones where the tyres are so tucked up under the arch or where the rim sticks out further than the tyre don't, all imo obviously...
Good
[/quote]
vs Not Good
Good
[/quote]
vs Not Good
Edited by BlueEyedBoy on Sunday 10th March 09:27
Triumph Man said:
What I don't get is referring to this whole thing as a "scene". Sounds like the gay scene.
Furthermore, what's with the roof racks? There's a lad around here with a mk2 Polo saloon that has been lowered, but he has a roof rack with a toy gorilla on it. Permanently.
Says a man who drives a car dressed up with white ribbons,Furthermore, what's with the roof racks? There's a lad around here with a mk2 Polo saloon that has been lowered, but he has a roof rack with a toy gorilla on it. Permanently.
Coming on here and being surprised that a lot of PH'ers don't like stanced cars would be a bit like me going on stance works and being surpised when I said they all looked s
t! 
I'll dig out some photos.. I was on my way home on the North Circular last year and saw a few cars that looked ridiculous. I realised where they were heading, so went there and took some photos.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff