getoffmyinternet

That's one way to do it. It seems like a lot of work making all that internal steel braking though. If they're that good at glass, I wonder why they didn't just make a glass mold. You just have to wax the crap out of it and it won't damage the original at all. They recreated mark rolston's whole front end that way. Just be aware that the plaster they used was a special two part system. Regular gypsum surely will not be as good of a finish and most likely be pretty porous. In fact pretty much the only way to get all the bubbles out is to vibrate it, but the part is a little big for that. That's why you see a pink coat, they spray a thin incredibly fine plaster on first to get a nicer finish and back it up with the cheap stuff. Also the name of the system escapes me, I'm sure there are knockoffs but it was first trade named after the guy who came up with it.

Yes PVA is good stuff. A little messy but releases extremely easily. You can get it from any composites type place, maybe even a boat store like west marine, aircraft spruce, or of course ebay. There are also easy aerosol and water based sprays out there if you don't want to use a cup gun. Most releases are still supposed to be used over wax. By the way, car wax isn't ideal even if it claims to be high carnuba, you need actual mold release wax. Definitely wouldn't recommend styrofoam for anything. It sucks to sand as a shape and isn't dimensionally stable. You'd have to put quite a bit of bondo etc. over it to form a smooth hard shell. I also wouldn't recommend trying to mix your own styrenes, it's cancer in a can. PU can be hot wired etc. no problem.

Did you ever make your part? I wrote a big ol essay and suddenly realized that this was freaking last year, what was I thinking? Anyway for what it's worth... A splash is any kind of negative of something. I believe it is so named because it's like splashing on some plaster real quick and dirty like. Plaster is almost exclusively used for splash molding because it's a terrible idea for forming from scratch. Plaster mold are often boxed in around a piece though because it's easier to mix it very thin and just pour it. Plaster would probably be the easiest and cheapest for a one-off, but it would be really really heavy and you still have to seal it properly if you don't want your part to stick. Simply waxing it won't do. To make a plaster splash it would be ideal for the plaster to be the same thickness (like one inch) all around to keep it from cracking as it shrinks while it dries. Mix it really thick and put it on like a putty that won't run, then support it with a wood frame or something roughly the profile of the part so it won't be too fragile (egg crate construction). Try to give any mold structure before it cures so that it doesn't warp. If you take it off and it changes shape you can't go back. That said, a fiberglass mold is still ideal. To make it durable and keep it from warping, the mold is generally made pretty thick, which racks up the cost. If it only has to last one time though, I've seen whole car shells (nascar bodies) replicated with one layer of fiberglass backed up by a bunch of cheap foam, not the spray stuff that expands ten times, the kind you mix and it gets the consistency almost of clay that you can press into shape like a hamburger patty. If that's too complicated then you'll just have to use a lot of glass, but you can at least use polyester resin instead of epoxy because it's so much cheaper. Just don't use a heat gun on polyester, it will lose it's shape.

Depends on how legit the paint is. Fingernails? There's this pretty common stuff called Citristrip that is pretty harmless, literally smells like oranges. You can let it soak for hours depending on how tough it needs to get which is why it's easier to use than MEK etc. that evaporates in seconds. I haven't used it to remove auto paint. It takes out wingwalks pretty freaking good but is harmless to aircraft epoxy. I suspect it would eventually eat up regular old enamels. Speaking of MEK, since it's basically been outlawed in CA, hardware stores now sell this stuff that says it replaces MEK and it seriously smells like those little toy toothpaste tubes of gummy stuff that kids used to blow bubbles through a straw with. Long story short, it absolutely sucks, can't place the smell on that one.

Wow that's bizarre. I was just there a week ago and everything looked normal except they stopped selling the converted companion flanges. Perhaps the domain just expired and they haven't realized it yet? Usually if someone goes out of business they'll put up a farewell landing page and just let their hosting run out.

In that case I'll sell you mine for $99,999

Cherry bomb and 1 stick of welding rod $25 Pretty sure it added 10hp to my jeep, can't beat that

Some mixed signals here. Those are technically correct but since there are multiple parts that can be given the same name it's best to clear the air with what's most common for each Stub Axle - most commonly referring to the one that the wheel bolts onto. It seems custom to call the ones that go in the diff stub shafts Half shafts - half sized driveshafts (have u-joints on them) ie. the ones between the diff and the wheels (or CVs if you got em) Companion Flange - most commonly referring to the connecting piece between half shafts and stub axles. The flange on the front of the diff should be referred to more specifically eg. diff flange In other words they are connected in this order (perhaps a master diagram would have been nice): driveshaft - diff flange - diff => stub shaft - half shaft or CV - companion flange - stub axle - wheel

IIRC they should be the same. Just the vlsd shafts were different methinks. Finned cover should only be on the lsd but I would double check.

Whether or not it's an lsd seems to depend on the specific date it was manufactured (4/87 and on) since you're on the edge there. Either look inside or spin a tire. I believe the opens were only 2 pinion.

I guess the difference of opinion on this particular law lies in the fact that you think talking while driving is comparable to wielding a firearm with the safety off. Like I said before, you can kill someone with your car whether you're multitasking or not, but you don't see cars getting outlawed altogether and I don't see you taking the train. Sharks can kill people, are you afraid to go to the beach? Should we fence them off to prevent people from falling in? If every minor risk in life were outlawed then it would be illegal to be alive.

Um, you don't. That's the point. Why is it that the endgame is always presumed first and then a million questions are asked about how to get there? The endgame should not be judge everyone and punish them accordingly based on our own set of rules. Talk about conflict of interest; we make the rules, we set the penalty for breaking them. I wasn't actually proposing that we put people on trial for how good or bad they drive. Ticketing people for actually doing something wrong is one thing, ticketing them for their supposed potential to do something wrong is just ridiculous. Let's see, he's not weaving, he's not speeding, he's not cutting people off, he's not crossing double yellows, he's yielding to pedestrians, he's signaling for lane changes and turns, he's not tailgating, he's not stomping on the brakes, he's not blowing through stop signs...Oh but wait he's on his cell phone! Well that's just dangerous! We better give that idiot a ticket so he learns his lesson about driving safe.

It is whether you are capable. I think the point Tony is making is that he could go his entire life driving while on his cell phone and never get into an accident because of it. Whether or not it would have otherwise been safer is moot. You should not get a ticket for something you're capable of doing harmlessly.

I'm with you on that. Why are we trying to make a bunch of laws that tie the hands of 300 million people in the exact same way? I really don't understand how they come up with a law where your fine gets doubled if you're on your cell phone while speeding or whatever. If you crash, you crash, what difference does it make that you were on your cell phone, is it really that poor of judgement, like driving under the influence or something? It doesn't matter what you're doing while driving, if you get into an accident, then there you are. Do something wrong, something bad happens, that's real world consequences at work. Accidents happen with your hands at 2 and 10 too, so what other laws can we make to confine drivers even further? Perhaps your hands were at 2 and 10, but you got in an accident because you were wearing your wedding ring and it slightly reduced your grip, so we should make a law against wearing wedding rings while driving. If you can talk on your cell phone while eating a slice of pizza and shifting with your greasy hands without spilling your coffee on your lap and still drive safely then godspeed. Some people look like they deserve to get pulled over and given a ticket even though they aren't really breaking a specific law, they just plain suck at driving. How can we make laws that are equal to everyone? Oh crap this is starting to sound like one of those 99% things.

I thought that might be the same car. Wasn't sure though, it looked a lot different. Old pic? That makes me feel slightly better knowing that there's one less of them out there than I previously thought. I think in this case it's the thought that counts. I wish it were trolling, but I think it's just the latter of that meme... I don't think he's even going for the wide tires idea because those things are stretched like crazy. Ricer and gangster apparently agree on one thing. It's almost hilarious the way they talked about 'old guys' (not sure why it's in quote either, I think they're being literal). The statement would almost make sense if the picture of a car in the exact opposite condition. I felt like replying, "Are you guys looking at the same pictures we are??" In their minds, it's the old guys that don't have the taste, and this guy is the one that is building a cherry show car. Yeah the stereotype is totally that someone who wants to restore a car to its original form has no taste... Restored? Ewe! I thought that the stereotype was that old guys didn't fix up their cars and drove them into the ground until they looked like this. But apparently careless neglect and undying precision ultimately yield the same result... "I can only pray that this kind of modification will continue to become more popular."

There was another z a lot like this one floating around that started a huge argument because form over function is the opposite of what hybridz goes for and people wanted it banned. Believe it or not form is what the guy is going for (albeit misguieded). They purposely make their car look like and perform like absolute siht and think that it somehow makes it cool. Ugly for the sake of being ugly. I have a hard time slapping a "to each his own" on that.

I put the image into google and this is like the third thing that came up http://www.superstreetonline.com/featuredvehicles/sstp_1011_1973_datsun_240z/index.html

That's exactly what I go through. In fact when I was going to AZ I was in my moms auto and it almost idled at the right speed for the traffic so I shouldn't have had to brake much. I feel like when I'm doing that the people behind me should love me because it's great speed regulation. If someone in each lane did that it seems like it cold trickle down and pretty much everyone would be just coasting at the proper speed. The whole reason for the stop and go is the people like you said shooting in and slamming on the brakes. In the Z I try to avoid shifting like a madman by doing that too, but it doesn't like coasting at a really low speed as much. Then you got people flying down the other lanes that are connecting to a different freeway so they can cut in at the last second rather than wait their turn. I'd love to force those guys out so they have to commit to going the wrong direction. Plus when two lanes merge and cars fight to be 1 second closer to their destination, then everyone has to stop because two of that same type of person meet and play chicken until the last possible moment. As for cell phones, studies have shown that the hand use part isn't really what causes the danger, it's the attention distraction to the conversation. People pay even more attention to a conversation over the phone than one in person, it requires more focus--which takes away from what they need to drive safely. In most cases being hands free isn't much bettter (if at all) than holding a phone, so it's silly to make a law about cell phone use but allow hands free devices.

Ditto. They call it "speeding" like it's a law of nature or something. A mater of physics rather than just some arbitrary number that somebody came up with a long time ago. If anything, the number could be increased simply on account of the fact that cars are safer these days. When the laws were passed, I'm sure they considered stopping distance etc. on cars that were made exclusively with drum brakes and no abs. They probably even considered mortality rate for when an accident will occur, and nowadays you can get hit at a higher speed and still walk away from it. But like you said, how close you follow has an even greater effect on the safety of the situation. If you're far enough away, forget about the speed, the accident won't happen in the first place. People follow the closest when there's traffic but it's stop and go or is just starting to let up and we're all rushing. That's why one accident often causes so many others. Everyone's speed is starting to climb gradually, but the gap between them isn't getting any wider--they're still following as close as when they were going 5mph. Cops seem to follow closer than anybody, perhaps because they live on the road they're the best drivers ever and have the reactions of a hockey goalie. I'm sure a lot of the time they're getting way up in my business so they can read my plate, which is obviously super safe. Half the reason people follow so close in the first place though is because of all the jerks cutting in and out. If there's any gap at all people assume that the lane is secretly going faster than all the others and they are the one car that discovered it so they have to rush in to capitalize on the find. I once drove to phoenix on the 10 when it was under construction and completely gridlocked and I never left my lane once. There was a guy next to me that changed lanes every 30 seconds and slowly got ahead. I stopped paying attention and figured he was long gone, but then almost four hours later I passed him up. Hey buddy, all of the lanes are going slow, you don't know anything we don't. Ugh, traffic really grinds my gears.

The car runs don't it?

Dang sounds like dude got married over here.

Too many mutha' 'uckas 'uckin' with our shi'

Oh it will. It will. All it takes is another cop to see you. I'm sure the cop in front of you had a perfectly good reason to be speeding. Oh look he's on his cell phone too, now you know it must be important.

LOL