Xnke Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 (edited) Mainly take note that the car has an inch suspension travel before those wheels hit the inner fenderwells. I've had my car that low, with some VERY hard springs and I STILL was bouncing the wheels off the fenderwells on every road seam or irregularity. I then went to a softer spring, and two inches (TWO INCHES) of suspension travel, and while it was greatly improved I STILL layed frame all over town...mainly because my tires weren't hitting the fenders and acting like bumpstops. Going back to stock ride height, I drive it daily and have no issues. I'm planning to work on getting it dropped a little at a time till I find the happy medium, but let's get real...the car in the article has at best an inch of suspension travel before his back wheels hit the inner fenders. Edited May 22, 2012 by Xnke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 I just assumed it was bagged because no one would drive that........................... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Rule 1: 1. The purpose of this site is to discuss TECHNICAL topics that pertain to the modification of the Datsun/Nissan Z cars (240Z, 260Z, 280Z, 300ZX, 350Z). No thoughtful modification that enhances performance or styling will be put down. The philosophy is one of "parts is parts" - it doesn't matter what automaker originally made the parts, if you think that using those parts on your Z will add to it's performance or cosmetic appeal. But the emphasis is on FUNCTION, not the addition of graphics, wings, etc. to only make the Z LOOK like it is a high performance car. However, everyone has their own ideas of what stylish modifications look good or bad. I guess the debate is whether the hellflush/slammed look is a "thoughtful" modification that enhances styling? IMHO, it is based on our rules, assuming the modification is done with some technical/engineering thought. Yes it will draw some technical criticism or suggested improvements but it does have a place here on HybridZ. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Six_Shooter Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 The way I read that is that there are a lot of people in this thread violating that rule, for ragging on what someone sees as a cosmetic improvement, the extreme lowering. It's in the same class putting a Vellarossa body kit on an S30, trying to make it look higher performance than it is or at least look like something that it is not. It's obvious that these extreme lowered S30s get used, and driven, I don't know how anyone can debate that, especially with the previously extremely lowered S30, that also received a lot of negative attention from this site, and every month or so new pictures would pop up with that car in a new location, some where it was being driven. In the article that started this thread, there are several pictures showing that car is getting driven, so to debate whether you can actually drive the car or not is absurd, it can be and is being driven. Whether you like the car or not is no reason to assume that it's not functional. Not everyone that owns an S30 wants to drive it at over 100 MPH, or race it, or time attack with it. I would imagine that there are a majority of S30 owners that have NEVER been on a track with their car on this very site, yet they install all of these race car and high performance modifications, I guess they should all be kicked off the site for not actually "using" their cars then, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators RTz Posted May 22, 2012 Administrators Share Posted May 22, 2012 It's in the same class putting a Vellarossa body kit on an S30, trying to make it look higher performance than it is or at least look like something that it is not. No, it’s not. Aesthetic modifications are very welcome here. When they are taken so far that they render the car useless THEN it is too far. That’s where the “thoughtful†part comes in. I guess they should all be kicked off the site for not actually "using" their cars then, eh? Enough. Really. Not one member in the history of this forum has ever been kicked off for any modification, aesthetic or otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yhlz Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Why is everyone spending all this time disagreeing. In my personal opinion and Mr. Meguiar's opinion on CAR CRAZY, if you're a true car enthusiast, you should learn to love and appreciate all cars, even if they are not your cup of tea. JohnC has a point. Style (functional/non-functional) is SUBJECTIVE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HK240ZT Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 I would like to postulate that even though the owner of that car may drive it "on everyday streets" , I gaurantee he avoids EVERY speedbump and pothole, he approaches every dip/driveway at an angle, and goes out of his way to make sure he drives on the "easy" streets. I dare anyone to deny it strictly because the reality of the situation is that if he didn't his car would be torn to shreds. I would also like to thank RTz and the other moderators for the excellent job they do of maintaining the focus of this forum. I think it was very appropriate in suggesting that particular mindsets or attitudes are probably best suited for other forums. i very much appreciate when I don't have to sift through a thread because when I searched for camber it came up with someone who "slammed and stretched" because they think it looks cool. Ditto. Thank you mods for keeping our forum performance oriented. As for the car, eh. Plenty of better examples of "speedy" S30s here on hybridz! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emeraldlion Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 Careful six, make sure you really want to pick this fight. No one is saying your car must sit at any height, to each their own. The point that is trying to be made here is that this is a performance site and the cars and individuals striving for this particular look cannot be after performance because the suspension geometry is actually not appropriate for performance. you are also trying to twist words. Yes most tend to avoid LARGE potholes, but if an s30 with coilovers and decent setups accidentaly go over a mild pothole, it is not as detrimental as it would be to this speedhunter car. You really need to get the big picture. No one is saying that this style is wrong. Just not in line with the performance orientation of this site. I kind of like the way the car looks, a little too low for my taste, and I can never condone stretched tires because it is unsafe, not sure how that fad caught on. Someone on this site that is not willing to admit that it is not an appropriate suspension setup for overall safety or performance should probably head over to ratsun or one of the other s30 sites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 I find it entertaining how people, who I would assume have never driven a car this low, especially the particular car in question, rag on how "un-usable" it is, when everytime a car this low comes up, the articles always say often it is driven, and on everyday streets... Just say'n. Articles lie. Remember the "250GTO" Internet post of the "Car"Culture Show"... It was a 240 Z in a body kit. Speaking as someone who HAS "driven" cars that low since about 1984, I say it comes down to your definition of drive able. . The BRE Z was more drive able than this car, and it's higher. I "drove" our Bonneville Car for a while---we lift it 2" to go run Willow Springs. There's a reason cars like this that are driven use airbags: they way they are photographed "down in the weeds" results in an UNDRIVEABLE car. You are a moving hazard on the roadway you are so slow (and usually darty...) They may SAY something, but those are words. I'll put money on the guy with the Moped for five laps around the Albertsons parking lot in Richmond any day over this vehicle. Seriously, you actually BELIEVE this car is driven at any sort of normal speed anywhere? If you have, you've never been around nor in them. I'd suggest reviewing some Carlos Santana and "War" albums for appropriate subject listening. "low...ri....der....de de de de de, da da da da ta!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 And to mention: I have a slammed dually tow vehicle. As someone mentioned at 70mph on the freeway my tires are the bump stops. I have to run with a 3x8' 5/8" thick slab of diamond plate in the bed to give enough load to keep the rear tires from radical pogo action over even mild speed bumps. I would consider my truck borderline functional. I will likely raise the front 2" with springs soon simply to get practical usage back into it... Having blue smoke billow out of your wheel wells when a dip in the road is encountered is a bit ridiculous. But I go to truck shows and find them FAR LOWER than my truck. Literally in the weeds front-to-back. And they are UNDRIVEABLE. Sure they move...forward and back on billiard smooth surfaces and usually not more than 5 mph. If they want to move or drive to an event they pump the bags up, run adequate clearance for wheels and suspension travel normally encountered, and go for it. There is a reason the CVC states that no portion of the frame may extend below the rim line---if you loose air in the tire, your frame becomes your directional control meaning you become a guided missile in the last direction you were pointed. And if you should suffer a dual axle blowout (both fronts or both backs) its even more acute. Not to mention loss of braking ability (though your frame does a good job of that...) Nobody says anybody needs to have a car if a give height. But we WILL call BS on hyped claims of no affect on driveability. And I will categorically state, without reservation nor qualification that there is NO WAY IN HELL that car could be "daily driven" in the same uncompromising manner as my Blue Turd 260Z. I would lay money within a month's time daily commuting, the car would be broken hard. I drive my S30 daily in the real world. There is not a road I will look at and go "uh, no I won't drive there" (except maybe Watts at 2AM) AT THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT, without becoming a moving hazard to other traffic due to excessive, unreasonable slowing for the most mundane of driving obstacles. I can't say that for my Dually. And I lay money such is not the case for that car. For a magazine having in yhe title "Speed"---the car is anathema to that concept. The argument "not everybody wants to drive their Z at 100mph" is moot when "Speedhunters" is the title of the rag! I'd bet money the car would not, COULD NOT be driven at that speed on any common roadway. Not in a box. Not with a fox. It could not be driven here nor there, It could not be driven anywhere. It does not work, these slam-my-can It does not work my six-shooting' man! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted May 22, 2012 Share Posted May 22, 2012 I mean, c'mon. What's not to laugh at. Yeah, they have their style but as functional cars these are failures. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators RTz Posted May 23, 2012 Administrators Share Posted May 23, 2012 Thanks to Tony and John, I think I just split a seem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I mean, c'mon. What's not to laugh at. Yeah, they have their style but as functional cars these are failures. Love the guy spinning the tires at 1:50. I've actually done that in my Z at a reasonable ride height, but in my defense the driveway was ridiculously short and steep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoNkEyT88 Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 And what the heck mask was he wearing?!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewZed Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 They all should have backed in (coincidentally, related to how I failed a forklift driver job interview test, many years ago) - Car #4 is a Z. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianZortiz Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 I am sure he lowered or lowers the car for shows/photoshoots. Oakland does not have glass roads. I really doubt he drives the car "daily" that low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rnye Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 They all should have backed in (coincidentally, related to how I failed a forklift driver job interview test, many years ago) - Car #4 is a Z. White G nose slipped right on out and he was pretty low! I love the look of these slammed Z's but enjoy driving fast cars... I'll have to find a way to make them meet somewhere in the middle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yhlz Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 Those Boso's sound pretty beasty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegasnative Posted May 23, 2012 Share Posted May 23, 2012 What is with the fenders covering up the rear doors? in that video Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony D Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Oh that purple skyline.... Ohhhhh! Bad tony Baaaad tony! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.