coldel

Man that was too easy!

the only car where the front looks like the back of a car Next...

Studebaker Avanti?

AMC Pacer?

OK look, the team made a call on trying something different based on pretty valid feedback - like anything in the world 100% of the people will never agree with 100% of the decisions. But for anything to work everyone needs to give it a try, if it doesn't work then we ditch the idea. Its called Test and Learn and is a good approach to have to developing forum spaces. And on a personal note, please don't take forums for granted, the GT-Four forums all died due to some poor management of them and everything is now on FB. There is no community, no banter, its a very transactional experience and not a good one from an ownership perspective. Just saying.

Sorry had it in my head it was AttackZ image!

Going to have a punt on something American given your recent aquisition, GT40?

I was going to say a mini

Bingo! Over to you

Nope, try again. Thought it would be an easy one to start

OK saw this on another forum but seems like fun, the idea is you post a photo of a part of a car (not a dust cap or a screw head or something daft!) but enough to be able to have a stab at what the car is. Winner is the one who guesses first and then gets to post the next photo, and so on...so here is the first pic, good luck!

You might want to speak directly with the people posting above, Payco mentioning his price is not representative of the market at large back then, was it typical of all Nismos pricing? I think you might have to chat with him direct to get a view on that. There are so many variables that drive price from weather, season, media, press, any trade in, sellers personal circumstances hell even mates rates right. I think as Jon says, go look at some, get a feel for the price and don't worry about prices moving - you don't really buy a modern sports car if you are worried about price dropping in 6 months time. Buy.Drive. Enjoy.

And if I remember correctly Mark at Abbey debunked the whole limited power in gears 1-3 at some point (like 6 or 7 years ago), again would need digging out! Or maybe Mark could jump on here and clarify given his knowledge of ecus and mapping That the first three gears the throttle input isnt linear i.e. 25% of the way down does not result in 25% throttle, but once you have the foot to the floor in first three gears 100% throttle gives you 100% throttle. Its just wound back in terms of how quickly it builds, the TC will change that curve, but wont give you any more acceleration or speed - you can achieve the same by pressing the throttle pedal in a bit more. This is all from memory from years ago so open to being told otherwise!

There is a thread on here somewhere if you search for it explaining it all.

Throttle controller is a bit of a myth as it does not give you extra speed, the throttle controller does make the throttle input more sensitive i.e. if you have the peddle down 10% it will push the input to the ecu as something like 50% You can replicate this by pushing the throttle down with your foot 50% also. It does give the illusion of extra speed because on high settings any touch on the pedal literally jerks the car forwards, much like it would if you drove around with your foot pressed completely down.

I would probably suggest gents we get back to Mars/SpaceX chatter as per the original post to keep the thread civil.

Kind of sums up where this thread has gone unfortunately.

I guess it then comes back to the question asked a number of pages back, what if it was shown many religions were fake and one someone did not follow was shown to be real, would followers of a religion swap to the one proven to be correct. Or continue following a religion shown to be fake. I suspect the answer is yes they would still follow it the fake one.

Prove it is impossible then...

Why do older skeletons of humans have smaller skull cavities? Arched backs? Why are humans now much taller on average than 200 years ago? Go into an old cottage built in the 1800s and why do you think the doorways are so low? Animals evolve based on their surroundings and their behaviour, the evidence (of which is not fake) is like this in a short period of time relatively small in the grand scheme of things, but over tens of thousands, or even millions of years, small changes become substantial ones.

Davey I have listened with interest to a lot of stuff you have posted on here, its quite interesting, but I think you have totally misunderstood what evolution is. Its not about species cross breeding, or in their lifetime changing shape or form. Its about how life adapts to its environment - as I mentioned if you look at invasive species its a great way to properly understand how it works as it happens at a much accelerated rate. I remember watching something about Cane Toads in Australia, introduced there about 100 years ago but with a max lifespan of something like 10 years that ten generations, anyway enough time for selective evolution to happen vs. the same animal that are still in their environment of origin. It showed how they are even in that short time diverging in their physical aspects, Australian ones are faster and stronger based on their legs being significantly longer on average than those back in their native habitat, where they have begun to adapt to wider open spaces of Australia vs the confined spaces of their origin.

More like Martins weaving driving style is countered by the Nismo handling characteristics

A really good way to understand evolution (its absolutely not one species giving birth to something else that's just ridiculous) is to look at invasive species and how after several hundred generations they have changed their general appearance, behaviours, food sources etc. compared to their cousins back in the native environment - they are always quite different.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias The enemy of all critical and objective analysis - everyone has it, to different degrees.

Apparently there is a tonne of sound deadening material in the boot you can strip out.