Removed

you made me waste 5 minutes of my life going back through all posts... anything edited is clearly marked, at the bottom of the post. Nothing has been edited since the last discussion, and anything edited (I haven't edited anything you lot have said) of my stuff posted has been edited within 5 minutes of being posted. (apart from the post while I was transalting the bit) I don't know what you 2 are on about, re. editing. I might have deleted some offtopic banter the other night when we were discussing Dash, but that's it. I have no further comment to make about this discussion, believe what you like

IMO you can't expect APS themselves to foot any bill though tbh. As you said, if they sustain that they did warn all agents to use the exhaust, surely it'd be down to the agent and not the main manufacturer? have you got proof of the contrary? So no, the kit in their eyes wasn't incomplete at all. Again, it all points to the dealer and you in this case would not be able to do anything about that. So if APS does anything it would only be a goodwill gesture, but would also set a "dangerous" precendent: ie a tuner does a shite job and you go back to APS asking for compensation. I don't know , as I sd before Giles's situation is surely difficult but at the same time you keep on trying to "accuse" everyone and anyone (APS for telling or not telling their dealers about the zorst, the dealers for selling the exhausts sparately despite being included in the kits, then APS for not coming up with some compensation because the dealer has gone bust)while really imo it's just a chain of events that made the whole issue really difficult to handle.

back on topic, Miraglio hasn't got much time to register here, he did read all 9 pages of this though... here's his reply on the Italian forum in english (Thanks mate!) and finds me completely in agreement. I won't post anymore on this as I think I'm going to follow his advice "Hi Minel, not so much time for this issue. Let's remind the three reasons why larger tyres offer better traction: 1) Less tyre deformation, given the lower specific force tranferred between tyre and the asphalt (higher contact area with the same weigh => lower forces to be transferred). Please remember that the equation T = gc*N holds true only for non-deforming materials, while rubber is an elastomer.... Please, remember to your friends that not only static driving has to be taken into account, and that accelerating and mostly breaking will definitely change the weight trasferred to each tyre, and easily put in trouble your tyre. Almost doubling the weight trasnferred to front tyres under braking (for instance), could easily cause serious tyre deformation on small tyres, while will result in zero to little deformation in a larger tyre. This is important to assure that the correct contact area is constantly at work. 2) Better statistical traction, given that the wider covered area allows you to reach some (potential) areas of the asphalt in which the friction coefficient may be better, and then reduces the probability of breaking traction. Just like playng the lottery: the higher the number of tickets you buy, the higher the probability to win. This factor is very important: if you consider a static driving situation, so when little or no tyre deformation is occurring, by using larger tyres you modify your contact pattern from this: *** ^ driving direction *** | *** | *** | *** | to this: ***** ^ driving direction ***** | ***** | This, I repeat, in static situations, when the inflate pressure holds the same, and larger tyres simply modify the contact pattern. Given such change in that shape, you are more likely to find better grip situations, because you are "scanning" a wider area to look for traction. Please think upon this, you'll realise how important this statistical effect. 3) Last but not least, better tyre construction, since the larger the tyre, the more performing, higly expensive the piece of equipment you are being endowed. Please don't forget that tyres are made by companies, and companies have marketing and customers segmentation policies. You get what you pay for: larger tyres = more expensive, better engineered and constructed. This is a very important point. People think that 225/45 R17 and 245/40 R17 are the same tyre, just different size. FALSE: the construction is different, and if you go further up with the size, also the compounds is modified. The second tyre in fact is intended to be more performing, and is designed for that. I know this because I've worked for an automotive manufacturer. Of these three factors, 2 and 3 are always at work when you drive, while factor 1 comes into play only when you are braking/cornering (or accelerating, if you have a +++hp car) and then you load the tyre with a very higher load if compared to static situations. This is true for dry conditions, and this is true for wet road, as you can easily understand. So no way in which on a wet road smaller tyres can give you better traction performances. Think for instance to wet/ winter tyres for cars: are they smaller, or are they just the same size, with different compound and different design? If reducing the size of the tyre could help traction on wet roads, why tyre manufacturers are not doing that? They could save money also, since smaller tyres are less expensive, both in materials and manufacturing costs, and increase profits! Think to F1 intermediate tyres, whicy are used for from mid to wed conditions: are they smaller? C'mon, don't waste time on that.... All of this becomes false only when you shift from "wet" conditions to "flooded" conditions, and then the real enemy becomes aquaplaning. In that situation, the larger the tyre, the more easily it will become a "surf board", and as speed rises, you'll start doing surfing, instead of driving That's why in rallies and other competitions on mud and snow (have you ever seen motobikes' races on ice?), they use very very small (spined) tyres, because in this way the lower contact area allows the tyres to penetrate into the water / mud even at high speed. Of course, the lower surface decreases traction performances, but at least you have some traction, since you are not flying on water / mud / snow, but you are touching the ground. But who cares about this??? Have you ever experienced real aquaplaning? I have, and from then on, at least as far as I'm at the wheel, when I see the road conditions turning into potential acquaplaning, I slow down, and not start arguing about my tyres size. I'm not a professional driver, and moreover my car is tuned for dry road (wheels, suspensions, boost gain pattern, everything is tuned for dry). Eventually, even F1 rain tyres are not much smaller than slick, just highly sculpted in order to drive out the largest possible quantity of water. That's why I strongly suggest not to get involved in this kind of discussion which are really a waste of time. Discussing about cars and mechanincs, in my opinion, is good as far as it helps you understand something useful for your driving experience. I saw your forum, 9 page discussion for this is.... unbelievable. Hence: 1) If someone thinks that smaller tyre will give him better traction on dry or wet conditions, leave him to his (probably bad) fate; 2) If someone thinks he should use smaller tyres so as to have less chance for aquaplaning, I'd rather suggest him to slow down when it starts raining hard, and keep larger tyres for all the rest; 3) ...and save your precious time to work and earn your TT upgrade All my best, Miraglio"

or the custards for that matter

surely lower PSIs will give you more grip but on my car the toyos are still at 35psi. Tyres are new, give them a few more hundred miles

come on then, get a move on!

course I would! Just saying it's a difficult situation for Giles due to the above reasons. don't get your knickers in a twist, I'm really not that bothered about the whole issue at a personal level tbh... unlike you seem to be. yeah i am speculating, and I can speculate as much as I like but hasn't Giles's car blown up in february? I call that retrospectively IIRC when you lot were buying the TT kit you knew about the oil pan that should have been included, noone ever mentioned the APS zorst as being mandatory... Certaintly noone mentioned it at the first NW dyno day whent he G-Force guys were up... the difference is that Kinetix has honoured their LIFETIME warranty and no you can't make the comparison, as there was only myself and kinetix, no installation from a third party involved. Now if on the other hand my engine blew up and tried to get it done under warranty, I would have accepted the risk I took into installing it, there's no toher way around it really...

don't think bap's comment was made vs yours. I don't know what problems he's got with you, but afaik You have had good reports from a couple of members on here and an issue that was resolved satisfatorily by yourselves. personally i have never discounted you guys when the time comes to decide which tuner to use for some FI

home made tonneau covers rule! :teeth:

but since you can't "trust" anyone in this business it seems (or at least it looks like finding a good trusted tuner in this country is somewhat near-impossible), you might as well have some fun if you have access to a daily driver and DIY!

come on though Bap, modifying cars is an expensive and dangerous hobby. In this case you can't sue anyone (well you could try to sue in Australia, I suppose) for the reason you keep giving (item sold wasn't fit for purpose) but tbh I believe the case wouldn't have a leg to stand on in any court. There's too many question marks and too many parties involved which are not even 1-trading anymore or 2-resident in this Country PS an RJN engineer (who is now doing the rebuild work on Giless car and has extensive VQ35 experience having worked on RJN's race cars before) I'm not too sure how independent that would look in any court though . Also, retrospective APS info is no good either, I have no reason to not believe Allan's statements that the bullettin has arrived AFTER the fact what I'm trying to say is, @*!# happens unfortunately: I would have personally gone public straight away, to warn prospective UK TT buyers of the possibility of a failure that may or may not be attributable to the exhaust, and then got on with it. Not saying Giles is whinging, I understand he's just trying to get parts to get the TT kit in working order and sell it on. Fact remains though, no real warranty is to be had (apart maybe for the installers themselves) unless you buy it as an add-on like WRC offers. The G-Force's demo car is just rumours, but quite founded afaik. And yeah I noticed Peter Luxum seems to have become a little more malleable once Giles's gone public on the US forums... wrt parts I stand by what i sd before, and would have gone public straight away, maybe it would have led to a quicker resolution, who knows

think so tell you what Jon, I'm gonna start studying to fit my own setup, at least I'm not gonna have anyone else to blame but myself when it blows up!

tbh though, especially after reading lots of comments on my350z and motoring about the lack of support from the manufacturer (which apparrently is a very common case for many other manufacturers too) the only person you could have gone back to is the Tuner/dealer. Of course them going bust has made this whole issue basically unsolvable for Giles, unless APS directly steps in somehow, as a goodwill gesture. I don't know the details either but from february until September there's a good 7 months in between , and if they haven't done it yet, I doubt that will ever happen. unfortunately with aftermarket modifications, you take your risks and sometimes, some people, have to accept the consequences. The fact that you can't even purchase replacememnt parts for the kit though, is ridiculous! So Bap you are saying that Giles' car tune didn't have anything to do with the failure? Didn't G-Force's own demo car with the true dual exhasut blow up too?? imo the common denominator here is the map, not the exhaust. I have also read many knowledgeable folk's replies onthe US forums stating that yes the exhaust could have contributed to the failure, but most of them are pointing the finger at the tune.

one mrs is allowed, but many is just for Azures no trace of custards

accepted by who though??? tbh seen how many US kits are fine for thousands of miles with no true dual exhausts, I'm more and more convinced that the map is at fault here.... one thing I'd like clarified though, once and for all: if Joe Bloggs comes to you Allan and wants to buy an APS TT kit.... do you include the oil pan and the true dual as standard now???

women choose men with Azures I'm afraid, we have plenty of pics to prove it. Custards are left with bananas I'm afraid

both WRC's and Dorian comments

around 7th October? should be ok by me

I did say hello though Dave and mentioned you and Dan in my post on the previous page ! PS You cars' pics are in the gallery too

let me know mate

must have missed this... good to see it was retracted though

was falling apart with only 40k miles on it wasn't it? Porsche build quality...

shurrup Porsche man

maybe it'd help if it read the name of the car which is actually 350Z

sorry, on holiday until the 25th... sat 30 I reckon will be good