Automotive Addicts V8 Pt. 2 - Real Motors have 8 cylinders and Pushrods Edt. - General

Cranks just fine, no hesitation from the starter, and all the electronics work just fine. It just wouldn't start yesterday, but today it's was not much different then it has been since I bought the car. One thing I know, I did a real shoddy job reconnecting the down pipe, when I last transported the car. I also know that the manifold or gasket is cracked/bad. The turbo leaks something fierce as well. All of this is just ahead of the O2 sensor which is why I was wonder if that could cause it to not start.

The car should definitely run without o2 sensors. If you got 0 reaction from the starter when trying to crank before it's probably somewhere between your key and the fuse/relay box. If you got clunks from the starter when it wouldn't crank the starter might be getting stuck.

https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/228931/d255963e-ea53-421c-bae7-d291f257769d/IMG_1572.JPG The 1991 starter solonoid bolted straight on to the '48 pattern. I'd say "Never change, ford" but that's basically already their thing.

Oh no, no. Maybe I'm mixing words. The starter is just fine, the engine spun when I turned the key, it just never fired.

Could be fuel delivery, could be an ignition issue. I don't know if your car has cam position sensors, but when mine went out on my Nissan it wouldn't spark cause it didn't know where the cams were. But that car had exhaust VVT and a timing chain instead of a fixed timing belt.

Crank only as far as I can tell. Fuel pump is my best guess right now, I know the secondary one that's under the car has a tendency to fail. I'm going to pull the fuel rail this weekend and check it out.

https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/113148/8e0c300d-2315-4452-8dbd-92cda440e07a/2018-09-27 13.49.09.mp4 I did my mandatory slippery tracks course. It was really fun. Here the ABS is off and my partner was trying to mimic the ABS using his foot, didn't work of course. The track was sprayed with water.

I got my D/D1 license mid-January. I genuinely wish the technical courses had been longer. Trying to un-twirl a long-ass city bus, doing 360's down a slippery hill with no traction is alot more fun than most people can imagine.

https://puu.sh/BCZsp/f690d84c5a.png RIP money. Came to 730 canuckistan funbucks.

I hate the way modern cars and SUVs look. All the brands are starting to look the same. So many vehicles that only have minor differences like slightly different angles for the shape of windows or lights. All the SUVs got the samey same Honda CR-V, Toyota Rav4, Subaru Forester look. The Ford Explorer looks ok, but I think the mid 2000s Explorer looks great. Why couldn't they keep that? What the heck is Jeep doing? The Compass, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee want to look samey same too. If it wasn't for the classic Jeep grill and hood badge, those three vehicles could be mistaken for any other brand. I fucking hate Jeep for discontinuing the Patriot (what a great compact SUV that was despite it's weak engine). They probably won't ever bring back the Grand Wagoneer, but at least give use Cherokee XJ styled body.

Dropped in on an impromptu car meet yesterday, widebody RX7 and a bunch of tricked out evo's all over the place, plus a few mercs on bags. Within 30 seconds of parking my ass, 7 people were crowding around the deuce, wondering who owned it. After going over the performance details, one of those garish civic SI's showed up. The impromptu meet immediately dispersed because nobody wants to talk to ricer fuccbois.

It's mostly due to regulations. Cars need to be areodynamic and aesthetically pleasing, the lights have to be a very specific height above the ground (and width, i think), the bumpers have to be an exact height above the ground and meet other requirements structurally, and above all, the body shape has to be pedestrian safe, rolling people up onto the hood instead of sucking them under the car. Put all that together, and there's simply only one shape that can fit all that criteria and work. Meaning "styling" essentially comes down to scribbling lines onto the same shape to reaffirm the brand's identity. https://blogmedia.dealerfire.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/226/2016/10/2017-Mazda3-Sonic-Silver-Metallic_o.jpg That's also why all cars have metallic paints, and primarily sell in flat grays/silvers. The metallic paint has very tight highlights which most effectively bring out the "artificial" lines added to the basic volume of the shape. Mazda's particularly good with that, with a lot of watery shapes stamped into the sides of the car. Whereas meanwhile back in the day, the primary differences in styling were the use of volumes, which gelled well with the basic gloss paint in pastel colours, since the reflection and natural contrast in shading was doing the majority of the work to sell the shape, whereas now we have to go out of our way to crank up the highlights to bring that out, since the base volume is effectively fixed.

That's why I like Mazdas current design, it's clean and neat without any of the fucken shitty angles all over everything.

Mazda and Volvo are rocking it in the design department.

R8 my cragslut ad: '83 Porsche 944 Rock Solid Project (Trades considered)

Some people will probably remember a few pages ago, I had a whine about stripes on road cars. Well, I’ve changed my mind in some limited circumstances - eg I’ve decided that the mid 00’s Vipers look better with stripes than without. However, if I ever did get a last gen Viper, I would still have it without the stripes. It’s bodywork is just so well done, that having it with stripes would detract from it.

My battery completely died this morning. No lights, no crank, nothing. So I bought a new one and when I took out the old one it was basically sitting on a loose relay. The relay when I picked it up leaked completely black water and broke open easily. It was one of these. Hopefully it still works. The fan came on like normal when I tested it so it might be stuck on one speed forever. https://www.rockauto.com/info/31/BA2030210-1__ra_p.jpg

They're rocking the same design department apparently: https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/109874/af8934b0-25cd-4af9-abf8-db884f504c01/image.png https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/109874/35deb2a8-8051-4a57-bc68-1dabf1c90368/image.png (Ignore the fact that the volvo is 2 tone)

Crossovers are basically the worst examples of design from any manufacturer so I'm not surprised by this.

It makes me wonder what companies would design if they could freely make any car, and not worry about sales or safety or whatever, aimed exclusively at enthusiasts. Just a mental exercise. Naturally they would go for an aerodynamic shape still, but what would it look like? what kind of engine would it have? For example, I think Mazda would simply build an updated RX-7, GM would probably build an updated 67-72 Truck, Honda would build more NSX or S2000... What do you guys think?

I think they had that freedom up until the california regulations going in in the mid 60's. That's why we got manic shit like this https://files.facepunch.com/forum/upload/228931/c12a7a51-e37c-4d36-a32e-180baadce7e0/image.png http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_i_AovfzNXgQ/TH2su-o7Y0I/AAAAAAABSNk/nmlNXMi9A-w/s1600/Sngraham.jpg http://supercars.net.s3.amazonaws.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/23124308/8552661.jpg There's some nuts concept cars around, but they'll never see the light of production so they crank it up to 12 knowing they don't have to be constrained by reality, whereas back in the day all concept cars were real cars because they were trying to make something for produciton. Xk120, Y job, stingray etc. none were intended for production but were real cars so they could get turned into one anyway. Meanwhile today, Jaguar had to "cheat" and use unbuilt but preiod registered chassis codes from the time to legally sell the XKSS and E type production runs, even though they're cars that were commercially sold in the past.

You have too much faith in GM

Pedestrians ruin everything. And Cali. And Nader. And Bean Counters. And Oil. And Gas Prices. And Henry Ford II. Let's see what else can I bitch about.

Ferrari FXX K, McLaren Senna GTR, Aston Martin Vulcan, Porsche 935 etc Some of then are based on road cars of course, but they don’t have to meet safety or emissions regulations as they are purely track-focused cars

I'm thinking about picking up a Cherokee XJ as a cheap 4WD daily I can work on when I want to but at the same time is reliable enough that I don't have to work on it out of necessity. Do you think an XJ would be worth it if I wasn't intending to go offroading, or would it be better to pick up a WJ or another vehicle that I haven't mentioned?

First of all, cheap and jeep just dont go together. Now, personally i'd get a WJ with the 4.7 HO, unless you can find a 1998 ZJ with the 5.9, those things are fucking beasts

https://images.craigslist.org/00S0S_7vDtyBRnmsc_1200x900.jpg Custom ram are dual snorkel ket Ford, Chevrolet, Dodge No lowballers i know what i have.

But Stev, he has 300 dollars into that!

I love cold air kits. Most cars since the... 80's? have been pulling air from the fender or in front of the rad with ducts, and are generally designed to be quiet and without any turbulence. Then these fucking ricers come along and stick a useless filter on the end of a nasty ass aluminum tube, place it next to the rad, headers, or literally anywhere inside the engine bay, and call it "cold air".

What's the general consensus on the 2009 Honda Civic? My 2000 Sentra has carried me all throughout college but recently it's been making a lot of weird smells, throwing all kinds of engine codes (precat stuff, electrical, evap leaks, etc). It's got 280,000 miles on it so I think it's time for it to retire. I'm mainly looking for reliability, decent MPG, and that's pretty much it.