Blocks different too, the 26 had a reinforced block and is the only one to have that. Oil pan is also different. Bare engine costs about 3500 euros here so it's out of budget for you, most engine swaps are out of budget for you, don't even think about it. Turbocharging is also out of budget for you. 2000 euros? Get a 1000 euro car, strip it and cage it. If there's money left then replace the tires
1932 Chevrolet Roadster back on the Holden production line on the day of its closure. Not many people know that a lot of early Chevrolet's started life on a Holden production line Some other models during production
NASCAR race is on cable, Formula One is on broadcast. This is still America, right? I watched the F1 race anyway and I actually found it exciting. Help!
NASCAR seems to all be about the straight aways and the corners just seem to be there to slow you down, nothing happens there. F1, the corners make or break the race, the speeds are far higher too. I find it the far more interesting race series
Had a drive around my grandads factory, stalled the car once! (the reverse gear is quite tall) and was very close to stalling a few times too (like the little shake as the revs dip below 500). It idles at only 750, quiet but easy to stall, idle control still has a bit of lag too (moving the car without the throttle). Has quite a bit less torque than the Honda Jazz, that thing would accelerate from 600RPM! (stick it in 2nd gear from around 4mph and it accelerates). The Hyundai though, it sort of has the idle power, then throttle power but if you push it down more it will get going, it has a sort of non linear throttle, makes it a little harder to drive than the Jazz, but the Jazz does have the capacity advantage (1350cc vs 1200cc) and has 4 more spark plugs. (no it isn't a V8, just a twin spark 4cyl ). Just that moving off you have less confidence under 2000RPM, so 2500RPM is the sweet spot for moving off with brisk pace. The Jazz can move off quickly from around 1800RPM (kinda similar to a diesel). Anyway that concludes this bad explanation it was quite good though, I do love driving
I'm tired of two things in NASCAR right now... #1: TOYOTA! I don't give a $H!t if its made in Kentucky, its has HQ in Japan and last time I checked, Japan != America... This brings me on to #2: NBCSN... Their broadcast sucks, It's too many filler bits that I don't care about and too much product shoving for what's mentioned in #1... Their live-streaming options also suck as I don't get non-stop but the same 3 ad's every commercial break. The only time this is fixed is if they (mercifully) let me watch it over Xfinity's streaming service...
It's actually a common misconception that NASCAR is/was only open to American manufacturers, it's just that historically, only American manufacturers were really interested. Apparently, back in the very, very old days, when they really were "stock" cars, you'd occasionally find an Alfa or Austin Healy trying to mix it up with the barges on the shorter tracks. However, Toyota does indeed have ulterior motives for joining... they're trying to force themselves into the fabric of America until their name makes you think of apple pie and high-school baseball, and basically become the new Chevrolet. The sad part is, given enough time, it might work.
Something nice to know about AMG. AMG apparently tuned some Galants and Debonair's and had them sold.
So a UK insurance company has put out a concept for a smart crossing, that changes to stop if it detects a hazard. http://www.thesmartcrossing.com/?ut...0_S_Trueview_Ad&utm_campaign=TheSmartCrossing But why? A good enough driver can see the hazard anyway so what is the point of this?
Because health and safety has suddenly gone through the roof, out of nowhere, to the point where people aren't trusted with alot anymore...
This idea would bring great harm both to motorists and pedestrians. Imagine this: You are driving down a street quite fast. There is an intelligent crossing ahead. A pedestrian, who is busy with his smartphone (let's be realistic), starts crossing the road, as he knows that the green light will turn on as soon as he steps on the smart crossing. The light suddenly goes red for you, but your car is unable to stop that fast and you run the pedestrian over. Result: Pedestrian- dead Driver (you)- in prison for vehicular manslaughter Of course someone might say that you should always slow down when approaching such crossing, but that would make drivers' lives worse. And some drivers who won't slow down would make pedestrians' lives worse- and sometimes even end them. To sum up, replacing a crossing with traditional traffic lights with an intelligent one is dangerous, and, as you already said, replacing an usual crossing with signs with it is useless.
We wouldn't need stuff like this if people looked up from their phones and opened their eyes every once in a while
That's why I said "let's be realisctic". There is a lot of great ideas that would work in ideal world, but not in the real one.
Easy enough to broadcast the crossing state for the car, if anything it's easier than traditional crossing --- Post updated --- Total disagreement, these crossings would only exist in towns, where you'd need to be driving dangerously fast to not stop
The performance of cars are great nowadays. But no car is going from 50KM/H to 0 in a split second. More importantly, no-one should have to. It's much easier for a pedestrian to stop and wait for a close car to pass by as apposed to making it slam on the brakes
