Geeto67

IMG_7231

Ok so I tried it: IMG_7232

Super happy this all worked out for you.

I'm not saying it's a good idea or a bad idea, but there was a time when this business model was viable and now it isn't. It wouldn't hurt to find out why. What was the thing that caused them to disappear? First step would be to write a business plan. This sets all your assets and liabilities out on paper, maybe something becomes readily apparent, maybe it doesn't and you need to do market research. This is one of those things were people talk about it a lot as a "wouldn't it be great" idea, but if you are serious then put pen to paper and do the homework. I know that a few places in NYC have had success with this model with motorcycles but they run it more like a club and motorcycle parking/storage pays the majority of the bills. Something you may have not considered, I don't think you can fly under the radar as a "car flipper" anymore. Having a garage and a spot might open you up to the requirements of being a used car dealer and that's a whole different game.

NOBODY is suggesting they be ignored. Just because the workings of international diplomacy aren't always visible or understood by the masses doesn't mean they don't have merit. Often it has more to do with leverage of positions within the community to get the outlier to fall in line. Think about how a neighborhood association works, if one neighbor steps out of covenant the rest gang up because they are all protecting their shared interest. It's not a direct confrontation, it's a structure for an en mass show of force, even if the allied neighbors don't really like each other. Attacking head on individually is the trap. It draws us in and causes our leverage with our allies that are also aligned with our enemies to evaporate. Putting pressure on China to act keeps them our ally and in turn pressure NK, directly attacking NK makes China our enemy because we threaten their position in NK. I no longer thing the world community is afraid of trump. I believe they were at one time due to his unpredictability but now I think they got his number and they are better at this game than him. Tillerson is going to have his hands full and that's even before we consider trump undermining him publicly. You spoke up so now you are in it. I'm not thrilled with it either but it's the prudent move at this point. You don't like it? What's option B? Preemptive strike? The long game is riskier because of the increased likelihood as a catalyst to the next world war. I know the level of cynicism is high here but the international community does still abide by morally justifiable action. If we are attacked we stand a good chance of retaining China as a ally, we attack first and that option likely goes out the window. NK is banking on this by the way. They are sitting there daring us to attack without actually attacking us first. They are banking on his temper to alienate our Asian allies. They have baited the trap and are waiting for him to take the bait. So at this point I ask, what's the better option than wait and see? Any other option is going to cost lives, what's the best chance for a possible outcome?

It is not being apologetic to acknowledge the president has all the finesse and surgical skills of a 10lb sledgehammer. Every other president has handled NK in a diplomatic matter since the 1950's. This is another penny ante dictatorship stealing our time and resources and the president is letting them by being his usual self.

I don't know that it matters if they are nuclear capable, the question is do they pose a military threat to Guam at the moment. The state run North Korean media seems to indicate it but the safe play here is wait and see what NK is actually feeling up to doing.

Clearly you are if you see the sitting president as owing no fault to this situation. You know the situation that has escalated since he took office. I shouldn't be surprised, most government trained killing machines think "diplomacy" is just a funny thing to paint on the nose of ordinance.

or maybe they do, millions of people buy hyundai's every year (new and used) - who is to say the model three isn't poaching sales from them? It's as much a car enthusiast car as a Nissan leaf. Also pre-orders are right around 455,000 counting the 63,000 cancellations. hardly 10s of millions.

so...what's the expectation for the model 3? Are people expecting it to be the dragstrip bully the model S with the ludicrous speed mode is? because I don't see it. the Model 3 is as fast as an acura TL and an audi q5 (5.6 0-60 time) and the ludicrous speed option is only going to shave .3-.6 seconds off that (to put this in perspective the model S 0-60 is 2.8 seconds in ludicrous speed but closer to 3.2 seconds with out it). It feels like people are getting excited over an electric version of a Toyota Camry SE (also a 5.6 second 0-60 car).

it's funny, but in all the tutorials I have watched and read they never mention a difference between distilled and tap. Since a lot of the bigger parts require 35-50 gallons of water most people use what comes out of the tap, but I can see how a hard water like we have here in ohio could have an effect on an oil based solvent paint. There are some key items of prep involved in the water: Borax: For Oil based acrylic enamel (Testors, Hombrol, other hobby paint) they recommend adding 1.5 tablespoons of borax per gallon of water. This is to increase the buoyancy of the paint in the water, increase the water's surface tension, soften the water, and act as a partial temporary glaze and water barrier on the enamel (borax is an ingredient in most enamels). There are specialty paints that don't require the borax, like magic marble and 1 shot lettering paint, but as I understand it magic marble is incompatible with most automotive clear coats (they recommend a Varnish safe for acrylic paint though some have had success with rustoleum enamel clear coat). 1 shot needs a hardner to enable it to be cleared over, otherwise it is too soft and will lift any clear coat. For some reason a lot of people are tight lipped about using automotive paints. I think this is what most pro's use but because they do it for a living they are reluctant to share - or maybe they get crappy results and they don't want to talk about it. the you tube videos can be literally divided into two types: amateurs using hobby enamel who talk a lot about what gives them "pretty good" results, and pros who won't discuss any materials or prep at all and just make trippy videos of guitar bodies going into industrial tanks with prog rock soundtracks. If you are drunk or otherwise chemically enhanced, watching deanswirlled on youtube dunk guitar bodies in multicolor swirls is really soothing. Drying: The general consensus is that the paint spreads so thin on the surface it dries almost instantly once removed from the water. However, almost every tutorial recommends having a hair drier or air hose set to low pressure to blow off the excess water clinging to the body. Too much air pressure and you may cause runs and skinning on any thick blotchy area. most noted that there are going to be one or two areas where the water got between the paint and the surface and caused a bubble. The recommendation there is to let it dry and evaporate and then touch up as appropriate. Everyone recommends at least a 24 hour drying period before applying clear coat. They also recommend single stage gloss paint as it is less porous and will cause less water to form bubbles, and will bond with the borax. Temperature: There is some split on this. some say you need the water to be 75 degrees to keep the paint in suspension. Too hot and it will dry and skin on the surface, too cold and the paint will take longer to dry and the risk of runs increases. BTW runs are important to avoid because the paint layer is so thin that you can't sand without removing the swirl you were trying to get in the first place. Most recommend at least 3 coats of spray clear before sanding for the first time. People that use rattle cans prefer not to heat the water, possible because aerated rattle can paint dries quicker than pant in liquid suspension and the cold slows down the drying. Magic Marble doesn't require it but it is recommended. When I look at a lot of the pro jobs I always see a heater in the tank but they also seem to be using a slightly thicker paint than what comes out of a testors bottle. This will be the biggest variable for experimentation for me I think. there are all my observational notes so far, someone suggested I try an look for some white xmas tree balls on sale to experiment with because 1) they are cheap, 2) they are a complex form, 3) if you don't screw it up you get something you can actually use on your xmas tree. now where do I find Christmas balls in august?

LOL. Just to get this conversation back on track, I bought out the only Humbrol supplier in columbus (Grandview Hobbies) of some basic colors like black, metallic red, and metallic blue, (at $1.60 a tin) and I went out to the garage and dusted off the testors paints I have for my models and ordered a metallic gold. The concern I have is that none of the paints are UV protected paints. I plan on top coating with a UV protected clear like duplicolor's perfect match clear, or spraymax glamour gloss coat but I am still worried about the color fading over time. I am probably going to use these hobby paints for the guitar but not the motorcycle. I also went on amazon and ordered some 3ml disposable pipette droppers I think I am going to try dipping some throw away parts next week as a test. From what I have seen so far the best results come from people laying the paint on top of still water rather than dropping it in from any height. There are guys that use spray cans and to do this and from what I have seen of their results the swirls are stringier and the paint tends to skin over more often (skinned over paint leads to blotchy patches), probably due to it drying as it heads toward the water, and also the disruption of the water shooting compressed gasses at it. floating the paint on the surface of the water tends to spread it really thin so not a lot of paint is needed for a large coverage area. Because of that I am thinking I am going to try to experiment with some touch up paint bottles from like autozone. If anybody has some old automotive gloss paint they want to donate to the cause of experimentation let me know.

http://insideevs.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/bollinger-chasis.jpg http://www.adandp.media/cdn/cms/Bollingerchassis.jpg here is the chassis. What's interesting to me is that it uses a central electric motor and CV axles rather than Disc motors at all four wheels. The downside of this is drivetrain efficiency loss because it still has to pass through an axle and a differential. The upside is lower unsprung weight and centralized mass. Something else I don't like is it uses inboard brakes like a jaguar. Again, low unsprung mass but also a PITA to service. This isn't an offroader like a rally fighter or a tube chassis buggy. I think the mark they were shooting for was original range rover or willys jeep and they surpassed that mark. It didn't occur to me before to mention it but one of the advantages of the hydro suspension is that off road it can behave like a solid axle. If you get one wheel high up on a rock, the suspension will increase the stiffness to the rear that is out of balance like a solid axle would. But you still get the marshmallow ride of a fully independent suspension on road.

Then you have not seen the OMG AR15 Unicorn: http://14544-presscdn-0-64.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/unicorn-gun-21.jpg http://www.guns.com/2012/02/10/omg-ar-15-unicorn-zombie-rifle-extraordinaire-video/

Anybody else see this? About 9:15 this morning heading west bound across the top of 270 by sawmill was a car hauler that had a 1950's studebaker starlight coupe, a 1960's studebaker commander, and a Tatra T-77. All three cars looked rusty and unrestored but looked to be straight (i.e. Traces of original paint, no body panels flapping in the breeze). Sorry no pics.

Citroen has been using this system since 1954. If they haven't got the bugs worked out of it by now.... Seriously though, Rolls Royce has been using this same system (that it licensed from Citroen) since 1966. The neat part of this system is it allows you to retract one wheel while driving and still balance. This feature allowed Charles DeGaulle to escape an assassination attempt. The original Range Rover had a similar system as well. This isn't like an Airbag system, if properly serviced it will last a really long time. It isn't cheap however, which is why you only see in expensive cars. I suspect it is part of the reason the Bolinger costs as much as it does.

so...I am getting ready to finish a couple of projects, specifically refinishing a 1996 Fender Jagstang and painting the tank and fender on my 1974 Sportster. I have been obsessing over swirl painting or hyrdo dipping videos on youtube because I think this is a neat effect and I want to try it out for both things. Here are some examples of the finishes I am talking about: http://www.etguitars.com/images/customguitars/paintfinishes/GMC%20swirl.jpg http://www.elusivesound.com/pics/UV03.jpg the process is similar to Hydro graphics except instead of floating a film on the surface of the water you are floating actual oil based paint. So has anybody tried this in real life? If so what got you the best results? has anybody tried this with actual automotive paint or even automotive touch up paint?

does Mass get an award for the first crashed one? http://jalopnik.com/jackass-not-paying-attention-crashes-into-mans-new-hond-1797384456

bang, you are dead. Not that you take customer's cars on rides or anything but the supercharged disco is 340 hp, the supercharged Range Rover is 510 hp. Just saying, it's a bit of a beast.

Are you sure that is a discovery Tim? Looks like a Third gen Range Rover to me (FYI Land Rover is the company, Range Rover is a Model). The supercharged ones used the same engine as the jaguar XJR and XKR.

The were testing the model 3 here in ohio. I've seen one with mfg plates driving around the back side of CMH more than once over the last year or so.

He's written 3 books already: "the little book of hedge funds", "Goodbye Gordon Gekko", and hopping over the rabbit hole". If he does write a kids book I imaging it will be a sequel to this: https://www.amazon.com/Nobody-Likes-Cockblock-R-Swanson/dp/0692636757/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1501581466&sr=1-3&keywords=Go+the+fuck+to+sleep Probably entitled: "Nobody loves a Cuck"

10 days. I believe it is a record. To put this in perspective, the average life span of a press secretary for any president in the modern age is 3 years. The short term press secretary leaderboard prior to the mooch's firing: - Jonathan Daniels: 19 days. Appointed by FDR right before his death in office, and continued to serve under Early's temporary appointment to replace him until Truman could find another. - Jerald terHorst: 31 days. Quit in Protest of Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon - James Brady: 69 Days. Shot in the head during an assassination attempt on Reagan - Jake Siewert: 112 days. Post Election Fill in under the last days of Bill Clinton - Roger Tubby: 124 days. Post Election Fill-in under the last days of Truman - George Stephanopoulos: 138 days. was the defacto press secretary under Dee Dee Myers until removed by Myers for misstatements, was never officially appointed. - Sean Spicer: 182 days. Resigned, suspected in protest of Anthony Scaramucci all others after that are a year and a half or longer. It isn't unusual for a president to remove a press secretary from office, but usually the ones that last a short term are tied to extenuating circumstances. In this case it's kind of a no brainer as to why, the Mooch was an absolute train wreck of a Press Secretary. Trump was right about one thing: he is setting all kinds of records, unfortunately they are the kind of records you don't really want to have.

I give you....the Lotempo: https://cleveland.craigslist.org/cto/d/must-go-lowrider-oldschool/6195725403.html

probably from this: http://gmauthority.com/blog/2016/08/2018-buick-regal-gs-could-feature-a-twin-turbo-v6/ seems a lot of people want the car to be twin turbo, and there was a lot of speculation that it would be a poor mans ATS-V (although the engine suggested is the XTS-V 410hp variant). have we gotten to the point where a N/A 300hp 3.6L v-6 isn't kind of impressive? I mean it's still not interesting in the platform because it's pushing close to 4000lbs of car but still, 10 years ago if you got 250hp out of a v-6 it was pretty amazing, no stock carb'ed chevy 283/327/350 ever really made that, even in the 60's (thanks gross vs net hp rating system). progress is pretty great.