Geeto67

that's not entirely true - you can do some plastics under a UV light with a low temp powder. They coat LS intakes and those are a plastic composite. Because they can't electrically charge the plastic they usually heat it up slightly to get the first layer of powder to stick and then use UV lights to bake subsequent coats.

nice work man. Couple of questions: - Is there someplace online where you have a rate schedule? Or can you ballpark what some of this works costs (i.e. what does 4 rims usually cost in a solid color? what does an old steel motorcycle frame cost in gloss black?). - is there a special coating you use for doing an aluminum radiator? does it affect the cooling properties any? - what is the coating you use for head pipes? - average turn around time?

Wet sanding will knock the edges of the scratch down, but if it is through the clear coat it may not be enough to make it disappear. Try polishing compound with a coat of carnuba wax afterward and see if it takes it out. compound will blend the edges and the wax can temporarily fill the clear coat. If it doesn't go away, then wetsand the whole piece and then reapply a clear coat on top.

LOL that is hilarious. Although a jug of Carlo Rossi would be equally appropriate because you can find it at a gas station for under $20, makes you more stupid when you consume it, and then afterwards makes you vomit and seriously wonder about your healthcare coverage.

Wow, that is both factually inaccurate and amazingly racist.

Then why say anything at all? Again, it isn't about the people. If the some total of your moral compass is dependent on your superiority to others then its not much of a compass. I don't care who you want to not impress or why, but it matters if you can make a point that isn't based on speculative fiction and unreasonable leaps of logic. right now your point is one of false equivalence that limited transparency of all media is somehow worse than the leader of the free world suppressing the media that is critical of him in order exercise a populist control over the press. if you are going to put your opinion out there it is subject to scrutiny. In this case I think you just want to root for your team and since Obama isn't on your team you have no problem ignoring facts or political theory in order to just say something you can't back up. I think that sewage treatment plant you don't want to volunteer at wants your opinion back so it can process it.

you can keep going on demonstrating you don't understand the difference between a lack of transparency and selective propaganda and disinformation. How you can think limited restricted access to the press is "worse" than the current administrations selective aggression toward news sources that criticize his administration as a way to expand his authority and waive his credibility is beyond me. He's using some pretty old school totalitarian regime tactics, like joseph goebels level shit. these articles also disprove your point that nobody held obama accountable for this, because that is what they are doing. that ship has sailed my friend, whether you like it or not you are arguing. Idiots worry about being right or wrong, intelligent people are more concerned with how supportable their position is and in the areas where there is room of interpretation is it consistent with their integrity and values. You should invest more time in developing your case and supporting your position because right now your argument that "Obama was worse" and wasn't held accountable is weak as wet toilet paper. but keep trying buddy, you'll get there.

Prove it. The Obama administration prosecuted sources and whistleblowers but rarely went after the media outlets directly. Even in its actions, they were still less than either Bush who preceded him. Even in instances where he locked out the press corp, it was the whole press corp, not just a select few, and often from events that had some element of privacy (like fundraisers - donors have a right to privacy). I'm not going to say Obama was a friend to the press, but many held him accountable for the whistleblower prosecutions. honestly nobody is going after the media outlets directly like trump has. The closest corollary is Richard Nixon, but even he didn't go this far and a lot of his tactics were used by Bush, Reagan, Clinton, etc...

and since we are talking about fake news...this is also an interesting article: https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2017/02/why-fake-news-targeted-trump-supporters/515433/

It's not a serious question. However, since it is brought up - Facebook is shaing info for all the news sites on the spectrum, plus many "fake news" sites (e.g. the Denver Guardian) that exist just to generate ad revenue from traffic (if you guys want to learn more about that this is a pretty good NPR piece from the planet money podcast: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2016/12/02/504155809/episode-739-finding-the-fake-news-king). Since content sharing is facilitated by users and algorithms clickbait and inflammatory headlines rule this space and places like the NYT and NPR get drowned out unless you purposefully go seek them out. What's worse is once you have clicked some of these "clickbait" sites or people send you some of them the marketing algorithms start to send you more and more of them and drown out the other sources. So the crap self perpetuates just because it's more attractive/inflammatory and not whether it has merit.

eh...no not really, unless you are confusing their Op-ed and pundit commentary for news. The NYT and Huffpo have pretty strong opinion sections that are often mistaken for actual reporting, Huff-po esp because of their main page layout which makes it hard to spot (I also feel like they could be toward the clickbait end of the spectrum too). If you are watching the situation room on CNN and think Wolf Blitzer is reporting news and not being an opinionated political pundit then I don't know what to tell you other than learn what the difference is between reporting and punditry (same goes for Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity, Rachel Madow, et al.) Brietbart could cheat over to the left more, not because they got better but more because the fringes of conservatism and the republican party got that much more crazy.

They used to. Look at any 1960's american car and you will see a spot for the plate in the design. In fact it used to look ugly without a plate so people would put fake plates there. examples: http://www.corvsport.com/Corvette/C4/1984/Images/1984_Prototype_Front_View.jpg I don't know what changed about the culture of design in the 1970's but that's when you started to see designs where the front plate was an after thought to the point today that almost all are an afterthought. Maybe it was driven by aerodynamics. In the modern era I think Audi nails it pretty well, as do ford trucks. The DOT sets the minimum standards and leaves it up to the states to decide if they want to do something different. If they stray too far they can withhold federal money (like with the highways) but they can't enforce. Bringing it back to our red light camera discussion this is why municipalities can make their yellow lights shorter than the DOT 3.6 seconds requirement when they contract with red light camera companies, but they run the risk of courts throwing out the tickets if the right defendant comes along. Anyway, I think there are always going to be people who just like to bitch about little squares with numbers and letters "breaking up the visual language" of their car's front end or some such waxy poetic nonsense.

Sounds like you won the world's shittiest lottery. Does it suck? fuck yeah it sucks. I'm sorry you got hurt, and I hope you healed. And yes maybe in your case it might have helped but again, this is one case out of hundreds of thousands of cars that pass through that intersection. Just because it would have helped you in your case however, doesn't mean it helps everyone. this is all assuming that the red light camera even in your case would have helped by being at the correct angle, triggered the camera (right turns on red even when the walk symbol are displayed don't usually trigger), able to capture the car's license plate (assuming no polarizing filter cover like many have on their cars in this state), the car was not stolen (cameras don't capture the driver, just the plate), and that you could get a copy of the photograph without a warrant or subpoena (and even if you needed one could get it in time). you are talking about a large expensive infrastructure to catch a very very small number of people committing a very specific crime. If the only reason they were there is to catch hit and run accidents like you are alleging, then yes the cost doesn't justify the existence. It is a very small secondary benefit of actual function of a red light camera - catching people who presumably run red lights. The money is made on people paying $50-$100 fines for presumably running red lights, and that's it. Red Light camera's come with numerous social costs. Primary is that they tend to increase rear end accidents at any intersection they are installed in. Accidents that they camera doesn't capture unless the car gets pushed into the intersection. They also are generally run by private corporations who are more interested in generating tickets than enforcing red light laws. The number and types of abuses in this area is fascinating from bribing city officials to displaced thresholds, tampered with light times (contractually shortening the yellow), making charities defenders of the programs by cutting them in on the revenue stream, and termination costs that empty the municipalities' wallet. Let's not forget that most programs are on dubious constitutional due process grounds, and in many cases (like in ohio) actually defy state criminal enforcement laws. Anyway...I don't get what all the fuss is about front plates. They have been around forever and they aren't hurting anyone.

Except that they don't, or at least they don't catch enough to justify the cost.

From my very limited experience in this.... typically when you dyno a car you want to do it in the gear that will yield a 1:1 ratio to get the most accurate reading. In most cars this is 4th gear (in some six speeds but not all it is 5th gear), but I don't know which gear that is in a 370Z. Let's assume the 370Z has a 1:1 4th gear, then if they dyno'ed the car in a 5th gear overdrive, and their dyno doesn't have the software to compensate for the overdrive (or they forget to enter it), then the hp reading will be higher rather than lower. Is it accurate? meh not really, Figure it is about a 5%-10% error between the two. Now if we assume 5th gear is the 1:1 ratio then running the car in 4th would mean a higher reading for the car run in 4th gear, assuming no adjustments were made to the dyno. Gears lower (numerically higher) than 1:1 are a torque multiplier and overdrives increase wheel speed - 1:1 is the the most accurate measure of hp and torque (it's the low valley - In underdrive the rolling road is going to measure a torque multiplication of 1.2 as 1, and in OD like 6th it will measure the faster wheel speed as a lower rear end gear than it is). I quickly google searched the ratios and found the ratios for a 2011 370 z are: So the dyno guy who ran your car did the right thing. The guy who ran the other car (assuming it has the same gearing) didn't run it right. Remember the rolling road is a measure not of what the engine is making but what is getting to the ground through the drivetrain - so any funny business with the gears is going to skew the numbers. cue people to tell me I've screwed up the explanation, but the end result is the same - if it wasn't run in a 1:1 ratio and the dyno wasn't adjusted to compensate then it is inaccurate.

did you do the repaint yourself? if so how did it go?

No, but I trust what you say even less. your logic's ability to defy gravity in it's leaps amazes me.

If that was the point of your comment then it was a satellite in orbit. And also that's bullshit.

From their HR departments like the rest of the world. I get that you are trolling by being overly simplistic about it but come on man, put some thought into it. Federal manpower is only part of the security costs, there is also space rental, lodging, business interruption, fuel costs, local law enforcement costs (often at Time and a half), supplies, etc...it adds up. Air Force 1 costs $180,000 per operational hour (a commercial 747 is $27,000 per hour in the air) due to the manpower and supplies. High vacation costs are just naturally associated with Republican Presidents, with W, Reagan, and Nixon being the worst offenders in recent history (Carter took the least number of vacations). Again, not really a thing to be stressing about. However, in every single instance until now the president was at a private residence they owned or a private resort club that they did not. I don't think there has been any other time when the president has vacationed at a resort or a hotel they own and the government has to pay for it and for using it's services for the accompanying security detail. The closest analogy I can think of is the president charging the government for food and lodging his detail at his private residence.

These are all projections, mostly by the washington post. They used an October report to calculate average single trip expenses, then they used those numbers to estimate what 3 trips to Mar-a-Lago cost, as well as the NYC security detail, and two international trips his sons took and used secret service protection and came out at $11.4 million in 30 days. We won't know the true money spent until the budget reports come out which won't be for some time. Obama (Supposedly) spent $97 million total in security and travel expenses for his 8 years (roughly $12 Million a year). I say supposedly because Judicial Watch, a conservative action group, is the source of that number and it is not independent or bi-partisan. I don't expect any trump supporters to get upset about his spending on travel, or his vacation time or that his kids get to use secret service even though they are conducting private business overseas. Even I am not that outraged over it, although to be fair - for most presidents the "winter white house" was just the fucking white house or Camp David and not a golf course they owned. What I hope people of both sides will get outraged about is the projected $1.5 million per hotel per year of tax payer money that trump's businesses will put in their pocket renting space out to the authorities for any place they require a security detail. I am not saying the government shouldn't pay for services they receive, but since he hasn't divested control of his companies and gets to decide he can travel anywhere he wants, it is just a "legal" way for a government employee to skim from tax pool. It gets worse when you consider that some of his properties (like the one in Mar-A-Lago) have doubled their fees. I would hope trump supporters who complained about corrupt democrats would realize this is what actual corruption looks like. I know they wont because media is the enemy or some shit or they took our jobs, but still - all he has to do is separate his business interests from his political ones or just choose to stay at places he doesn't own, but he doesn't to either and he visits his own properties frequently.

based on what? 50 years is 1967. The Democratic Party didn't really fully embrace the civil rights movement until well into the Nixon administration (it had partially embraced it with Kennedy in 1960, but it wasn't fully committed). In that time the US has had 5 REPUBLICAN presidents (Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II), vs 3 democratic presidents (Carter, Clinton, Obama). In those years the Democrats have controlled senate 12 terms out of 25 total terms (and in some cases only had the majority by 1 or 2 seats). So you can't say the Democrats have been in power the majority of the last 50 years in a political system where Republicans make great fanfare out of dismantling democratic programs. Tell me again how the underdog isn't doing enough to win the day. Considering that they have had to work against presidents who thought mental illness was a form of communism and that a war should be waged on that same group you claim the democrats failed using covert government operatives and the illegal sale of narcotics, the democrats are doing an ok job. I think you are confusing mainstream democratic politicians with a stereotype of liberals. Most policy making (prior to this administration) is based on facts and research, to steer toward an educated guess as to what will influence the behavior away from what the facts show as the root cause. Don't confuse the two, there are plenty of conservative democrats and some socially liberal republicans (though the party drives more and more out each day). vote for whomever you like. you currently have a president who is less benign than a shoebox so...good job.

14K miles means you have 50K miles before the transmission pops. Kidding, but only slightly as the 4L60E's reputation is "not if, but when it breaks". A leaking or failing front pump and line pressure regulator is usually the source of failure so look for trans leaking or weeps. Does the car have any mods?

man I wish we could like or star posts. I would star the shit out of this. Why is everyone so uptight about a statue? He's a notable son of columbus - plus it sounds fun and would probably draw some small amount of tourism revenue to the neighborhood where it is. There are plenty of notable Columbus natives (columbus-ites?) who should have statues - statue all the notable people!!! Just don't give Guy Fieri a statue - nobody needs to immortalize donkey sauce.

no they shouldn't. What does a helmet protect from in a car with no cage? it isn't going to protect you from a roll over, that's the roof's job. And it's not protecting you from a concussion from your head being flung about or whiplash (that's the headrest's job). It is really meant to protect from something loose in the car bonking you on the head and cracking your skull or something caving in and bonking you on the skull. I think the logic behind a 3/4 helmet in a street car with airbags is they don't want the airbag deploying into your full face helmet chin bar and the helmet then injures you. I am not saying it's scientifically sound logic, but I can see how someone would think that makes sense. No eye protection for anybody? well that just isn't thinking it through. These "super-car" experiences are not the same as an HPDE or an autocross. They are meant for people who don't have the means to own an exotic car to scare themselves shitless driving something whose power levels can't even fathom. As such the courses aren't usually even as good as older race tracks (runoff too short, wrong barrier type and placement, etc) and a staff in charge that doesn't always make savvy decisions to protect it's clients or instructors (like running a course reverse to what it was designed without considering the barriers as we saw last year). The gamble with the odds that the driver will crap themselves long before they get in any really dangerous situation and the instructors are just there to keep people from getting in over their heads, not to give them any real lesson on high performance driving. But like any risky event shit happens and then it's a tragedy. My fear is that places like this will give a stigma to real driving schools like bondurant and skip barber and make it harder for those places to operate due to rising costs when they aren't in the same class. You want to learn HP driving, go to a real school at a real track (Skip Barber, etc). Pay the premium it's worth it. You want to tell your wanna be Lambros that you took a coke white hurrican 160mph down a back straight and then brag about screwing a $1200 an hour call girl in your room at the bellagio right after to work the Adrenalin and 4 redbulls out of your system then Speed Vegas is your place.

It is NOT a budget fire suit. The only protection from fire is a fire suit or fire suppression. Long sleeves/jackets protect from loose debris in the car that can scratch bare skin. It's not protecting against fast moving sharp things but it is resistant to flying interior trim pieces that may have small sharp screws/clips, plus whatever else has fallen between the seats like pens, etc and other loose small objects in the car like keys. Same with gloves: not fire protection but protection from steering wheel friction burns, dash objects knocked loose, etc.