Form > Function

[WingsofWar]

[Outlawstar98]

Originally Posted by fatoni

you guys are confusing unsafe drivers with unsafe cars. i think the concern many people are voicing is not in how you drive but how a car without adequate suspension travel or forced into a suboptimal camber curve may perform without much if any predictability. i think the point is that there is no real reason to do it other than "because" while there are a bunch of reasons not to.

Unsafe cars? I saw more broke down built cars than stanced cars. Hell I had a friends transmission fall out of his car once. Also stanced cars are easy to take care of. My friend chris which has this car:

drives it daily and works on it (not due to issues just changing settings) almost every weekend. And even with track cars (which chris there has a turbo'd MX6 in that garage behind it) you still avoid any road bumps, Hell I do in my BRZ and it is set up for track right now. (and I do tend to drive like a **** when I know the road is good.... lol)

edit:
To add he does drive that Mazda3 hard... You should see Him and I when we curse to meets.... hahaha

[SLICVIC]

Originally Posted by WingsofWar

Originally Posted by Outlawstar98

Unsafe cars? I saw more broke down built cars than stanced cars. Hell I had a friends transmission fall out of his car once.

Funny you say that , this pic was taken on sunday , the "stance" scene in my area planned a huuuge meet called Shrink All the Cars, as a fund raiser and had an insane turnout. Also this was purposely planned on the same day as "Honda Day" at Atco Raceway to make sure all the ricers stay out of our meet because they seem to ruin alot of good meets. On the way back from the #ShrinkAllTheCars meet , we saw at least 10 broken down "functional" built hondas along the side of the highway on the way home, i can only assume they were at Honda day.

[Siberian Husky]

The FRS is such a unique car at its price-point, it's obviously purpose built and it drives this concept home in every way possible. I can't help but feel like this forum and the community is turning into a bunch of snobby assholes.

You own a car with "beautiful" balance, with its unique chassi, low center of gravity, boxer engine choice, limited slip differential, responsive throttle and steering, etc. All of a sudden because you own a vehicle with these qualities it makes you an authority on what it means to be track-purposed and not.

I have seen so many threads made by new owners wanting to modify their car but are afraid of "upsetting the balance."

Will a staggered setup upset the balance?
Will the weight of a turbo set up upset the balance?
How much neg camber can I run without upsetting balance?

I have never seen so many e-bench racers in my life. Stance is nothing new on cars. I think some of the stance/hellaflush setups look great, and others look bad and unsafe. There are varying degrees of good and bad in everything. What really bothers me is how fake a lot of people on this forum come off being. All of a sudden because they own an affordable purpose built machine, it is in their plans to track the car and so purchases and modifications must be done accordingly. Bullshit.

The majority of us will use the car to commute in, pick up groceries in, and we will occasionally take it sideways on some quiet bend when no one is looking. 85-95 was the golden era of japanese rwd cars, just because the FRS/BRZ/GT-86 is the only one of its kind on the market [right now] does not make it this illustrious work of art that gets destroyed cause someone wants to dump it and hard park at their local Krispy Kreme on Thursday nights. I just wish everyone would stop pretending like they are track-bound enthusiasts and just let others do whatever the fuck they want without this unwarranted criticisms. It's one thing to say something is ugly and you don't like it or don't agree with its functions, but please stop with the dogmatic bullshit about destroying the purity that is the FRS foundation.

By the way, for you function>form philosophers. Extreme negative camber makes a car easier to drift, a pastime this car is renowned for.

[Outlawstar98]

Originally Posted by Siberian Husky

The FRS is such a unique car at its price-point, it's obviously purpose built and it drives this concept home in every way possible. I can't help but feel like this forum and the community is turning into a bunch of snobby assholes.

You own a car with "beautiful" balance, with its unique chassi, low center of gravity, boxer engine choice, limited slip differential, responsive throttle and steering, etc. All of a sudden because you own a vehicle with these qualities it makes you an authority on what it means to be track-purposed and not.

I have seen so many threads made by new owners wanting to modify their car but are afraid of "upsetting the balance."

Will a staggered setup upset the balance?
Will the weight of a turbo set up upset the balance?
How much neg camber can I run without upsetting balance?

I have never seen so many e-bench racers in my life. Stance is nothing new on cars. I think some of the stance/hellaflush setups look great, and others look bad and unsafe. There are varying degrees of good and bad in everything. What really bothers me is how fake a lot of people on this forum come off being. All of a sudden because they own an affordable purpose built machine, it is in their plans to track the car and so purchases and modifications must be done accordingly. Bullshit.

The majority of us will use the car to commute in, pick up groceries in, and we will occasionally take it sideways on some quiet bend when no one is looking. 85-95 was the golden era of japanese rwd cars, just because the FRS/BRZ/GT-86 is the only one of its kind on the market [right now] does not make it this illustrious work of art that gets destroyed cause someone wants to dump it and hard park at their local Krispy Kreme on Thursday nights. I just wish everyone would stop pretending like they are track-bound enthusiasts and just let others do whatever the fuck they want without this unwarranted criticisms. It's one thing to say something is ugly and you don't like it or don't agree with its functions, but please stop with the dogmatic bullshit about destroying the purity that is the FRS foundation.

By the way, for you function>form philosophers. Extreme negative camber makes a car easier to drift, a pastime this car is renowned for.

I just wanted to quote you and saw I love your screen name;

HAVE A PIC OF MY DOG!



/random

[Outlawstar98]

Originally Posted by SLICVIC

Funny you say that , this pic was taken on sunday , the "stance" scene in my area planned a huuuge meet called Shrink All the Cars, as a fund raiser and had an insane turnout. Also this was purposely planned on the same day as "Honda Day" at Atco Raceway to make sure all the ricers stay out of our meet because they seem to ruin alot of good meets. On the way back from the #ShrinkAllTheCars meet , we saw at least 10 broken down "functional" built hondas along the side of the highway on the way home, i can only assume they were at Honda day.

Yeah i know of that meet, didnt it get kicked out? I live near philly.

since your in NY, going to TristateTuners summer meet this sunday? going to be huge like always.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Outlawstar98

Unsafe cars? I saw more broke down built cars than stanced cars. Hell I had a friends transmission fall out of his car once. Also stanced cars are easy to take care of. My friend chris which has this car:

drives it daily and works on it (not due to issues just changing settings) almost every weekend. And even with track cars (which chris there has a turbo'd MX6 in that garage behind it) you still avoid any road bumps, Hell I do in my BRZ and it is set up for track right now. (and I do tend to drive like a **** when I know the road is good.... lol)

edit:
To add he does drive that Mazda3 hard... You should see Him and I when we curse to meets.... hahaha

breaking down isnt what i mean by dangerous. being slammed or not has no bearing on the mechanical drivetrain of the car (well other than dinged up oil pans or whatever). if you are trying to show me that race cars are unreliable, i get it. if you are trying to make me believe that "stanced" cars are somehow more reliable than a car not stanced, you cant.

also, sweet name.

Originally Posted by Siberian Husky

The FRS is such a unique car at its price-point, it's obviously purpose built and it drives this concept home in every way possible. I can't help but feel like this forum and the community is turning into a bunch of snobby assholes.

You own a car with "beautiful" balance, with its unique chassi, low center of gravity, boxer engine choice, limited slip differential, responsive throttle and steering, etc. All of a sudden because you own a vehicle with these qualities it makes you an authority on what it means to be track-purposed and not.

I have seen so many threads made by new owners wanting to modify their car but are afraid of "upsetting the balance."

Will a staggered setup upset the balance?
Will the weight of a turbo set up upset the balance?
How much neg camber can I run without upsetting balance?

I have never seen so many e-bench racers in my life. Stance is nothing new on cars. I think some of the stance/hellaflush setups look great, and others look bad and unsafe. There are varying degrees of good and bad in everything. What really bothers me is how fake a lot of people on this forum come off being. All of a sudden because they own an affordable purpose built machine, it is in their plans to track the car and so purchases and modifications must be done accordingly. Bullshit.

The majority of us will use the car to commute in, pick up groceries in, and we will occasionally take it sideways on some quiet bend when no one is looking. 85-95 was the golden era of japanese rwd cars, just because the FRS/BRZ/GT-86 is the only one of its kind on the market [right now] does not make it this illustrious work of art that gets destroyed cause someone wants to dump it and hard park at their local Krispy Kreme on Thursday nights. I just wish everyone would stop pretending like they are track-bound enthusiasts and just let others do whatever the fuck they want without this unwarranted criticisms. It's one thing to say something is ugly and you don't like it or don't agree with its functions, but please stop with the dogmatic bullshit about destroying the purity that is the FRS foundation.

By the way, for you function>form philosophers. Extreme negative camber makes a car easier to drift, a pastime this car is renowned for.

extreme negative camber doesnt make it easier to drift. it makes it easier to break traction. they are different. in fact a static rear camber makes it easier (whatever you mean by that) to drift because you arent having to deal with dynamic camber changing the levels of grip back there. its the reason a car like the ae86 is pretty legendary for drifting while the miata, which is similar in many dimension, isnt even on the drifting map.

[SubaSteve]

This looks good.

This is taking it too far.


I find slammed to be ok on cars but hellaflush is dumb...

[Outlawstar98]

@fatoni what that statement, and how most people talk bad about form and they should go to function, isnt that the same either way you go then? You have more chance of things not working right either way. I see more stock cars crash, doesn't that mean stock cars are worse? right??? RIGHT??? lol

[Siberian Husky]

Originally Posted by fatoni

breaking down isnt what i mean by dangerous. being slammed or not has no bearing on the mechanical drivetrain of the car (well other than dinged up oil pans or whatever). if you are trying to show me that race cars are unreliable, i get it. if you are trying to make me believe that "stanced" cars are somehow more reliable than a car not stanced, you cant.

also, sweet name.

extreme negative camber doesnt make it easier to drift. it makes it easier to break traction. they are different. in fact a static rear camber makes it easier (whatever you mean by that) to drift because you arent having to deal with dynamic camber changing the levels of grip back there. its the reason a car like the ae86 is pretty legendary for drifting while the miata, which is similar in many dimension, isnt even on the drifting map.

Drift theory is deep. I agree with your statement, what I wanted to make clear is that there is a place for high levels of negative camber in certain drift applications. I just wanted to shed light on the fact that the "function" in "function>form" is multi-dimensional.

[SLICVIC]

Originally Posted by Outlawstar98

Yeah i know of that meet, didnt it get kicked out? I live near philly.

since your in NY, going to TristateTuners summer meet this sunday? going to be huge like always.

the turnout was so huge that it was packed to the point that an ambulance couldnt get into the park in case of an emergency , so cops claimed it was unsafe, which is respectable. meet split up to ikea/king of prussia

Ive heard about the tristatetuners but i didnt know where/when , ill def look into that , thanks.

[Outlawstar98]

Originally Posted by SLICVIC

the turnout was so huge that it was packed to the point that an ambulance couldnt get into the park in case of an emergency , so cops claimed it was unsafe, which is respectable. meet split up to ikea/king of prussia

Ive heard about the tristatetuners but i didnt know where/when , ill def look into that , thanks.

im 15 mins north of KOP, awesome place. If i knew they went there I would of drove down.

http://www.tristatetuners.com/forum/...d.php?t=129460

[VesperLynn]

Alright. Time to pitch my $.02.

Watching this Thread had been kind of funny. I personally don't like the look of crazy cambered out cars (no offense Vic.). However I do love how much time and appreciation he has put in for his car. The argument that the car isn't being used for its purpose is bogus and irrelevant. There's multimillionaires who buy lamborghinis and Ferraris that don't drive them the way they're meant to 99% of the time. They suck at driving and bought it for a status icon.

I do like the look of some slammed cars, Vic's car looked awesome when he had the gold wheels on for my personal opinion. I have friends that are into "mega stretch" and "low and slow" and that's personally not my thing. I like my car lower, but only by an inch, two at the most. I like everything to be functional at all speeds.

Anyway. Some people are overreacting. I've been almost creamed by some idiot in her minivan more times than any slammed or cambered car. That's just my experience though.

[fatoni]

Originally Posted by Outlawstar98

@fatoni what that statement, and how most people talk bad about form and they should go to function, isnt that the same either way you go then? You have more chance of things not working right either way. I see more stock cars crash, doesn't that mean stock cars are worse? right??? RIGHT??? lol

haha. youre missing my point and what is probably the point of many others so im going to try and explain it a little better. that was probably our fault.

the point i was making is that what that kind of camber does to the hanlding is make it less predictable. it takes less to upset a car like that than it does to one of these "function" cars. things like emergency braking or lane changes are enough to send stanced cars out of control. i never meant to involve any other system of the car other than suspension when i was talking about danger.

Originally Posted by Siberian Husky

Drift theory is deep. I agree with your statement, what I wanted to make clear is that there is a place for high levels of negative camber in certain drift applications. I just wanted to shed light on the fact that the "function" in "function>form" is multi-dimensional.

you may or may not have a point but i dont know enough about drifting to respond. this whole movement doesnt bother me. its my personal belief that the people who are disgusted by it are at least equally responsible for the problem. however, if you asked me, the only car that should have that much camber is a delorean and it should be positive camber.