Reply With QuoteIs it easier to simply remove the passenger seat and bolt it back in when you have company?Originally Posted by Huertecilla
That is the goal. Nów. It was not earlier.
Frankly, I was not expecting thís much of a difference even though it should be mentioned that the vehicle docs. weight is with the fuel tank full.
It is the really real measured weight on an official weighbridge of the car as I drove it up from the village after dropping off Mountain Girl.
I already have the budget set apart, but... the charming company.
Still have some time before ordering though as I have not yet found OEM mounting brackets/rails.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 7th May 2019 at 18:39.
Is it easier to simply remove the passenger seat and bolt it back in when you have company?
"A man of little significance"
Well, there is the trade off between a huge multiple hassle ónce and a minor MÚLTIPLE hassle as the latter is several times/week.
I also could replace just mý seat but that would annoy me to no end every time I use the car.
Anyway; a luxury ´problem´.
The seat story is turning into a sage with devided points of view and opinions.
Not just mine!
Looks like your suggestion Foxy is not at all bad. I can fit just mine and take the passenger´s seat out. That would save the most weight on the seats ánd on the pasenger :-)
To be continued....
Another thing I have looked into several times over the past decennia, with different conclusions, is lexan windows.
Those dó save about half the weight of the glass ánd come with several additional advantages. On the MR, it would save a whiff over 3 kilos on the two door windows. Not cheap though as they are thermoformed ánd need be hardcoated both sides.
Not sure whether that is worth bothering Mr. Mike Templar about.
Polycarbonate windows age and scratch very quickly, ok in race cars but not sure I would want them in a road car
A friend put a polycarbonate windscreen on his MGB GT. A very bad move, it instantly rendered his windscreen wipers useless as any dirt on the screen would scratch it and make it a PITA in sunlight. I wouldn't even bother for door glass, it's not worth the effort. Easier to suggest to the glamourous company that they go on diets...
...and then you can permanently remove the passenger seat!
"A man of little significance"
Thanks for the moderation about the polycarbonate.
Only natural for a man´s mind to wander ;-)
You could always replace the windscreen with aero screens and throw away the roof and door glass.
"A man of little significance"
It has been done and since I would have no c-company anyway ;-)
One bloke in Japan even deleted the doors and welded in the partial safety cage/roll bar.
Yesterday drove down to the coast. This time slow life mode; short shiftng, not pushing it, windows down, cruising through the views.
Decided on buying the Luso seats. Two out of three is still one up on most, so the third can tioli. Will order when I have sourced a set of OEM mountings. There should be plenty around but sofar nothing. Patience, patience. Like that is my fuerte :(
Remember the launch campaign in Japan or at least the illustrations?
Malagueña gf is sorting her dress for the Feria de Jerez; WOW!
Never understood how Toyota marketing connected the MR-S with Cervantes´s windmills and Sevillana dresses but hey, in mý life it ÍS!
Here a row of Don Quijote´s ´giants´ in Castilla-La Mancha; we had time trials right at the bottom of the hill:
No time today but hoping to take some dress photos Tuesday.
On the theme of lightness, someone developed this for the MX-5:
https://rev9autosport.com/project-g-...ikini-top.html
I'd have one in a flash if I had a garage for my Healey. You could throw out the soft top and frame (about 20KG) and have a hardtop (about 20KG) for bad weather/parking the car somewhere overnight and just use the lightweight top if you're out and it rains. When I was changing over my Mk1 roof (with plastic rear screen) for a Mk2 roof (with glass rear screen, and some extra support to stop the roof fabric collapsing under the weight) I took the car out for a spin, with the passenger seat unbolted, and with 40kg missing the car felt significantly nicer to drive. I actually left it like that over winter, with the hard top on, before I grew bored not being able to take the roof down and sold the hard top. The minimalist lightweight top is a good idea though, although I'd put all the weight back on by fitting the roll cage it appears to need to sit on!
"A man of little significance"
It´s an idea adapted from 4x4 with a roll-cage.
Good idea for a track car with roll-bar.
The OEM soft top is lighter than a roll bar though.
Also the bikini top is only an alternative if it would be a bit more weather resistant.
As it is, I think a simple tonneau covering the tub is the lightest alternative for soft top removal and hard top back up.
Your mentioning noticing 40 kilo less is a crystal clear illustration of it not being hunting a ghost but a real world noticable difference.
I know you used to do the same as us; even ´just´ take the rear bench out because even thát is something you notice.
Imagine how noticable is what I took off the MR2 and how motivating that is to shave off another 20 on the seats.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 9th May 2019 at 13:13.
Whishing you an enjoyable trip.
The weather forecast is boring; clear, sunny skies till the 16th.
The Feria de Jeréz is on this weekend os maybe a nice destination.
The Malageña gf is under way and will be radiant in het incredibly elegant red Sevillana dress. It is bordering on art that.
Adrian is having the best of weathers.
Met him on the beach; I suggested a quaint chiringuito, like 40 years ago and the last of that breed. You sit under a century old tree, just beyond the flood line but still feet on the sand. Want to sit in the sun, shade, half shade? Pick your choice. Véry enjoyable indeed.
On the mod. front still sourcing OEM mounting bases.
Driving up and down between the coast and mountains a bit much, took the highway twice. Because of the weight I took out, the car now sits rather high on the springs and the combination of a raised cog and softer springing does a power of no good to the stability through long, undulating corners at speed.
The solution seems obvious; lowering springs but, there is a big BUT as those are stiffer too whereas my car is líghter.
Need to ponder a bit about that, but if I am to order a set of springs I´d best get some new gaiters too.
Right, cleaned the pcv-valve.
Simple job so .... sómething will go wrong.
The valve looke nicely clean, no crud, no oil but did not move freely; was stuck.
First spray wd40, check rear gaiters.
Now spray oven cleaner.
Check front gaiters.
Clean the valve and presto; moving as new.
The lightest wipe of sealant and in it goes.
So what went wrong then?!
The rubber hose was split :(
Cut it just beyond, so had to reroute it and ... it split again (:< >:)
As it is a real pita to change all the way, tightly taped it and it sits pretty again.
Ok, the shock gaiters.
Three ok, one split. Never mind, an all round change when I fit/mod the springs makes sense anyway.
...and the lady in red
Spent half the afternoon rolling in the dirt to measure the (increased) ride height and effect on the roll center.
Also what the effect of lowering springs would be and the effect on the roll center.
What clear is, is that I have created a problem by taking so much weight off.
The ride height has increased, thus the roll centre, thus the jacking, adding up to seriously more roll and bump steer.
The conclusion is that it neéds adressing.
The solution is less obvious.
Lowering springs are stiffer and go down too far, lowering the roll center which then needs be compensated for by special lower strut ball joints. All in costing €€€, ride height and a harsher ride.
Can’t you get lower springs but the same rate, changing the roll centre gets complicated
http://www.dfaulknersprings.com/
In this case the car is lighter so the forces are less and that caúses the increased ride height. So basically I would need same length, softer rate springs for the car to behave the same
There are quite a lot of lowering spring sets available for this car, all lowering 30-35 mm. and having a markedly stiffer rate.
Because they are stiffer, my car would have the same lowered ride height as the heavier OEM weight but have a harsher still ride.
Yes, and the lowering of the roll centre: Because of the length of the lower strut and ration of that to the track width, the lower strut needs to be compensated by about the same amount as the car is lowered to maintain the hight of the roll centre.
I don´t want all that negative complication to correct an entirely opposing issue.
I will fírst have a look at what I can achieve with the OEM springs.
Normally I loath shortening springs but in this case it may be exactly what is needed to restore the OEN geometry with the bonus effect of a slightly stiffer spring rate giving less roll.
Anyway, depends on their design too and that of the spring cups.
No, fírst measure more accurately.
Need a level flat surface to measure real accurate to establish whether I have a 20, 25 or 30 mm. large issue.
None seems much but on 200 mm. it is a very, 10 - 15%, undesirable increase in height of both centre of mass and roll centre.
No, firstfírst .... lífe: Grandpa needs to be taken to the airport this afternoon. My son´s gf needs to be collected wednesday, so I will stay at the coast. They both have luggage so not using the MR2.
Neither today as grandpa and daughter Mountain girl are dead set on cramming several days´ worth of activties in the morning.
Will measure Thúrsday I am affraid.
Some reading while you are bored waiting near the airport https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics...ng/roll-centre
I have Meister Rs on my MX-5 and they're great. You can adjust the height from scraping along the ground up to OEM ride height and control the stiffness from completely relaxed to track-only, but they're really good on body roll even when set to soft. On Saturday I had an 80-mile drive to see a friend, all cross-country, and forgot I'd been messing around with the dampers to counter the slight uneasiness from the rear (lack of brace + probably the LSD too) and it was all a bit tight for that distance. The good news is when I took the dampers down a click each (took 45 seconds from stopping to pulling away again!) I have a comfortable ride, the right level of bite into corners and the rear stays where I need it to. The bad news is I now have a petrol smell on 'enthusiastic' cornering on roundabouts. And I'm now thinking about uprating my brakes to give a little more bite, they feel slightly loose after a while. And I spent the journeys there and back thinking about throttle bodies vs turbo...
https://www.meisterr.co.uk/car/suspe...9-99-mr2-sw20/
"A man of little significance"
THANKS guys!!
Will have a serious look at it Adrian!
Would any of you happen to have access to a copy of Miliken & Miliken?
On page 683 there is an equasion which, including explanation, I would really love to stress my brain matter on.
The thing with adjustable suspension is Foxy, that I nééd to know what I am doing before I´d feel comfortable with that.
I have had many such suspensions on my racing and enduro bikes and it took like forever to arrive at settings for different circumstances. It was/is no doubt a lot better but I positively háted it.
On this car I would need to know/understand what the ride height setting doés first before I´d go that way.
Been searching the varous MX5 fora too as I am ofcourse not adressing a new issue and there are several times more MX5 owners struggling with this than MR2 owners.
As to adjustment for load with a passenger I would not bother as I simply will not nearly push the car as close to it´s limits with that added responsibility. Not to mention that the girls are sure to whack me hárd on the head the moment they have a hand free...
Are you sure it wasn't the placebo effect, dampers that change that much with one click would be terrifying.
There is a book (I cant remember the name) they took a group of top race drivers and told them they were changing the suspension settings, all of the drivers reported handling improvements and degradation, the truth was they had changed nothing.
Nope, I have a bad back at the moment, that one click all round was enough to stop it crashing over every dip and bump in the road. I tried softening off the rear by a click to help after the rear subframe brace was removed/LSD was fitted but that made the overall handling worse, so I stiffened it back a click and then stiffened it an extra one, which felt much better. Adding a click all round made it just about bearable but you do try to take off out of your seat on some of the bumps taken at speed. That's how I left it when I set off for Dorset on Saturday, and stopping outside Salisbury took a click back off all round to make it that little bit more comfortable while still allowing it to go round corners and roundabouts like it's on rails. Like Petrus, I'd been fiddling around with the damper settings for ages and having found a setup I liked the LSD/brace change messed it up (slightly). When I went to Swansea and back a couple of weeks ago I took two clicks off all round and it cruised beautifully. Isn't that the point of adjustable dampers?
"A man of little significance"
A single adjuster is always going to be a compromise, three ways have low speed and high speed bump so the shock behaves correctly depending on what you hit, I have black art design pro series on the Renault, you can feel them working, very similar to the Ohlins we used on the race car but about £3000 less. if you get the suspension frequency correct (3hz I think) the car becomes compliant
http://www.blackartdesigns.com/suspension-products
Just found this, it is worth a read, it shows that you can work out most of your suspension settings with a calculator before ever touching the car. https://www.drtuned.com/tech-ramblin...on-frequencies
Problem with in reality rather mundane sports cars like the MR and MX is that there is very little one can do to change the geometry unlike with p.e. a Lotus Elise.
The MR has the McPherson strut that can be seen as an infinitely long upper arm and changing the angle does hardly anything to alter the roll centre.
The lower arm is a pressed steel strut and the only possible change is a longer/shorter ball joint. At the back even thát is not an option, leaving one without any to try restore factory spec roll center hight.
The factory geometry is without a doubt the best compromise for up to fast road use and lowering the car strays away from that.
Adjustable coil overs are only a better quality McPherson strut. Not more not less and given the above there is very little one should do concerning the ride height, leaving adjusting the damping to the spring rate for a particular use.
Back to my higher car I am leaning to modding the OEM springs to restore the factory spec. ride height as that is after all the optimum compromise, perhaps 5 mm lower at the front. IF it is possible that is.
My dampers work significantly better than the standard shocks but cost £600, which is about a third of what I paid for the car. They're not perfect but they don't need to be.
"A man of little significance"
Can't you get adjustable spring platforms for your car, then play with caster and camber, then cut the springs down? I think cars look good with the little rake but in reality its just for looks.
Interesting, these shocks come with them https://mr2-ben.co.uk/products/664 makes me think someone has thought this through.
Last edited by adrianw; 20th May 2019 at 15:22.
Thanks for looking Adrian.
If not original or original replacement, I would need a homologated set.
As for the camber adjustment, I have already sorted that with camber bolts.
As I wrote, the height adjustment is a theoretical thing only because it affects the roll center and best left very close to OEM. The only thing available for that is a higher bottom bracket ball joint from HardRace.
There is a baffling lack of concrete; factual ´geometry´, info on the suspension upgrades availeble. The absense of specifications of lowering springs is symptomatic (Tein being the exception).
Not even the TRD Sportivo kit offeres conncrete info.
Neither is there much (understatement) on the TRD Sportivo spacers for the subframe which is part of the kit.
Been measuring a bit under the car and the effect is a definite lowering of the roll center. Working form 20 mm lowered springs (as per TRD kit) the effect is in the order of 30 mm!!!
See a schematic and now imagine lowering the chassis side of the bottom strut
Note: I have chosen thís illustration as it visualises the effect BUT it is also an example of the negative effect of lowering a car too much: The distance between COM and RC has increased so this car will roll MÓRE despite lowering.
As such illustrating twó things ;)
See; ´overthinking´ is not all bad ;D
Meanwhile have sourced OEM seat mounts. Leaves the matter of paying the seller in GBP as my paypal has been hacked.
Also sourced a breast brace. This is reputed to be even more effective on the MR2 than the front strut brace.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 21st May 2019 at 17:12.
Still wondering about the Sportivo ´dog bones´,
As I observed earlier, it is both baffling and disgusting how few factual info is available from manufacturers/vendors of aftermarket ´go faster´ stuff.
Even such a basis simple piece of info as spring values is the exception rather than the rule yet the ones I can find differ from 1,5 to 5 kg/mm. at the front per example. Both extremes for 30mm lowering springs, so if you would not dig deeper you could be in for a surprise either way.
Then there are 20mm to 45mm lowering ones, alas without strength info so Jove knows what you will end up with BUT... great colours!!!
I am always amazed when people lower their car and don't understand the effect, BAD always test the standard springs prior to specifying others, is there anyone near you with a tester on suspension dyno?
There you have another thing which amazes me; nobody seems to have the foggiest how strong the standard ones are. So... HOW ON EARTH do you know whát you are doing with different ones??
Quite frankly any cabrio or form of transport that takes you away
You´re missing the crux; it is not about the transport aspect but the amount of the added value of fun.Quite frankly any cabrio or form of transport that takes you away
Meanwhile unearthed the spring rate of the standard springies. Hard to believe that it is a basically unknown to the myriad of modifying owners.
Koni, H&R, KW, KAW , MeisterR, Tein and thén some. Got all the data; the fácts, and the conclusions are;
- that no coil-over is suitable for spirited B-road driving; all too hard springs, wáy to hard.
- that the damper/spring combos as provided by the manufacturers are best matched
- that the ride hight they give is a fait ascompli
- only Koni offers an adjustble street set with homogation. They may not be the best but they are the best for the use with legal docs.
I think I will suspend the bucket seat till after the suspension upgrade.
First the belly brace though; it should be about to arrive.
That belly brace is similar to the one fitted on some MX5s, if it works the monocoque must be severally compromised.
Can you get a set of standard springs from a breakers, then cut them down to try. it is a lot of work but might produce the results you are looking for.
The MX5 monocoque floor pans is one of the strongest topless mass production ones ever. Because of the bulkhead in the middle, the MR2 one is even stiffer.
Do bear in mind that the Lotus Elise p.e. is a targa; having a serious brace óver the tub.
When you open both doors it is obvious that the floor pan is what provides the stiffness and as such will benefit from bracing the two belly buckets underneath. Toyota díd in fact put a brace in the middle and added one further back per FaceLift update but those are compromised by the bean counters and not really rigid enough.
Cutting the springs will restore the spec. ride hight. I´d happily cut the fitted springs and go Koni/H&R or whatever with the extra info if it does not pan out. Not thát much work, so it still is an option.
It will make the spring slightly stiffer as the same force will act on a shorter rod = less flex. This is in a way a good thing.
Secondly the car has mid corner float at higher speeds, indicating that the shocks are past due. They still are perfectly ok for normal use but overasked when pushed at speed. The ham question is whether tackling this issue at illegal speeds on the highway is worth 700€ more than cutting the springs.
Thanks for putting it in print for me to look at again: I will have to put the car on the bridge for the belly brace so need a time slot in the garage. Might as well tackle the springs. Then drop by the tyre guys to have it alligned again.
Would save plenty budget for the buckets :-)
Last edited by Huertecilla; 28th May 2019 at 11:46.
Since I wil take out the shocks; do dust boots on the shocks actually hélp?
None, well only some now vintage ones, of my motorcycles, not even the offroad ones had boots.
On the 4x4s the metal shroud keeps stones off the rod but allows all dust/water/mud to fall out.
Very much like the plastic sliders in front of modern offroad bike front fork stanchions. At the rear those bikes have a flap.
Makes me wonder whether or how much the dust boots on my MR actualy dó.
Just pause to thínk about it a moment: The shock moving in/out changes the volume inside the boot = pumping air in/out, including dust/water droplets.
I even remóved a set from the front forks of a vintage offroad bike because it sucked in dirt anyway and subsequently trapped it. The only thing it did was hampering wiping the stanchions off.
So; I wonder....
The gaiters stop dust getting in and turning to grinding paste, the shocks last longer with them
What about the sucked in air, thus dust/salt/water which subsequently gets trapped inside?
No doubt that less gets in/on but there is no way to clean it out whereas without you blow it off with water pressure.
I remember the discussion about it on motorcycles during the eighties. There was no concensus but they did disappear.
Seat mountings are in as is the belly brace.
Suffering from modding withdrawal symptoms and cannot have the bridge till Tuesday, so had a look at the seat mountings.
Quite good condition and easy to change from RHD to LHD.
Looks a feaseble mod. for the buckets too.
The recling mechanism looks easy to remove and modify to reatin the belt buckle mounting hole.
Had forgotten about the driver seat incline mechanism so that is bonus! Better than faffing with spacers.
Quite héavy though at 6.5 and 7 kilos.
Luckily the back mechanisms look to be at least half of that. Makes sense as those need be immensely strong ánd have heavy duty springs on all sides.
I estimate that the seat swap maintaining OEM mountings will save 15-16 kilos.
Marginal gains
Mounted the belly brace and faffed about with the stock springs.
The latter was to correct the result of weight saving. I did not want a stiffer ride nor loose much ground clearance.
In the end cut almost a full coil off the front springs and less than half off the rears.
The front dropped just under 10mm lower than spec. and the rear a bit over 5mm. lower than spec. To write 9 resp. 6 would infer an unjustified level of exactness.
Went for a test drive over the ´norm-route´ and a spin over the ´circuit´.
First topped up the oil and the gas tank = heaviest non-passenger mode.
The caution is that I changed twó things; the Snelbaard belly brace and faffing with OEM springs. Neither is a game changer.
The belly brace is replaces two OEM bridges and adds an X-brace; an improvement; basically a marginal gains thing; a stiffer stiffener.
The slight shortening of the standard springs took the car down from higher than spec to slightly under spec with a slight stiffening as side effect; a marginal gains thing.
These two mods have effects which are impossible to completely distinguish on the test route/ circuit, though the change from higher than spec to a whiff lower is more noticeble than the increased stiffness.
Oh and a third thing: The spring mod is correcting a step báckwards, the car standing measurably higher on the springs because of weight shed.
The cool thing of the MR2 whch I mentioned before is that small changes are surprisingly noticeble when the car is pushed to the limits of tyre adhesion. This time too; marginal but there. Just that bit more direct feedback giving just that bit more confidence.
It did not come at any noticeable cost in comfort which makes sense as I only minimally shortened OEM springs.
Bottom line;
recovering from a small step backwards, with marginal gains overall. Low cost too.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 7th June 2019 at 18:06.
Mrs.Velorum´s car Gremlin experience made me rethink the carpeting.
After all, what is good enough for the Elise is cértainly good enough for my MR2:
Granted that is will not look thát neatly finished though.
As there is no insulating/damping foam, the effect on comfort will be minimal.
The 5 kilo or so to be shed seem not worthwhile but it is very little trouble.
Also to get to the handbrake cables; lubricate the linkage, adjust et all, it is necessary to take the center console out. For that is is easiest to kake the seats out.
I need to do the handbrake cables and then I am already done with most of the hassle to get the carpet out!
Thus; the car jobs for next week:
- modify the seat mountings
- remove carpet and add another 5 kilos of lightness
I picked this up recently -
It's a 2010 2.0l Sport with the folding roof. It had the Bose sound system but I've already ripped out the head unit and replaced it with a Pioneer Android one. Next on the list is the brakes as the front calipers are binding so I'll do the discs and pads at the same time, then it'll get a full service and Dinitrol treatment as the standard rust proofing on these is very poor. Beyond that I'll be doing something about the suspension as it rocks like a boat under acceleration and braking. People don't rate the Bilsteins on the sport model as much of an upgrade so I'll probably fit decent coilovers when funds allow and RX8 ARB's are said to be a cheap and effective upgrade. Power wise it's 160bhp as standard but the manifold is very restrictive and also has a cat built in so a new manifold and remap can see close to 190bhp or over 200 with cams. That's a pretty healthy improvement so it would be rude not to.
TBC
Thanks for sharing
Véry practical and good looking that retractable roof variant. Unfornutaley it follows the golde rule that nothng comes for free; it´s a bit heavier. Mind; 1150 kilos is still not a heavy cabrio.
It doés however illustrate the trend of ever heavier newer model; the NA was 200 kilos lighter. Mazda was spot on by breaking that trend with the ND like Toyota did with the Mk.3 MR2.
The pre-cat manifolds are a nuisance but don´t believe the hp gains as they are not that much of a weakest link. A better manifold design will not bring much as the main cat further down the tube becomes the bottle neck.
Cams only make sense with a full sports exhaust and remap.
MX5s are great fun to mod though as there are sóóó many about; plenty of experience and off the shelf goodies availeble.
Starting with modification ís a trip down a bottomless rabbit hole so be warned :-)
Enjoy!!
p.s. here is a photo of the ND Superlight show model. It weighed in at 1000 kilo.
p.s. to be able to imagine the real weight of weight saving, I refer to a 10 liter bucket of water and 40 kilo sacks of horse feed. The latter is rather heavy, basically unwieldy so the perfect reference to imagine the car wielding that or multiples of it.
I routinely cart two at a time along; no need to imagine that ;-) and I am rather chuffed to have unburdened my car by even more than that.
It is also the pérfect way to experince that it is very little effort to keep it on the move and quíte another to manouvre or stop.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 8th June 2019 at 17:38.
The roof only adds 35kg over the soft top and is way more practical so the soft top was never considered.
As for the manifold, it's not so much the cat in it that's restrictive but the bottleneck where the four pipes join into one. It's a crap design and it's been proven many times the gains available by swapping it for something else. A close to 20% increase in power for around 1k is not to be sniffed at.
No argument from me; I wrote ´practical´ and only ´a bit´ heavier.
My point about the power gains is; much is written, very little backed up with ceterus paribus befor/after dyno graphs.
A 20% gain from just an exhaust manifold swap... mwah, but... I am happy for you if the MX experts proove otherwise.
On the MR2 fora you can find LOADS of claims that removing the pre-cats will give extra hp whereas in reality it cóst a few horses. Even a swap for a well made 4-2 is only a handfull of horses at best and that is not at the max. because the main cat and oem muffler become the limit there.
The popular swapping of the OEM airbox/intake for a socalled ´cold air intake´ has more evidence of resulting in a lóss than in a gain.
There is a rather hallowed swap of the oem intake horn for a longer one doing away with the OEM conneting hose in the mudguard. The couple of horses gained at the top end comes at the cost of a larger herd gone awol midrange.
The moral of the above is that OEM is very, véry good; an overall optimum compromise simply impossible to improve upon. A less restrictive air filter element is a good example.
Changing nothing else it wíll give a bit more grunt as the MAF will tell the ECU about the air flow BUT filtering will be less effective. No short cust availeble there either.
The standard car is thé text book example of a chain being as strong as the weakest link; there are basically no links you can swap and have a stronger chain.
Just suggesting due dilligence when looking at modifications.
For the rest; have fun with you car this summer!!!
It´s out.
Not a lot of work, nor complicated but not as simple as stated on Spyderchat, especially because old plastic of the various bits gets brittle.
Cleaning up now. First vacuum cleaner, then a wet rag and putting it together again...
Got some ´red´ silicon stuff. Cut it to size and in it went:
It shoúld be 6 kilo lightness added but have not weighed it yet.
Does not look half bad either, I have to say, more bad @ss than plain bad really :-)
Time to put the seats back in but first a break as it is réal hot here. REAL hot.
Weighed it; - the silicon that went in 5 kilos.
Worth it?? Nahhh. But as is was almost for free; cost me 5€ for the silicon matts and ís 5 kg. lees. Also looks better imo.
Had to take the seats out anyway as the locking nut of the handbrake cable adjuster had been tightened silly tight.
So, would do it again but because of the 5 kilo? No.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 10th June 2019 at 14:09.
Posting Permissions
