Has anyone on her got a nova on here as low as this think it looks good :thumb:
http://i1149.photobucket.com/albums/...g?t=1337364670
Printable View
Has anyone on her got a nova on here as low as this think it looks good :thumb:
http://i1149.photobucket.com/albums/...g?t=1337364670
Mine might be a little lower than that
ahh. the one on airbags...
to be honest, if your chassis legs get any worse, yours will look like that too....lol
I lowered mine more than that a while ago.
It was on a beavertail at the time and I wanted the suspension to roll my other shell around on lol
lol i know but i hope it dont lol
That low would be undrivable lol. Looks cool though :cool:.Quote:
Originally Posted by novadave24
not undrivable just would need perfectly flat road and going staight ahead only lolQuote:
Originally Posted by EwanG
i think all it needs is smooth bumpers and gte kit :)
I think it looks :tard:
1. I don't see the attraction
2. Looks stupid
tut. anything on air looks good, particularly the euro/ratty/oem+ stuff. Only competition/motorsport spec. cars wouldnt, of course.
Yeah I hate how all these look & no doubt would "handle" like a piece of sh1t because nothing that low could drive properly... :roll: I am right in saying that aren't I quart composer?
http://shop.simonlewis.com/ekmps/sho...996-3512-p.jpg
http://m.supertouringregister.com/image/865.jpg
http://pics.imcdb.org/0is256/cavalierg.3884.jpg
Cue the insinuated backlash of how those were "engineered by a team of expects with hundreds of thousands of pounds" and there's absolutely no possibility of anyone else outside of that environment being able to produce something similar for the road.
That cav looks tucking epic
Have you seen the roads in Renfrewshire ? A car that low would run a ground in some places,
Track car yes
Road car, pointless
Novas that low remind me when you remove all the springs and shocks on the way to the scrapyard lol
Why is it pointless?
Speedbumps lolQuote:
Originally Posted by BRoadGhost
That red cav would get over a speed bump
I don't understand how the wheels even turn when there tucked that far inside the arches????? Clearly they do but I don't get it lol
Maybe people like rubbing noise lol
Speedbumps, multi storey car parks, 3 point turn, carrying people in the back, getting stuff from B+QQuote:
Originally Posted by BRoadGhost
So many cons,
Pro's? You get " Yo bro your ride looks sick innit " compliments from the pond life at McD's car parks.
Lowering a car to the point where its detrimental to handling on actual roads is the same kind of daft modification as tinting the windows so dark you can't see out of them properly, or having a stupidly massive big bore exhaust with multiple pipes on a 1.0, its all show and no go. I'd rather have a car that serves its purpose as an actual car, rather than an unuseable ornament. I've never understood this obsession people have that wheels must be hiding half way into the wheel arches, it just looks broken.
the red btcc car is from the days when they had a minimum ride height, and when they pulled into the puts after a session, the scrutineers would pull them in randomly to drive over a 3" block
the later ones were from the era when money was god & they had to look like hotwheels toys, but they were certainly fast & spectaculer.
the op pic is of a show car. it also has a welded chain steering wheel iirc, both are classic mexican lowrider mods, low & slow etc...
unfortunately, there are lots of kids round here with really low cars on mega stiff springs, including the metrognomes, in their rover 100's with the fluid drained out, their heads bobbing up & down like a churchill rear shelf toy.. they are naturally declining, due to the large amounts of skid marks & floral tributes on roundabouts, these are the cars that suffer from terminal understeer(literally)
i used to work with a hotrodder who had a 400hp yb powered hillman husky van. it was so low, it had small castor wheels mounted into its sills so it could clear obstacles.. it was also incredibly fast on decent open roads...
that car looks ****
The wheels at the front can have the arches over them because the geometry is such that to clear any corner on the circuit, that's all the room they need.
Lowering ride height doesn't have to mean you can't get shopping in B&Q, clear a speedbump, use a multistory carpark or do a three point turn. TBH some people would be lucky to even have a passenger, let alone more than one, even if there were seats in the back.
I don't think lowering a car that much is detrimental to it's handling or is just for show, in fact i'd say it's the opposite, providing it's done right.
"I'd rather have a car that serves its purpose as an actual car, rather than an unuseable ornament." Amen ~ And that purpose would be to drive it. The way the arches look in relation to the wheel is just form following function; if it was a saloon you'd be able to see more of the wheel.
Is a nova 3" from the ground too low then?
That nova looks utter crap
The cav looks ok, but you know there for competition use
Personally I prefer to actually have some suspension travel
Rear end it tubbed, with a big air drop system in it. I did have pics in the boot, but i cant find them. The tubbs where bigger than the ones Simps had made. I didn't drive that low.Quote:
Originally Posted by turbojolt
It's a "show car" simple as that. It does drive that low, it doesn't go shopping, it doesn't carry people (when set that low) It's done for the low at a show, nothing else.Quote:
Originally Posted by bazil
I've set mine as low as i can go, but still drive able. I can go shopping in it, i've had 2 32"flat screen tvs in it, i've had 4 adults and KFC in it(rubbed a bit), i've had a xe engine block F20 and bits in the boot. And it's still drive able. Ok i cant go in a multi story car part in Scum as the ramps are very sharp so even with 2 people it the center box catches every ramp. And i don't have full lock on the steering but...
If i wasn't gonna do any of that id go lower.
its just a good look to see a nova on the floor then a vw for once lol
There lies the issue.....Quote:
Originally Posted by BRoadGhost
Most will just slam the crap out of a car with the cheapest nastiest coil overs they can and then not fix the issues such as geometry, driveshaft angles, steering arm angles and so on. That's where the claims of it won't handle right come from.
Bit like folks bitching about carbs always going out of tune, when in reality it's just badly setup in the first place.
Still even if you sort all that out the ride is going to be harsh because you won't have any travel
Not suitable for british roads therefore crap
http://www.gtspirit.com/wp-content/u...off_camber.jpg
bet this handles sick lol
All that needs is a VW badge to complete the nonsense look
lollollollollolQuote:
Originally Posted by Edd
Again, done properly you'd have sorted a decent quantity of travel if doing it properly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Edd
No, if it's on the deck and you have any decent amount of travel you'll just smash the underside up
So what if that cavalier is used competitively; suggesting it wouldn't be useable on the road is utter nonsense.
These car's do have suspension travel. In believe it or not, the same way every other cnut does the instant they slap coilovers on their car.
What the ignorant cannot grasp no matter how many times it's said or even shown is the entire body [amongst other components] is reengineered to grant compliance.
You think an F1 car doesn't have sufficient strength / stroke to ride up & over a curb?
A harsh ride as you put it Edd will never come from such developed cars because the shell has the strength to translate the impact through more of itself, than some standard car with harder suspension.
That over cambered merc is nothing like the car's i've shown.
Why would you smash the underside of your car up, if you've got the clearance to get over a speedbump?
Don't worry, Edd would invent use cases that would never happen to justify a point of view lolQuote:
Originally Posted by BRoadGhost
Vx's and Elise's frequently run 90mm of ground clearence on the road with no issues, some even try 60mm but have to be coy about speed bumps but they understand the complications of doing so.
What people don't realise is that when you lower a car you alter the centre of gravity in relation to the roll centre. Past a point it actually creates more body roll and thats the reason you need to run stiffer springs. If you do the right changes to your suspension components to control the two centres you can run softer springs. I've just spent good money on my 200sx to do exactly this. I have my coilovers on softest setting and nothing crazy spring wise and theres very little roll but its compliant on bumps. In comparison to the breaker 200sx I bought that just had coilovers, good quality ones too, and slammed low but still not as low as mine - it drove crap!!
I'm on Broadghosts side but agree that for most road cars that are "slammed" theres very little thought to performance its more for looks, like stupid camber just for stance & lows.
Someone's been edjumacating themselves lol
When do I get to tear this 200sx apart anyway, you never call, you never write :(