The Car Thread ... !

[Apple fanboy]

So, another bit of an update...

One of the things I picked up in my 6 hour road trip yesterday was a set of LE wheels which I love. The jury is still out for me on how they will look on my car, but it was $200 for 5 and they had tires at least good enough to roll around/drive around the block and see how I like it(it's a shame to toss 80% tread tires, but they're also 23 years old if not older and most likely cheap tires to begin with).

I'd called someone else I was visiting while up that way, and talked about the wheels a little bit. He said "You know those take special lug nuts, right? Ask Pete if he has them when you get the wheels." I texted and asked, but unfortunately he came up empty.

I did a quick search, and Moss has them but $17 EACH. Shopping around from various suppliers gets them down to $15 each, but that's still a whole lot of money for lug nuts.

Since these are older alloy wheels, I'd assumed I needed shanked nuts. I told Autozone I had a 1980 MGB to see what came up. They showed a set of shanked nuts for $37 for a set of 20-more than I need but also they're $37 for the set. They're chrome and not black, but I figured they'd work for mounting.

I asked on the MG forum if they would suit, and the short answer is no.

I got a really detailed answer from someone who had been through the same with finding them, and here's why:

Most lug nuts are either made with a conical seat or with a shank. The conical seat centers the lug nut center the hole on the stud, while some alloy wheels(particular older ones) are machined tight enough that the shank holds them correctly. So, in other words, it's an either/or deal.

It turns out that the LE wheels require both. They need the conical seat to center them and the shank for support. This is the general structure of them https://lugnutguys.com/collections/...ts/et-style-bulge-acorn-lug-nut-1-2-20-chrome

If things were easy, I'd order those above-they're certainly cheap enough-and call it a day.

Here's the other snag, though. The LE lugnuts have a .20 shank length. This supports and extends a little past the wheel hub without bottoming out against the drum or rotor. The ones linked above have a .30 shank, which is long enough to bottom out and consequently not seat the taper against the wheel.

The person who gave me that link ended up cutting them down on a lathe to get them to fit. This time last year, I'd have stayed an hour late and work and gotten it done at our small in-department machine shop. Now, I don't have access to a lathe the size I need.

I MAY have a lead on a servicable used set, which is easiest. Otherwise, I'm going to be pulling some favors to see if I can either get some lathe time somewhere or get someone to do it.

Option C...there's a 9" South Bend on Craigslist that needs a little TLC but is cheap and not too far from me. I wonder if my wife would let me put it in the back of the garage

I miss having an older Colchester lathe to jump on.

 

[bunnspecial]

Just tell her it was always there and you just tidied up so bow she can see it ?

I wish it worked that way. She's been in this house for three years, and I only moved in when we got married back in the fall. She let me have the garage back in January when I FINALLY got my car here/back from the shop, so she knows pretty well what's there. Her car is in it now...I changed the oil last night, then realized that the filter I THOUGHT was on the shelf wasn't, so I need to get that put on then get things swapped back around.

Also, this was another of my prizes yesterday. I'm not a big "bling" guy, but the stock air cleaners are a pain to put on and take off, but fundamentally are a sound design. These reuse the velocity stack from the stock cleaners, which guys with flow benches have tested and not found anything that flows better for street use, so I'm glad they stay.

The only real downside is the filter elements are foam(which are terrible), but I'm sure K&N or someone makes a pancake filter that will fit this housing. For a lot of reasons, I consider K&N and other oiled filters a bad idea for street use(their filtration efficiency is lower than paper until they load up, at which point the claimed flow advantages-which rarely even matter short of WOT-go out the window) but they're better than nothing and K&N does make a million and a half different filter configs.

 

[Apple fanboy]

I wish it worked that way. She's been in this house for three years, and I only moved in when we got married back in the fall. She let me have the garage back in January when I FINALLY got my car here/back from the shop, so she knows pretty well what's there. Her car is in it now...I changed the oil last night, then realized that the filter I THOUGHT was on the shelf wasn't, so I need to get that put on then get things swapped back around.

Also, this was another of my prizes yesterday. I'm not a big "bling" guy, but the stock air cleaners are a pain to put on and take off, but fundamentally are a sound design. These reuse the velocity stack from the stock cleaners, which guys with flow benches have tested and not found anything that flows better for street use, so I'm glad they stay.

The only real downside is the filter elements are foam(which are terrible), but I'm sure K&N or someone makes a pancake filter that will fit this housing. For a lot of reasons, I consider K&N and other oiled filters a bad idea for street use(their filtration efficiency is lower than paper until they load up, at which point the claimed flow advantages-which rarely even matter short of WOT-go out the window) but they're better than nothing and K&N does make a million and a half different filter configs.

View attachment 1734287

Lol. Is that your finger over the lens? Shame on you!

 

[bunnspecial]

Lol. Is that your finger over the lens? Shame on you!

I know. That's what I get for using my iPhone and not a real camera

Or, maybe it just needs an adjustment of the nut behind the screen.

 

[Apple fanboy]

I know. That's what I get for using my iPhone and not a real camera

Or, maybe it just needs an adjustment of the nut behind the screen.

I never enjoy shooting with an iPhone. Just feels awkward. Much prefer the ergonomics of a proper (Nikon) DSLR.

 

[bunnspecial]

I never enjoy shooting with an iPhone. Just feels awkward. Much prefer the ergonomics of a proper (Nikon) DSLR.

Agreed very much.

Of course, there is no more perfect camera than a Hasselblad 500C/M, but the Nikon F2 comes close.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

I still use my Mamiya Medium Format. Love taking that out and use the wait level finder!

 

[bunnspecial]

I still use my Mamiya Medium Format. Love taking that out and use the wait level finder!

I know we're drifting off topic seriously, but what the heck.

I've never had any Mamiya 645 stuff, but at one point did have a decently equipped RB67 system. I had two bodies and lenses from 65mm to 250mm. The RB67 is almost comically big-this throws people for a loop when you mention it, but it's actually a 7cmx7cm camera to allow for the rotating back, or in other words the lenses have to project roughly a 9.9cm diameter circle to fully cover the frame(and practically larger to avoid falloff, etc). Other 6x7 cameras can get by with a 9.3cm circle. That makes the RB67(and RZ67) lenses larger than, say, a comparable Pentax 6x7 lens. Of course they save some weight by not needing a focusing helical, but the leaf shutter adds in a bit more. Still, though, when I would use my RB67 handheld, I'd usually use a WLF. I had a metered prism, but that weighs nearly 2lbs in and of itself(I think it's spec weight is like 930g).

I sold it all since I found the Hasselblad a lot more agile and practical for my uses, and it's very natural feeling for me both handheld and on a tripod. Even though there's a "Hasselblad Tax" on stuff, there's still a LOT available and if you need a film back or what have you it's not hard to find one.

The nail in the coffin for the RB67 for me was getting a Pentax 67. The 105mm f/2.4 doesn't have an equivalent in the RB system and is amazing. I live for wide angles, and thanks to the shorter mirror and consequently shorter registration distance, Pentax wide angles need much less aggressive of a retrofocus design than RB lenses. The 55mm f/4 is phenomenal and is much smaller than the 65mm I had for my RB. The closest equivalent to the 45mm f/4 Pentax I'm aware of is the 40mm Distagon for Hasselblads, but that's a beast of a lens that really doesn't fit into the same conversation.

One of the camera stores where I use to hang out would joke with me about driving around in an old car and getting out of it and using a camera potentially older than my car. That's not QUITE true if I'm using an F2 since it was introduced in 72 and my favorite one was made in roughly 75(for anyone looking at an F2, a good rule of thumb that's not 100% correct but close enough is that the first to digits of the serial number are the year it was made). My main Hasselblad, though, a 500c, date codes to 1960.

On another note, contrary to opinions expressed otherwise, the weather has been warm-ish here the last two days, and I've been tearing up the roads with the MG. I've done a bit of wrenching(like fitting the blingy air cleaners), but nothing out of necessity. I was out with my wife yesterday afternoon, and made the comment to her that I'm glad to have the car basically to where I'm just happy with how it's running. The engine isn't 100% broken in yet and I'm probably a couple hundred miles from needing to do another full tune-up just to account for initial run-in wear, but it's really just overall running like a dream now.

Not sure if I mentioned this, but I got a bit bold over the weekend and did a wholly unnecessary oil change. 20W-50 is the normal grade oil, but it's like molasses, especially when really cold. I did a drain and filled it with Castrol Edge 5W-50. I was reluctant to use both an oil with such a wide viscosity spread, and also a full synthetic, in an old engine. It wouldn't have hurt to wait a little longer into break-in for a synthetic, but I'm not worried about it sprouting leaks. The difference is night and day, and I can see this being a year-round oil. The cold cranking effort, even on a warmish day, is amazingly low and I'm super happy with how fast the oil pressure comes up even at sub-freezing temperatures. I've noticed in the past that the oil pressure can come up reluctantly when it gets cold, and I've speculated that there may be cavitation in the oil pump trying to move such a viscous oil. 5W-50 takes care of that concern.

Otherwise, now that it's warmed up, it's just been a lot of enjoyable top-down driving.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

Yup RB PRO with WLF. My favourite for portraits is my lovely 150SF lens. Still use my hasselblad flex tight for scanning to digital.

 

[Apple fanboy]

I know we're drifting off topic seriously, but what the heck.

I've never had any Mamiya 645 stuff, but at one point did have a decently equipped RB67 system. I had two bodies and lenses from 65mm to 250mm. The RB67 is almost comically big-this throws people for a loop when you mention it, but it's actually a 7cmx7cm camera to allow for the rotating back, or in other words the lenses have to project roughly a 9.9cm diameter circle to fully cover the frame(and practically larger to avoid falloff, etc). Other 6x7 cameras can get by with a 9.3cm circle. That makes the RB67(and RZ67) lenses larger than, say, a comparable Pentax 6x7 lens. Of course they save some weight by not needing a focusing helical, but the leaf shutter adds in a bit more. Still, though, when I would use my RB67 handheld, I'd usually use a WLF. I had a metered prism, but that weighs nearly 2lbs in and of itself(I think it's spec weight is like 930g).

I sold it all since I found the Hasselblad a lot more agile and practical for my uses, and it's very natural feeling for me both handheld and on a tripod. Even though there's a "Hasselblad Tax" on stuff, there's still a LOT available and if you need a film back or what have you it's not hard to find one.

The nail in the coffin for the RB67 for me was getting a Pentax 67. The 105mm f/2.4 doesn't have an equivalent in the RB system and is amazing. I live for wide angles, and thanks to the shorter mirror and consequently shorter registration distance, Pentax wide angles need much less aggressive of a retrofocus design than RB lenses. The 55mm f/4 is phenomenal and is much smaller than the 65mm I had for my RB. The closest equivalent to the 45mm f/4 Pentax I'm aware of is the 40mm Distagon for Hasselblads, but that's a beast of a lens that really doesn't fit into the same conversation.

One of the camera stores where I use to hang out would joke with me about driving around in an old car and getting out of it and using a camera potentially older than my car. That's not QUITE true if I'm using an F2 since it was introduced in 72 and my favorite one was made in roughly 75(for anyone looking at an F2, a good rule of thumb that's not 100% correct but close enough is that the first to digits of the serial number are the year it was made). My main Hasselblad, though, a 500c, date codes to 1960.

On another note, contrary to opinions expressed otherwise, the weather has been warm-ish here the last two days, and I've been tearing up the roads with the MG. I've done a bit of wrenching(like fitting the blingy air cleaners), but nothing out of necessity. I was out with my wife yesterday afternoon, and made the comment to her that I'm glad to have the car basically to where I'm just happy with how it's running. The engine isn't 100% broken in yet and I'm probably a couple hundred miles from needing to do another full tune-up just to account for initial run-in wear, but it's really just overall running like a dream now.

Not sure if I mentioned this, but I got a bit bold over the weekend and did a wholly unnecessary oil change. 20W-50 is the normal grade oil, but it's like molasses, especially when really cold. I did a drain and filled it with Castrol Edge 5W-50. I was reluctant to use both an oil with such a wide viscosity spread, and also a full synthetic, in an old engine. It wouldn't have hurt to wait a little longer into break-in for a synthetic, but I'm not worried about it sprouting leaks. The difference is night and day, and I can see this being a year-round oil. The cold cranking effort, even on a warmish day, is amazingly low and I'm super happy with how fast the oil pressure comes up even at sub-freezing temperatures. I've noticed in the past that the oil pressure can come up reluctantly when it gets cold, and I've speculated that there may be cavitation in the oil pump trying to move such a viscous oil. 5W-50 takes care of that concern.

Otherwise, now that it's warmed up, it's just been a lot of enjoyable top-down driving.

Absolutely. Driving is always better when the sun is out. Even more so with the top down. I have to make do with a sunroof.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

Absolutely. Driving is always better when the sun is out. Even more so with the top down. I have to make do with a sunroof.

I never drive with my top down. That is such a British man with van thing to do.

??

 

[44267547]

Ahh yes, back to the EV design debate.

I love stopping on the way home at my Ford dealership, just to gander at the new rides, last time I saw the Bronco (Which I found slightly underwhelming) and now the new Mustang MachE, which surprisingly in a world with EV designs are either click with me or a complete miss, I actually think the ‘Mustang’ Mach E is at the top with the Tesla model 3 Plaid based off design only.

Just to give you a glimpse of what it looks like without seeing rendered photos, [and I’m not gonna involve specs’ here], just strictly the aesthetics and overall the contoured design. I think Ford actually did a really good job with this, it still looks futuristic, but has some really Sleek lines that actually looks really sharp.

When I looked at the Mach-E initially, I actually get a glimpse of kind of like a hatchback—crossover combined together, and it works for what is. It almost makes me think of the Mazda CX-9 from a side profile view. I do like the high-gloss black trim surrounding the fenders that encompasses the back of the vehicle.

I’m actually really excited about a future EV in my lineup at some point, and I think the Mach-E is a great starting point that I would look into, more specifically probably the performance model. And I’m not saying that as somebody that just likes ‘Ford only’ with owning 3 Mustangs/2 SHO’s, if anything, I’m a lover of all makes and models, I’m not brand agnostic, as I think I’ve proven that owning pretty much every muscle car (With the exception of a Corvette) from every manufacturer.

And I have to say, what pulled me in even more on the Mach-E, I just love red more than ever. Specifically this is -rapid red metallic-, similar to ruby red metallic, but a bit more vibrant.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Ahh yes, back to the EV design debate.

I love stopping on the way home at my Ford dealership, just to gander at the new rides, last time I saw the Bronco (Which I found slightly underwhelming) and now the new Mustang MachE, which surprisingly in a world with EV designs are either click with me or a complete miss, I actually think the ‘Mustang’ Mach E is at the top with the Tesla model 3 Plaid based off design only.

Just to give you a glimpse of what it looks like without seeing rendered photos, [and I’m not gonna involve specs’ here], just strictly the aesthetics and overall the contoured design. I think Ford actually did a really good job with this, it still looks futuristic, but has some really Sleek lines that actually looks really sharp.

When I looked at the Mach-E initially, I actually get a glimpse of kind of like a hatchback—crossover combined together, and it works for what is. It almost makes me think of the Mazda CX-9 from a side profile view. I do like the high-gloss black trim surrounding the fenders that encompasses the back of the vehicle.

I’m actually really excited about a future EV in my lineup at some point, and I think the Mach-E is a great starting point that I would look into, more specifically probably the performance model. And I’m not saying that as somebody that just likes ‘Ford only’ with owning 3 Mustangs/2 SHO’s, if anything, I’m a lover of all makes and models, I’m not brand agnostic, as I think I’ve proven that owning pretty much every muscle car (With the exception of a Corvette) from every manufacturer.

And I have to say, what pulled me in even more on the Mach-E, I just love red more than ever. Specifically this is -rapid red metallic-, similar to ruby red metallic, but a bit more vibrant.
View attachment 1735516
View attachment 1735515
View attachment 1735517

All the best cars are red.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

I’m sorry to say, well not really but I have been living in the UK too long ?, that just doesn’t do anything for me. Looks like a generic soft roader. Also find the price point ridiculous yet again. The entry level is really basic, and the all singing and dancing version is stupidly expensive.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

All the best cars are red.

iPhone autocorrect is terrible. Surely you meant, black.

 

[aarond12]

That new Mach-E does look nice and the price is reasonable... until the dealerships mark it up to the stratosphere. Granted, some dealerships say they're not going to mark it up. We'll see about that. One of my friends went to a Ford dealership recently and saw Mustangs (gas-powered) on display with a sign that said "MARKET ADJUSTMENT OF $50,000". Seriously? WTF.



If they can keep pricing down on the Mach-E, I may consider it for my next EV lease. I'm very happy with my Niro EV.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

The Mach-E looks nice and I’m happy with my Niro Ev. Yup that is exactly my point. I totally get that. Not a compliment for car lovers though, in my opinion. Entry level ones are rather cheap.

 

[Nütztjanix]

I happen to really like the new Hyundai Ioniq 5.

It does have a bit of Audi, though (A1, A3).

 

[Anonymous Freak]

Just added a third EV to the garage, a used Tesla.

 

[44267547]

Went and picked up some seafood last night, and sure enough, there was another Mach-E (In ‘carbonized gray’, almost identical to ‘magnet metallic’) in the parking lot. I totally understand why EV’s really don’t have the appeal to a lot of people, but I think over time, you adjust and appreciate the overall aesthetics of what makes it so different from traditional styling.

Anyways, If I were to buy an EV tomorrow, it would be between the Tesla model 3 Perfm and Mach-E Perm strictly based on design elements.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

Went and picked up some seafood last night, and sure enough, there was another Mach-E (In ‘carbonized gray’, also my identical to ‘magnet metallic’) in the parking lot. I totally understand why EV’s really don’t have the appeal to a lot of people, but I think over time, you adjust and appreciate the overall aesthetics of what makes it so different from traditional styling.

Anyways, If I were to buy an EV tomorrow, it would be between the Tesla model 3 Perfm and Mach-E Perm strictly based on design elements.

For me that would be today, only the Audi GT, Porsche Taycan or Tesla Model S Plaid+ Based on design. And the Tesla would be the only one to buy based on use ability and charging infrastructure.

 

[44267547]

For me that would be today, only the Audi GT, Porsche Taycan or Tesla Model S Plaid+ Based on design. And the Tesla would be the only one to buy based on use ability and charging infrastructure.

Taycan for the win. But for the consumer base, they don’t know it exists and Porsche knows their target demographic for the luxury EV segment that outsources the majority who won’t pay that price. Plaid+? At least Tesla markets their products, but the Mach-E? Far more affordable and domesticated with dealerships that promote new age tech/EV.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

I disagree. That MachE is stupidly expensive for a car looking like a generic East Asian soft roader. But also way to expensive for the brand as a whole. On this side of the pond nobody in their right mind buys a Ford worth more than 40K let alone one that is more than 60K. It’s a ridiculous jump in market segment and customer target.

 

[44267547]

I disagree. That MachE is stupidly expensive for a car looking like a generic East Asian soft roader.

In fairness Cyberdude, you disagree with just about everything/anything that doesn’t correlate to your pricing and styling segment, but I think you do that intentionally when no agrees with you, I also suspect you don’t understand the domestic market that much (But the foreign segment you make some valid observations).

And....what’s an ‘East Asian soft Roader’? That jargon doesn’t compute and I’m definitely not searching that.

 

[cyb3rdud3]

In fairness Cyberdude, you disagree with just about everything/anything that doesn’t correlate to your pricing and styling segment, but I think you do that intentionally when no agrees with you, I also suspect you don’t understand the domestic market that much (But the foreign segment you make some valid observations).

It is called having an opinion, and sharing it

I'd like to think I've added enough to it to quantify it as well, for example the price point. No Ford is that expensive this side of the pond. It is a huge jump from the segment they currently operate in as a brand. Will it work? Perhaps. The competition is heating up rapidly at that price point.

And....what’s an ‘East Asian soft Roader’? That jargon doesn’t compute and I’m definitely not searching that.

A generic 4x4 looking vehicle that isn't actually a 4x4 but generally just has the front wheels driven. It may have a 4x4 option but then often the price is nearly doubled by that stage. Fake looking (subjective I know, but hey it is an opinion on a discussion forum), devoid of quality styling and features. Often has a lot of generic tech thrown at it to suggest it has a lot of features...A Kia Niro is an excellent example of such a vehicle, Dacia Duster, then there is the MG's, and Hyundai's and so on. Ford has been doing the same with the Kuga segment for example, and now the Mach-E. And then there are those Chevrolets which are just rebadged Daewo's...

But it is fine for you to disagree. What I would appreciate though is if you do that directed at what I actually say and have a discussion about the cars, opposed to taking a cheap shot at the person and their character. That is just a bit silly and nasty and all it does is show your character and in my opinion your inability to reason and discuss.