# whats rice



## gotpie (Dec 27, 2005)

I was looking at some post and a lot of people that ask about ceratin mods are called ricers. Could every one please tell what they think is Rice and what is not rice? I'm curious Thanks.


----------



## muchachomaloo (Aug 24, 2005)

there are car enthusiast and ricers. ricers objective seems to be to look fast and sound fast but that doesn't mean they are fast. They usually get named brand performance bolt-ons and don't have that much custom engine work. An exlample of a ricer would be aem intake, borla exaust or some other name brand one, and a full body kit plus wing. The exteior mods in that case would cost more than the interior. An enthusiast will on the other hand would have very little body modifations but have a lot invested into the engine they might have bolt-ons but still more money spent under the hood and on performance mods then aestics.


----------



## wildmanee (Nov 21, 2004)

Think of gaudiness as well.. there can be well-done bodykits on cars, they're still rice, but not as rice as half painted fenders or bumpers and spinning hubcaps from wal-mart.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

my wing is rice... i know that, but my car is faster than most, so it equals out...


----------



## wildmanee (Nov 21, 2004)

It's not rice at all. Since your car is AWD, it will help with the rear tire's traction.


----------



## SonsofWisdom (Mar 29, 2004)

ricer mods

If you car has stock engine...not built up...and you put on a body kit, rims, exhaust...then it is rice...as your car is no faster (Sure you gained 5hp...so now your at what...145 stead of 140?) but "looks" faster

If your engine is stock (cold air and exhaust is still stock, it does not add enough hp/torque to be considered bad ass)

Pretty much any 4cyl car with intake and exhaust only that has body kit and/or rims and/or is dropped and/or lights is ricey...not respected...and generally disliked by all serious tuners.

So any time someone does "stuff" to there car and doesn't understand what the purpous of it all is...they are ricers.

lowering is done to enhance handling...if you heat your springs your a ricer cause you've just screwed your ride

If your camber is way negative cause all you did was lower and didn't correct your alignment...you're a ricer...a little negative camber is good...a lot is not

Body kits are meant to (in cooperation with lowering) to reduce the amount of air going under the car...not meant to make a BOLD statement about your car

If you do not have a turbo and intercooler..then your body kit doesn't need a big nasty opening in the front (unless you're gonna put one on)

Any turbo set up on stock internals is rice

Any one who activly says NOS when reffereing to nitrous oxide charge systems is a ricer and should be slapped

Any one who insists it is easier to get good hp and torque from a 4cyl then v8 is a ricer...even if they are talking about a 2jz or any other inline 6

Any one who focuses on looks and not functionality is a ricer


I saw a pic of a drift team pulling their 350z, don't know why they were pulling...here is one way you know your "wing" is functional...they were pulling on the wing to pull the car back...A wing on your trunk will serve no purpous becaus the trunk will flex...so even if you aligned your wing for downforce..the trunk flexing will then throw that off 

Any way...don't do anything to your car if you don't fully understand the purpose of a mod or if you understand the RIGHT way to do it...anyone who does...is a ricer...and should also be slapped


----------



## gotpie (Dec 27, 2005)

So in all reality I'm a car enthusiast that fell in to ricer ways and am struggling to get back to my grass roots. My car has a frontend from Stillen but the rest of the car looks stock other than the car being completely shaved , the engine only has boltons but my engine is about to blow up and will be replaced with a SR20DET but i'm struggling with money. So really this would be rice no ?


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

gotpie said:


> So in all reality I'm a car enthusiast that fell in to ricer ways and am struggling to get back to my grass roots. My car has a frontend from Stillen but the rest of the car looks stock other than the car being completely shaved , the engine only has boltons but my engine is about to blow up and will be replaced with a SR20DET but i'm struggling with money. So really this would be rice no ?


not if its done well. Hell even bumpers have their purpose. Wes runs the Stillen front facia on his car as it allows more air to cool the intercooler. As long as you are enchancing your car in a way its usually not rice. performance parts arent rice; rice is like eurotails, huge body kits, huge rims that weigh a ton, neons all over. Not all interior and exterior mods are rice. hell, you can do a CF dash kit and as long as you do it right, its not rice. CF hoods aren't really rice. Do want makes you happy. Some think if you touch looks its rice, but as long as it is done in good taste you are all good.


----------



## Z_Spool (Sep 27, 2003)

Rice mods are tacky modifications to a car that defeat form/function for the sake of "standing out" or getting looks.

Examples include but are not limited to:









Altezza (Euro) Tailights, as they in no way improve lighting, nor vehicle visibility at night, and in some cases reduce the visibility of the vehicle at night.









"Supra Style" wings, as they create more drag than they do downforce, and the limited amount of aerodynamic benefit created isn't effective until approximately 80MPH. I doesn't neccissarily help keep the rear of the car down, but rather keeps it straight. It in no way will help a car in a drag race which is what the owner is normally trying to achieve with the purchase of this style wing.









Body kits (ground effects) with excessive flared openings, again create more drag then needed in order to serve it's purpose. Most times the vehicle in question isn't even equipped with anything needing anywhere near this much airflow.









Undercarriage neon lighting (Underglows) serve no purpose rather than attracting attention. See Also interior neon lighting.









Excessively large mufflers (Fart Cans) offer little to no power increase, nor does it help with power delivery. Simply intended for the effect of making the car louder, and having something shiny to look at in traffic.









Vinyl "Sponsorship" decals are intended to present the image of having a car that is professionally modified and sponsored. Often times the parts on the car will not match the mentioned "sponsor," or may not even have any modification at all. This trend is derived from the professional race circuits and their cars having sponsors place decals on the cars in order to advertise what wins races.









Color coordinated interiors offer no advantage other than showing how much money you're willing to spend on your car, and the simple idea of "standing out."









Large chrome wheels (bling) actually offer a disadvantage to performance, as the slow braking, and acceleration, as the heavier a wheel is, the more force must be taken to cause it to spin, or to stop spinning. The only advantage to this "modification" is to, again, show off your wallet, stand out and hide the true size of your penis.




Feel free to add any that you see fit.


----------



## WATSON1 (Jul 9, 2005)

Damn Z, why did you list all of the "mods" that you have on your GT? :thumbup: 
Just f-ing with you, I agree 100% but have a question, my Alti came with stock euro's, am I rice? I have the CAI & cat back exhaust. But I also have the HotShot headers in the garage, UR pully installed, Wolf Technology clutch & flywheel will be on order next month. Plans for a lot more as the money comes in. :cheers:


----------



## ICP Sux0rZ! (Jan 10, 2005)

SonsofWisdom said:


> Any turbo set up on stock internals is rice



so any stock turbo is rice? nope sry its stock

and how is upgrading a turbo but not internals because its not needed yet rice?


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

muchachomaloo said:


> there are car enthusiast and ricers. ricers objective seems to be to look fast and sound fast but that doesn't mean they are fast. They usually get named brand performance bolt-ons and don't have that much custom engine work. * An exlample of a ricer would be aem intake, borla exaust or some other name brand one*, and a full body kit plus wing. The exteior mods in that case would cost more than the interior. An enthusiast will on the other hand would have very little body modifations but have a lot invested into the engine they might have bolt-ons but still more money spent under the hood and on performance mods then aestics.






gotpie said:


> So in all reality I'm a car enthusiast that fell in to ricer ways and am struggling to get back to my grass roots. My car has a frontend from Stillen but the rest of the car looks stock other than the car being completely shaved , the engine only has boltons but my engine is about to blow up and will be replaced with a SR20DET but i'm struggling with money. So really this would be rice no ?


 Name brand bolt-ons aren't rice.... unless they are APC or OBX


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

SonsofWisdom said:


> Any turbo set up on stock internals is rice


Dumbest comment ever. Hell many cars have good bottom ends, like how the SR20de can hold upwards of 350whp on stock internals. it might be rice to you, but why spend 1500 dollars if it is unneccassry.

hell, i have stock internals on my STI, so does that make me a ricer.


----------



## Kencapel (Nov 5, 2004)

What about in our nissan category? I say that if you have any GTR badges on ur nissan besides a skyline then its nice, i mean RICE :thumbdwn: Big rims arent rice...it depends what car it goes on like on Maximas (95-2004+) are nice being that its a luxurious looking car and would bring it out more. Big ass aluminum wings are rice to the 5th power. Decals stretching from the back to the front is big time rice especially if its some dragon ball Z or mortal kombat looking character or flames. now the Nismo decal is NOT rice :thumbup:


----------



## NotAnotherHonda (Aug 7, 2003)

you guys make it more complicated than it really is. here it is:

your car is rice if you have more money spent on cosmetics than your engine. period.


----------



## xbrandonx (Mar 27, 2004)

SonsofWisdom said:


> Any turbo set up on stock internals is rice


Wes and mike are both on stock internals.



also as mike said, name brands are not rice at all. A hotshot header and Stromung exhaust on your car and if thats all you have done to it, that is not rice. Just welding on a muffler is rice, however a full catback in no way should ever be considered rice.

Just because a car's exterior isn't stock doesn't mean the car is rice. There is nothing wrong with a tasteful body kit as long as thats not all that you have done.

If your engine is STOCK and you've got a mod list 10 pages long, then that is rice.


----------



## Z_Spool (Sep 27, 2003)

WATSON1 said:


> Damn Z, why did you list all of the "mods" that you have on your GT? :thumbup:


Why you gotta hate? Besides, I'm still saving up for the Dubs yo. 



WATSON1 said:


> Just f-ing with you, I agree 100% but have a question, my Alti came with stock euro's, am I rice? I have the CAI & cat back exhaust. But I also have the HotShot headers in the garage, UR pully installed, Wolf Technology clutch & flywheel will be on order next month. Plans for a lot more as the money comes in. :cheers:


No, you're not rice, because they are OEM. (although I think that Nissan was rice for making those, but everyone was doing it because they made such a splash in the aftermarket.) As I stated before, Rice mods are more aesthetic mods done to get noticed. Louder, Brighter, and Shinier.


----------



## Kencapel (Nov 5, 2004)

I've seen some fast rice also..wassup wit dat


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

Kencapel said:


> I've seen some fast rice also..wassup wit dat


Check out OT, search for a VW GTI.. big body kit, and making 560hp.... Rice comes in all shapes and speeds..


----------



## Island^View (Jun 22, 2003)

Rice is "all show, no go." Period. I'm surprised nobody said that yet.


----------



## Kencapel (Nov 5, 2004)

I hate to see the hyper whites or fake ass blue bulbs claiming to be HID's...thats just straight up rice a roni to me. www.laughatrice.com


----------



## ICP Sux0rZ! (Jan 10, 2005)

Kencapel said:


> I hate to see the hyper whites or fake ass blue bulbs claiming to be HID's...thats just straight up rice a roni to me. www.laughatrice.com


what about hyperwhites that dont claim to be HID are those safe to get?


----------



## SonsofWisdom (Mar 29, 2004)

You're gonna sit there and assume this person is talking about one of the few engines that can handle 7psi stock? You shouldn't...ricer mistake

I agree..many engines can handle 2-3psi, some can take 5-7...the MAJORITY of engines can not. That is the basis of my comment on forced induction.

Most people going forced induction are looking for decent hp gains, 100hp, that is not a good idea on stock components. 

I am basing my statement off of many turbo civics that blow themselves apart with only 6-7 psi...turbo ka's that start breaking down after 350hp...do a search you'll find the members here who have ACTUALLY tested them.

I did not ask for your smart ass opinions, you can dissagree if you like but be respectful you punks...and do a fucking search


----------



## Z_Spool (Sep 27, 2003)

SonsofWisdom said:


> I don't really care if you guys think putting a turbo on stock internals IN GENERAL is a good idea...it is not. I'm giving good, proffesional advice there...so suck it.
> 
> Sure...many engines can handle 2-3psi, some can take 5-7...the MAJORITY of engines can not. That is the basis of my comment on forced induction.
> 
> ...


----------



## xbrandonx (Mar 27, 2004)

SonsofWisdom said:


> I don't really care if you guys think putting a turbo on stock internals IN GENERAL is a good idea...it is not. I'm giving good, proffesional advice there...so suck it.
> 
> I am basing my statement off of many turbo civics that blow themselves apart with only 6-7 psi...turbo ka's that start breaking down after 350hp...do a search you'll find the members here who have ACTUALLY tested them.
> 
> I did not ask for your smart ass opinions, you can dissagree if you like but be respectful you punks...and do a fucking search


wes and mike are both putting out about 3x the stock HP of their cars turboed with stock internals. And much higher then 6-7 PSI. SR20 internals can take alot more then just 6-7 PSI as well.

It all depends on the car weither or not how much Boost you put to your car, its not a general rule that you cannot run X lbs of boost on a turbo. It varries. Some stock internals can take it, some can't.

This has gotten way off topic though.


----------



## ICP Sux0rZ! (Jan 10, 2005)

vg30et can handle 10+ on stock internals, so i dont know where your getting your info but you might wanna check it


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

What defines rice to me is someone that just puts parts on their car with no sense of taste. I know of a guy with an S10 that has put every pep boys piece o shit part on his car and it looks retarded, not to mention sounds like ass because it has a half assed custom exhaust system. 

On the other hand, I don't mind a tasteful race inspired body kit or a properly sized functional wing on a car that benefits from it (RWD or AWD or perhaps in some cases a track FWD car). At the same time, body kits that make your car look like some sort of lizard or bug make me want to pull down my pants and take a shit on a car to make it look better, as do huge chrome rims, I HATE CHROME RIMS!

I don't think someone that puts bolt ons on their car is automatically a ricer. You could argue you need custom work done on your car to be a tuner, but then again bolt ons just means you want to preserve or increase your reliability and power at the same time without risking engine damage. Also, turbo on stock internals is rice? since when? turbo on a non-turbo car is never rice assuming it actually works (gluing a turbo to your engine wont do anything, lol). Otherwise, that would make pretty much every turbo spec v a ricer.

I do agree that most axle back exhausts that are tastelessly huge and horribly sounding are pieces of garbage, but well designed cat backs should never be called rice.

Another big factor in determining rice or not is what car you are actually modding. If you drive a 1990 geo metro then give up now and for god sakes don't mod your car, unless you want to be sleeper and do a full engine and transmission swap, but very few if any people ever do this beyond talking about it. On the other hand, I hate people that just automatically slam people that are trying to learn and do legitimate performance mods to their economy engines when the owner never acts like a hardass.

That brings me to my final point: the biggest thing that determines a ricer is the owner. If he says he lives his life a quarter mile at a time and has NOS in his veins, he is ricer to the max. If he wears a visor turned sideways and has his seat leaned back so far you think a 10 year old kid is driving from the back seat, he is ricer to the max. You could go on for days jeff foxworthy style with what makes a ricer a ricer, in fact, that could be fun, off topic thread anybody?


----------



## xbrandonx (Mar 27, 2004)

if you spend 4 grand on a turbo kit, it'd take alot of cosmetic junk to be able to call it rice.


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

SonsofWisdom said:


> I did not ask for your smart ass opinions, you can dissagree if you like but be respectful you punks...and do a fucking search



calling someone a smart ass and punk in the same sentence you ask people to be respectful..... nice...haha



Scott said:


>



Turbo and Rice do not compute....


----------



## SonsofWisdom (Mar 29, 2004)

xbrandonx said:


> Wes and mike are both on stock internals.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I agree...but you just said everything I said...granted I didn't go into detail, guess I should have.

I'de like to sate again that I never said no engine could handle boost folks, what I said was that in general engines can not. I know the n/a sr can handle some boost, as can the stock ka...my statement was a generalized one, I was not going to go into the specif cars that can handle 2-3, 3-5, 5-7, 7+ pounds of boost...

Also, in my experience those whom I have seen "slap" on a turbo on their stock civic and then blow it up are the ricers....I'm certain the two folks mentioned by xbrandonx knew what they were doing...ricers don't. I have witnessed many a honda engine blown to smithereans becuase the ricer owning it thought he could just slap one on...I hope I've clarified a little bit more.



myoung said:


> calling someone a smart ass and punk in the same sentence you ask people to be respectful..... nice...haha


Yes, there were several dissrespectful replies from smart ass punks in this thread. Immature replies warrant no respect.

Replies from those such as xbrandonx were actually thought out, and backed up...however as I already said it seems everyone misunderstood what I was saying.

Any way it does not bother me too much that folks did not get what I said, it is just very annoying to have to read so many immature responses.

If you're gonna disagree you can do so respectfully, however the info given so far does not refute what I said, only supports it.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

> Also, in my experience those whom I have seen "slap" on a turbo on their stock civic and then blow it up are the ricers....I'm certain the two folks mentioned by xbrandonx knew what they were doing...ricers don't. I have witnessed many a honda engine blown to smithereans becuase the ricer owning it thought he could just slap one on...I hope I've clarified a little bit more.


I don't think that necessarily makes them a ricer as much as it does a misinformed individual. Not knowing what the hell you are doing when it comes to tech doesn't make you a ricer necessarily, after all, you don't call that guy that thinks he is fast in his silverado because it has a V8 a ricer do you? Like I've said before, it mostly comes down to the attitude of the owner. If he starts telling you he runs 12's because he has some 18" rims he's a ricer, if he blows a motor from too much boost he's just learning the hard way.


----------



## SonsofWisdom (Mar 29, 2004)

I can agree with that...

Usually missinformed and lack of desire to be correctly informed.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

Sonofwisdom, do you understand why hondas are very bad at holding boost? Do you understand that they mostly run 11.1:1 or higher compression. They are designed for N/A. They blow ringlands all the time because of that. K/A can hold over 300hp on stock internals. That is well over 100% of a gain. With proper airfuels, many cars can handle a lot fo boost. you have you know yoru motor before you can boost. And what about cars like the STI, EVO, SRT-4, Skyline, Supra, where you can hold good amounts of boost on stock internals. Most nissan's can boost because they have stock forged parts. The cranks are very beefy, but the rods could be a bit thicker. Generalizing will make an ass out of yourself. Yes cars like the 350Z can only hold 8-10psi on the TT kits, but thats their design. 

All i am saying, think about what you say before you post. If you generalize all motors based on Civics and a few ka guys, the its just ignorance. And mostly the guys that blow their motors do one of two things: overboost their stock motor, or cheap out on the fuel accessories (just using a SAFC) leading to detonation.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

psuLemonn said:


> Sonofwisdom, do you understand why hondas are very bad at holding boost? Do you understand that they mostly run 11.1:1 or higher compression. They are designed for N/A. They blow ringlands all the time because of that. K/A can hold over 300hp on stock internals. That is well over 100% of a gain. With proper airfuels, many cars can handle a lot fo boost. you have you know yoru motor before you can boost. And what about cars like the STI, EVO, SRT-4, Skyline, Supra, where you can hold good amounts of boost on stock internals. Most nissan's can boost because they have stock forged parts. The cranks are very beefy, but the rods could be a bit thicker. Generalizing will make an ass out of yourself. Yes cars like the 350Z can only hold 8-10psi on the TT kits, but thats their design.
> 
> All i am saying, think about what you say before you post. If you generalize all motors based on Civics and a few ka guys, the its just ignorance. And mostly the guys that blow their motors do one of two things: overboost their stock motor, or cheap out on the fuel accessories (just using a SAFC) leading to detonation.


One added note, many of the cars listed above also have the motors they have for racing homologation (evo and sti especially). There are certain classes of racing (group N rally for instance) where the motor is only allowed a few mods so the companies sell special editions like the STI and EVO to meet the requirements to run the superior motor. If I'm not mistaken I believe the supra and skyline also run the overbuilt motors to meet racing regulations, but I'm not positive so I'll leave that to speculation.


----------



## xbrandonx (Mar 27, 2004)

SonsofWisdom said:


> Also, in my experience those whom I have seen "slap" on a turbo on their stock civic and then blow it up are the ricers....I'm certain the two folks mentioned by xbrandonx knew what they were doing...ricers don't. I have witnessed many a honda engine blown to smithereans becuase the ricer owning it thought he could just slap one on...I hope I've clarified a little bit more.


Let me guess, they got their turbo kit, bolted it on, and drove it. No tuning right? Thats not rice, thats just dumb.

As PSU said, differnt cars are set up for different applications. Some Internals are made where running boost isn't going to be an issue, some are. You just have to know what you are doing and be willing to pay for everything and not cut corners.


----------



## erik2282 (May 17, 2005)

Coffee can mufflers that sound like an army of pissed off bumble bees, that the biggest rice thing of all to me, no wait its the body kits, well its all of that...I like my stock exhaust, its quiet and i can hear my ex-girl's lips on my %$k....hahahha....i got my 97 altima for everyday driving, it saves gas, it has no mods other than my sound system and limo tint. my other ride is a 86 chevy monte carlo, which i'm now saving money to replace the crappy 305 it has in now with a mild 350... sorry im a chevy guy... i like imports too just not the ones that sound like mad bumble bee's...


----------



## xbrandonx (Mar 27, 2004)

rice is what you eat with someyungboi


----------



## mitchell35758 (Oct 21, 2005)

First, do you guys consider some trucks as ricers?(I assume you would)
I might end up regreting this. 
Do you consider my truck to be rice? Go easy on me, please  


























bed cover - functional
vent visors- windows open slighty for summer time heat while parked.
bug shield- protect leading edge of hood further from bugs and rocks
exhaust and intake - make it sound like a truck
billet grille - 50/50, looks/protection from debris (had an incident with a bird, luckily it did not damage anything this time)
fog lights - added visibilty for night time driving on back roads and poor weather conditions
Tail lights - just like them, matches the contour of the headlights
wheels - I had stock steelies and wanted something that was a little wider and looked better
window tint- looks

I think it was all done tastefully. Nothing for racing and not going to lower it. I'll probably regret this, but what would the verdict be?


----------



## Dustin (Dec 14, 2003)

mitch, your truck isnt rice, rice is purely opinion. and honestly, i like the truck, it's got a lot of neat features, bed covers, bug shields, and vent visors all serve a purpose. gigantic bodykits, and graphics dont. as long as it has a purpose, or is done tastefully, it's cool.


----------



## mitchell35758 (Oct 21, 2005)

Dustin said:


> mitch, your truck isnt rice, rice is purely opinion. and honestly, i like the truck, it's got a lot of neat features, bed covers, bug shields, and vent visors all serve a purpose. gigantic bodykits, and graphics dont. as long as it has a purpose, or is done tastefully, it's cool.


Thanks man 
I was worried that the fact that I had an intake and magnaflow(even though it is a truck setup) that some might consider it to be rice. Some still might. Just curious what you all thought since you guys are on the subject.

Thanks again :cheers:


----------



## WATSON1 (Jul 9, 2005)

Doesn't look like rice to me, that's a nice truck. You didn't go to the extreme with things you did to it. All of it is actually functional except for the tails and the wheels, which, IMO make it look great. :thumbup:


----------



## 1CLNB14 (Apr 30, 2002)

Like I've said before, the NissanForums.com definition of rice changes with the seasons.
Just do what you like, and fuck the haters.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

^seans care is hella rice





jk, that shit is hot as hell


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

mitchell35758 said:


> Thanks man
> I was worried that the fact that I had an intake and magnaflow(even though it is a truck setup) that some might consider it to be rice. Some still might. Just curious what you all thought since you guys are on the subject.
> 
> Thanks again :cheers:


only thing I don't like is the chrome rims, but thats just because I don't like chrome rims :thumbup:


----------



## mitchell35758 (Oct 21, 2005)

neogeon said:


> only thing I don't like is the chrome rims, but thats just because I don't like chrome rims :thumbup:


You don't like chrome rims because of what has come of them in the past years or just never have? The only ones that I like are the truck style rims that you wrap with normal tires and not ultra low profiles.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

mitchell35758 said:


> You don't like chrome rims because of what has come of them in the past years or just never have? The only ones that I like are the truck style rims that you wrap with normal tires and not ultra low profiles.


I love your truck, if only it had some krager SS rims (i konw they are american, but they are dead sexy)... Even so, i like the setup.. you are far from rice.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

mitchell35758 said:


> You don't like chrome rims because of what has come of them in the past years or just never have? The only ones that I like are the truck style rims that you wrap with normal tires and not ultra low profiles.


A little of both, but I never really liked them and I certainly never wanted them. Chrome is fine on 50's style hot rods and such but I despise modern bling. I would like your rims if they were perhaps a silver or gunmetal or brushed aluminum, but thats just me.


----------



## erik2282 (May 17, 2005)

yeah thats a nice truck. just dont, for the love of god, put a wing on it or a big ass APC sticker...


----------



## mitchell35758 (Oct 21, 2005)

Thanks psuLemonn, I looked at them and they are very nice. Can't look at them anymore or I might try to find a way to buy some. Maybe in the future

neogeon, thanks for the input. I now understand what you are saying. When I was looking for wheels, I was going to just get a standard set of brushed alluminum wheels(like on my very first truck), but my wife pointed these out to me. I loved the design and they weren't too expensive, they did have the silver painted ones, but they looked like the paint would chip off later on down the road. I don't mind chrome so I went with the chrome ones.

erik2282, thanks. No way in hell would I put a wing on it or anything of that nature. I think that stuff on a truck is just flat out gay. I don't think there is anything else I can do to it now without being tasteful. 

Thanks for the input everyone. I'll quit taking the attention from the topic now. Thanks again :cheers:


----------



## SonsofWisdom (Mar 29, 2004)

*wtf??!!!?!?*

You now what...again folks are agreeing with what I already wrote

Now I'm sure some of you will miss this to...I'm not gonna post in this thread any more after this...because if you don't get what I'm saying in plain english after FOUR F*ING TIMES...you never will...sorry if I seem a little zipped out...but folks honestly...we're all agreeing so far...and you're acting like I'm not..GAH 

SO here...for the fourth time...I'll say it...once again...I'm saying it again, cause I've already said it before...as in previously.



sonsofwisdom said:


> I agree..many engines can handle 2-3psi, some can take 5-7...the MAJORITY of engines can not. That is the basis of my comment on forced induction.


What I'm saying here is that...yes...some engines can handle 7psi stock...but most can't...so while some can take boost upwards of 5psi...others can not, and I think there are more of the latter, that being those that can not reliably handle over 5psi...although, some can take over 5psi, and some...even 7psi and even some...over 7psi...but for me...I think the majority can not handle 5psi and up, reliably that is.

See I think there are more cars that can not handle over 7psi then there are that can...in the USDM...and that can be bought for say...$28-$20k and under...in my opinion...that's just what I think...my own... .02 if you will



sonsofwisdom said:


> Also, in my experience those whom I have seen "slap" on a turbo on their stock civic and then blow it up are the ricers....I'm certain the two folks mentioned by xbrandonx knew what they were doing...ricers don't


Yes...some people do "slap" parts on...and as you'll see in my next statement...these people in my opinion...are ricers. See, in my opinion, to me that is, people who don't know what they are doing...but do it anyway...in my own view..my own world...are ricers...cause that's what they do...they do things, when they don't know.

BUT some people know what they are doing...these people don't usually blow up engines. This is because they know what they are doing, and thus, they are not ricers, in my opinion. That is because they know what they are doing.



sonsofwisdom said:


> Usually missinformed and lack of desire to be correctly informed.


This here is my definition of a ricer...they don't know what they are doing, they haven't researched, but they assume they are correct and stick parts on...but they do this without doing the proper research as to how to do it correctly. See they don't really know, and they are usually wrong, becuase they aren't right, and that's the kicker. This is due to their lack of desire to get the correct information. To me this makes them a ricer, and that's just my opinion.


So in conclusion, I am not saying that I personally do not know of cars that can handle 5+ and 7+psi on stock internals...so don't sit there and tell me of them. I am saying, ricers do not, and ricers assume there car can handle 5+ and 7+psi, even when there car can not. This is because ricers DON'T do research first, and they then blow up cars. TO ME...and IN MY OPINION, those kinds of poeple are ricers, I do understand if you disagree, and that's fine with me, because I'm cool with that, and it doesn't bother me.

Now I've wasted valuable time on this topic...a stupid topic at that...mostly because for some reason, without my knowledge, and for this I DO apologize, I must have begun speaking an alien language after my first post in this thread...I don't understand it either...but I don't care, cause I'm tired of this thread...so shey fua zgefberger, and good gtrea-x2.

So I'm sorry to also have wasted your time...but I must in some fashion...attempt to explain what I meant to say...and still though...I'm left wondering...WTF...wtf indeed.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

^^^^^^I totally know what you mean, I get just as frustrated as you are because people don't like to read and just want to jump in with their 2¢ as soon as they can get it out of their pocket. I'm having the same problem with a spec v vs. skyline (general skyline, not just GT-R) thread where I say the spec v has similar styling cues to the general skyline and esp. the GT-R and performance and dimensions near dead on to a GTS25 type S. Even though my comparison doesn't really change anything about the performance of the spec v, they still insist that the skyline is a supercar and the spec v is an econobox because they obviously don't know what a skyline actually is, what an econobox is, or what a supercar is, and they speak before they think and definently before they read. In fact, if your definition "misinformed and don't care to find the information to be right" then everyone arguing against my skyline vs. spec v argument would be a huge ricer because they think every skyline is a ferrari killer and that simply is not the case. (in fact, one skyline trim has a mere 130~140 hp depending on year, yeah, supercar my ass)

P.S. I know skyline has an I6 and is RWD (AWD in GT-R and "4" models) while spec v is I4 and FWD, don't try to tell me that, I know!


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

Rice is when you call your Spec V a fwd skyline, and try to justify it. Yes, I'm aiming that at you neogeon.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

neogeon said:


> they still insist that the skyline is a supercar and the spec v is an econobox because they obviously don't know what a skyline actually is, what an econobox is, or what a supercar is, and they speak before they think and definently before they read. In fact, if your definition "misinformed and don't care to find the information to be right" then everyone arguing against my skyline vs. spec v argument would be a huge ricer because they *think every skyline is a ferrari killer and that simply is not the case.* (in fact, one skyline trim has a mere 130~140 hp depending on year, yeah, supercar my ass)!


wow you know how to stretch what people say. the skyline is no supercar, no even the GTR.. but when people talk about it being a supercar, its the GTR, no other model. The mines skyline is close to a supercar. your spec is an econobox, the skyline is a sports car. [/discussion]


now, son of wisdom. I respect your opinion, but i believe its scewed and based on hondas (which i explained why they can't hold boost). almost every nissan i know of can hold upwards of 10psi (depending on the turbo). I just said you were too general, and i gave my reasons. Hondas have very high compression (not turbo friendly). They will not hold boost b/c of that. Nissan motors and subaru motors are both friendly to turbos and can hold excesses of 10psi on a properly sized turbo. Many american cars can hold boost with no problem on stock bottom ends. Again this is where you are too genereal. I am not saying you are wrong as i know where you coming from, but its too broad of a statement, that is what i am saying.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

psuLemon said:


> your spec is an econobox, the skyline is a sports car. [/discussion]


explain to me how a 130 hp ECONOMY tuned engined vehicle is a sports car especially when it weights 2700 lbs and has 4-doors, because you know what? thats what the lowest trim skyline is, and you know what else? the sentra GXE fits the same description. FWD or RWD does not a sports car make, are you saying the celica and tiburon aren't sports cars? What about the new Mitsubishi Eclipse? it has 263 HP and is FWD. Are you saying a crown victoria and caprice are sports cars? After all, they have RWD and since thats all that matters apparently. Or how about the suzuki aerio? It is available in AWD that runs 0-60 in about 10 seconds, but since its AWD SURELY its a sports car. What about the AMC pacer? It was RWD and its as econocar as you can get.

quote from a wikipedia article:
"Contrary to popular myth, the Pacer was not widened six inches to make room for the rear wheel drive configuration. According to an AMC market study from the early 1970s, front wheel drive was never a consideration."

the AMC pacer was an inline six, RWD, and abysmally slow, so I guess it MUST be a sports car since an abysmally slow RWD RB20 inline six skyline with 130 hp is. You are wrong now and you always were, the skyline has economical models too, cope with it and move on. You know what? the pacer had high HP engines thrown in too, kind of like the skyline, so does that mean the car wasn't an economy car? nope. Just because the sentra line doesn't extend into the performance stratosphere doesn't mean it can't be compared to an older model car that does have higher end trims. Also, the spec v is in more than a few race series and last I checked economy cars don't make good race cars.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

chimmike said:


> Rice is when you call your Spec V a fwd skyline, and try to justify it. Yes, I'm aiming that at you neogeon.


Rice is when someone makes a perfectly well formulated argument as an intelligent human being and someone is a skyline fanboy and won't listen to what you have to say. you=mega skyline fanboy that needs to learn what a skyline actually is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_skyline

try reading for once, it helps


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

psuLemon said:


> The mines skyline is close to a supercar.


so is the tommy kaira, they are what you call "tuner cars." They still aren't supercars because they don't meet the fundamental design criteria of a supercar even though their performance is on par.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

neogeon said:


> Rice is when someone makes a perfectly well formulated argument as an intelligent human being and someone is a skyline fanboy and won't listen to what you have to say. you=mega skyline fanboy that needs to learn what a skyline actually is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_skyline
> 
> try reading for once, it helps


you honestly have no fucking clue what a fan boy its.. you overly praising your spec is a fanboy.. no one has said tha the skyline was god. you seem to think we are all skyline fanboys because we say its better than the spec.



neogeon said:


> so is the tommy kaira, they are what you call "tuner cars." They still aren't supercars because they don't meet the fundamental design criteria of a supercar even though their performance is on par.


that is why i said its close... not that it is...


now for your other post. Yes the skyline has one econo model out of the whole bunch, but the MAJORITY of skylines are sports cars. NOT everyone. Stop trying to take one fact and blow it up as all... the pacer wasn't a sports car, just like the areo isn't. and to be honest, when 99% of people talk about the skyline, its in mention of the GTR... nothign else.


----------



## pete2.0 (Sep 17, 2004)




----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

pete2.0 said:


>


condoleeza says: psuLemon, you're an asshole and neogeon isn't a fanboy, he just knows good value when he sees it and needs to put the smack down on everyone's candy ass and let them know what a skyline really is.

P.S. Spec V is good car, if you would stop trying to call it crap in every single post you make then maybe I wouldn't have to be so defensive of it, I'm sure if I looked I could find some fault in the STI and yell about it everytime you posted like you troll me and all my posts. Is it really that hard to let me enjoy my car and say "goddamn its fun to drive"? Also, if you call the skyline a sports car, then the spec v has to fit the bill too, because the spec v gives out performance numbers that would run with ferraris and corvettes from the 70's/80's and in fact in a comparison when it first came out Motor Trend stated that the civic si (the slowest car in the test) was faster than the original Mustang Mach 1 and I think if it is faster than one of the most popular muscle cars of all time calling it a sports car regardless of its origins is not incorrect (provided you base sports car on performance). Stop being a dick.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

psuLemon said:


> Yes the skyline has one econo model out of the whole bunch, but the MAJORITY of skylines are sports cars. NOT everyone.


A. spec v is not an economy car, if you honestly think the spec v is an economy car then you should immediately enter a mental institution

B. I bet if you took the production numbers you would see that probably a solid 70-90% or more skylines were of the RB20 and N/A RB25 trim levels. Look at the lancer evo, evos account for maybe 10% if that of the lancer lineup and there is no reason to believe that the same statistic doesn't follow for the skyline. Just because Nissan made a few more higher trim models in limited numbers doesn't automatically make the lesser and more common models irrelevant or uncomparable to a spec v. Stop trying to make my statement about the skyline into something it isn't, I said the R33 GTS25 type S shares alot of similarities regardless of part numbers, etc. with the 2002 nissan sentra SE-R Spec V, that is all I said, period, the GT-R's performance along with other models is totally irrelevant.


----------



## pete2.0 (Sep 17, 2004)

Dude, get over it... You drive the sport version of a gramma car, not a 250 + horsepower sports car.
And why are you comparing your car to Ferrari's/Corvettes of the 1980's? My GA16 has more horsepower than a Ferrari 328 GTS... That is a horrible comparison...
Lets look at a current comparison (note: I am only looking at the top of the lowest level of production cars available in the United States):
Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V --> 175 hp @ 6000 rpm , 180 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm
Audi S4 --> 340 HP SAE @ 7,000 rpm; 302 ft lb @ 3,500 rpm
VW R32 --> 240 HP SAE @ 6,250 rpm; 236 ft lb @ 2,800 rpm
Evo 8 --> 276 HP SAE @ 6,500 rpm; 286 ft lb @ 3,500 rpm
Boxter --> 240 HP SAE @ 6,400 rpm; 199 ft lb @ 4,700 rpm

I could go on for quite a while... Your car is not a super car... get over it and enjoy what you have!


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

pete2.0 said:


> Dude, get over it... You drive the sport version of a gramma car, not a 250 + horsepower sports car.
> And why are you comparing your car to Ferrari's/Corvettes of the 1980's? My GA16 has more horsepower than a Ferrari 328 GTS... That is a horrible comparison...
> Lets look at a current comparison (note: I am only looking at the top of the lowest level of production cars available in the United States):
> Nissan Sentra SE-R Spec V --> 175 hp @ 6000 rpm , 180 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm
> ...


wow...wow, I think that was the most retarded response anyone has every given to any of my arguments ever, how do you sleep at night?

#1 you obviously know nothing about the skyline otherwise you would know that the skyline IS a "gramma" car that just happens to have a few low production sport versions. THE SKYLINE IS NOT A SUPER CAR, 300 HP is not a super car, there are many many cars with 300 hp, not to mention a super car by definition requires certain criteria that the skyline does not meet, F430's, Ford GT's, Murcielagos, etc. are super cars. True, skylines can achieve performance on par with a super car, but that still does not make it a super car and only someone that doesn't really know what a skyline is would make such a statement.

#2 The 02/03 spec v and the R32/R33 Skyline GTS25 type S has nearly the exact same weight, dimensions, displacement, horsepower, torque, not to mention tremendous similarities in looks that I'm not going into because I am tired of linking pictures. The biggest difference between the two is one is FWD and one is RWD and the skyline has an inline 6 and the spec v has an inline 4 even though output is near identical. Comparing the spec v to a skyline does not make either one any better or any worse, but people need to learn what a skyline really is, because you know what? 90% of the skylines produced are practically econocars, try reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_skyline

#3 I'm comparing my car to ferraris/corvettes of the 1980's to show you that the spec v is not a slow car and that saying it is nothing but a slow piece of crap is a very ignorant statement. Also, listing horsepower and torque numbers is the lamest attempt at trying to prove a better car, you could at least try to do quarter mile times even though that still isn't good criteria. For further explanation, see below.

#4 I know what my car can do, I drive it every day. I know what other cars can do, I have lots of friends with sports cars and I have driven their cars. My car is not a drag car, NOT A DRAG CAR, one more time, NOT A DRAG CAR. Saying a spec v is not a good performance vehicle because it doesn't run a low 12 is an ignorant and stupid statement. The spec v is capable of lateral acceleration and slalom speeds that can compete with some of the worlds best (better slalom than McLaren F1, look it up) because of its light weight and since it has a good torque and horsepower band it stays in power well around a track. I find much more enjoyment in a car that handles well than one that simply has me in the position for a speeding ticket quicker, as thats all straightline acceleration past a degree is good for (most cars tuned for drag would be laughably slow on a road course from turbo lag, traction issues, and things like solid rear axles). If you want to comment on the performance of a spec v, how about you look at lap times around a course, or how about you check out this link where the spec v BEATS the SRT-4 on a road course setup even though the SRT-4 makes about 80 more peak whp. http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=39&article_id=1425&page_number=7

P.S. the sentra is not a gramma car, I see grammas drive corvettes, are they gramma cars too then? Just because the car doesn't cost $90,000 doesn't mean it sucks.


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

neogeon said:


> A. spec v is not an economy car, if you honestly think the spec v is an economy car then you should immediately enter a mental institution
> 
> B. I bet if you took the production numbers you would see that probably a solid 70-90% or more skylines were of the RB20 and N/A RB25 trim levels. Look at the lancer evo, evos account for maybe 10% if that of the lancer lineup and there is no reason to believe that the same statistic doesn't follow for the skyline. Just because Nissan made a few more higher trim models in limited numbers doesn't automatically make the lesser and more common models irrelevant or uncomparable to a spec v. Stop trying to make my statement about the skyline into something it isn't, I said the R33 GTS25 type S shares alot of similarities regardless of part numbers, etc. with the 2002 nissan sentra SE-R Spec V, that is all I said, period, the GT-R's performance along with other models is totally irrelevant.



Hate to burst your bubble but it is in the Economy class...

The RB25 is nothing like the QR25...similarities????..yea ,,, they were both made by Nissan........ where do you get this stuff? You own a Sentra, nothing wrong with that... get over it


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

myoung said:


> Hate to burst your bubble but it is in the Economy class...
> 
> The RB25 is nothing like the QR25...similarities????..yea ,,, they were both made by Nissan........ where do you get this stuff? You own a Sentra, nothing wrong with that... get over it


I know the RB25 is nothing like the QR25, I'm just saying the displacement and horsepower/torque are nearly the same so stock for stock the skyline GTS25 type S doesn't outclass a spec v into warp speed oblivion like everyone always likes to think the skyline will. Yes the RB25 can acheive higher hp etc. than the QR, thats not being argued here, but then again, who knows? The QR may have alot more potential than we know now, after all its only been sold since 02 so thats really only about 4 years and I remember someone that owned an B13 SE-R and how everyone didn't know the SR20's potential at first and only later was its potential unlocked. BTW, I own a spec v, if i wanted a "sentra" I would've bought one, all the cars really share is an outer shell and everything else performance related is totally different (engine,suspension,transmission,rims,tires,seats (bolstered seats are a performance mod, even if it doesn't make the car faster)).

P.S. Lotus Elise gets better mpg than the spec v, so is it too in the economy class? Like I've said before, name a better ALL AROUND performance car (not drag car) for anywhere near the price of a spec v and I will happily trade my spec v in ASAP, except, you won't, so I won't need to. The spec v is cheap because it pulls off the shelf parts and combined them into a very worthy adversary on the track (not drag strip) of cars costing thousands more. Just because Nissan made the sentra body into a performance car instead of starting from scratch doesn't mean people have to pull the "sentra GXE is a gramma car" card everytime I talk about the spec v, damn, sometimes I feel like I'm talking on a mustang forum...


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

myoung said:


> Hate to burst your bubble but it is in the Economy class...


according to who? I find it gets good mileage but most people I see seem to be bitching that the mileage isn't good enough.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

neopet, i never said the spec V was shitty. i only state that it is not a super sports car. Economy implies economical. you have 4 doors, you get good gas mileage, then its in the economy class, just like all sentras have been. The spec 5 is a nice car for what it is, but its nothing like any ferrari, skyline, r32, evo, etc... its made for a different purpose.. pleasee remove the stick from yoru ass, i will read your other post later to rip into them.


to let you know, the lancer is an econo car too, its gets over 30 mpg... the evo is a sports car. the 2.5RS is an econo car, but STI is a sports car. Ferrari will own your mom any day of the week.. stop trying to make your car look better, when you talk muscle cars, you talk the hemi 426, 427 chevy, 455 pontiac, 429 etc.. you dont talk the 289 or less.. hell you can even talk 350 small block. a car that has 50 years newer techonolgy will be better...


----------



## pete2.0 (Sep 17, 2004)

Dude... Nissan advertises the Sentra as an *ECONOMY CAR*!!! and to answer your 4 statements:

1. I was comparing the top end of different car companies LOWEST LEVEL OF CAR! I said nothing about the skyline since it is not the lowest levle of car that Nissan makes, the sentra is.

2. I answered why I didnt include the skyline in the first question (and btw any fuck tard can write an article in Wikipedia...)

3. Why dont you compare your car to something about 20 to 30 years newer? Thats right... it doesnt have the numbers to back it up. The specs on 70s/80s cars are low because the technology wasnt there before. Your comparison is completely wrong and should be stricken from the record. You cannot compare something that is 20 years (or more) older. Thats like comparing how much you make today to how much people made in the 70's... the dollar and inflation rates are very different... so technically you dont make more than people in the 70's/80's.

4. Anyone can know what their car does, but let me give you hint, your car cant run with the big cars because its not meant to!!! 
The Spec V is great for what it is (An *economy based* sport model), there is nothing wrong with the numbers it make, hell I wouldnt mind having one (if I didnt have to pay for it :thumbup: ), but if you really understood why I posted those numbers than you would realise that I am right... Your car just cant do it.

As for the ps, yes I do see many grammas driving expensive, luxury/sport cars, and no that doesnt make them "gramma" cars. I guess that gramma car isnt the best to describe the spec v, so I change my original opinion to *econo-box*.
And btw, I sleep very well at night :thumbup: 
And one more thing... I lvoe the sentra economy class, I drive one, but I know its limitations, just give up on your dreams of running with ferraris (not from the 70s/80s  ) and corvettes and enjoy your *economy based* car for what it is


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

pete2.0 said:


> I lvoe the sentra economy class, I drive one, but I know its limitations, just give up on your dreams of running with ferraris (not from the 70s/80s  ) and corvettes and enjoy your *economy based* car for what it is


You drive a GXE, the limitations are nothing like those of a spec v, and I know this having driven a B14 GXE (actually kind of fun but slow as dirt, I could've made a sandwhich in the time it takes to go 0-60). I could tell you stories of how well the spec v does, but this forum frowns upon any type of street racing so I can't include anything. Horsepower and torque numbers don't mean anything. I know for a fact (look at road and track/car and driver/motor trend and you'll find them) that the spec v runs just a few tenths slower 5-60 than an EVO VIII and actually the same 5-60 as a honda S2000 and both of those cars make 65-96 MORE HP. With a ridiculous lanch you can knock almost 2 seconds off of both cars, but how practical is launching a car at 9k RPMs? not very unless you like buying new transmissions every couple months or at least clutches if you're lucky. Horsepower alone doesn't make a car fast unless the weight and suspension is there to back it up. A Cadillac Eldorado can do 0-60 in like 8.2 seconds, try running that big honking boat through an autocross course. I will agree with you that the Spec V does not have the same goal in mind of a supercar to be fair to your statement. Supercars and Grand Tourers are designed for performance on the higher end at speeds of 100+ mph and thats why cars like the skyline GT-R and Acura NSX are the most famous for Shutouku highway racing in Japan. On the other hand, more lightweight cars like civic type-Rs, lighter versions of the skyline, silvias, RX-7s, etc. are the weapon of choice for sub 100 mph tight technical courses like touge racing where handling G's take precedence over straightline speed, this is the niche the spec v fills and in my experience does so beautifully. If someone bought a spec v expecting to run fast ET's at the local drag strip, they made a very bad call, but if they want to run through corners at world class speeds, they picked the best car for the money to do it in.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

pete2.0 said:


> Dude... Nissan advertises the Sentra as an *ECONOMY CAR*!!!


yes, the SENTRA, when the 02 SE-R came out they actually put it in a seperate section entirely from the sentra on the website to strongly distinguish between the two cars just like mitsubishi puts the lancer evolution in a different section from the regular lancer. Also, you think Nissan Japan doesn't advertise the RB20 powered skyline with 128 hp (same as a current GXE) as an economy car? Thats the number 1 point I'm trying to make, the skyline lineup is not all supercar performing models, some of them are in fact economy cars while one sits at nearly the same performance aspects as the spec v and there is a good chance would perform about the same.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

pete2.0 said:


> Anyone can know what their car does, but let me give you hint, your car cant run with the big cars because its not meant to!!!


Guess what, it can and it does, and it was meant to, and I can speak about that with first hand experience.


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

neogeon said:


> The QR may have alot more potential than we know now..


actually we already know....


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

neogeon said:


> according to who? I find it gets good mileage but most people I see seem to be bitching that the mileage isn't good enough.



According to Nissan... The sentra is the lowest priced car in the inventory... it is the Nissan Economy Class vehicle... period... nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is..


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

myoung said:


> According to Nissan... The sentra is the lowest priced car in the inventory... it is the Nissan Economy Class vehicle... period... nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is..


Yes, but I don't think when the 02 SE-R came out they put the SE-R and sentra on totally seperate pages on the Nissan website for fun, there was a reason behind it, and that reason was to make sure people didn't mistake the SE-R for a crappy ho hum economy car. To show you what I mean, I'll try to mock up the nissanusa website from 02

Cars: (drop down menu)
Sentra
Altima
SE-R
Maxima
etc. 

now why would nissan do that if they didn't want to emphasize the world of difference between the sentra and the SE-R?


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

myoung said:


> According to Nissan... The sentra is the lowest priced car in the inventory... it is the Nissan Economy Class vehicle... period... nothing wrong with that, but it is what it is..


I just remembered, that won't be for long as soon they are going to sell some car below the sentra, I forgot what its called though since I am not interested in it in any way shape or form. Also, just because its the lowest car doesn't mean its crappy. The 3 series is the lowest model cars BMW sells in america, so does that make them cheap economy cars since they are the lowest priced model? Also, the regular 3 series cars perform decently (handling is supposed to be superb, but I haven't driven one so I can't speak about it) but then there is the M3 that completely outclasses the regular 3 series just like the SE-R completely outclasses the sentra.


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

neogeon said:


> Yes, but I don't think when the 02 SE-R came out they put the SE-R and sentra on totally seperate pages on the Nissan website for fun, there was a reason behind it, and that reason was to make sure people didn't mistake the SE-R for a crappy ho hum economy car. To show you what I mean, I'll try to mock up the nissanusa website from 02
> 
> Cars: (drop down menu)
> Sentra
> ...


 It's a Sentra.....period


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

neogeon said:


> I just remembered, that won't be for long as soon they are going to sell some car below the sentra, I forgot what its called though since I am not interested in it in any way shape or form. Also, just because its the lowest car doesn't mean its crappy..


1) Versa..........

2) no one said the Sentra was crappy...but it is an economy class vehicle.. just like the Civic.. The Spec is just the top of the line Sentra...but still the entry level vehicle in the lineup...


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

myoung said:


> 1) Versa..........
> 
> 2) no one said the Sentra was crappy


Well, personally I define an economy car as something no one wants that you are stuck with to save pennies on your commute to work everyday, so calling the spec v an economy car would imply it is crappy and would be derogatory by my definition. Even if the Sentra is the least expensive model in the Nissan lineup, it still offers all of the features and comfort items as my dad's old 88 maxima he had back in the day. On the other hand, something like a chevy aveo or a daewoo lanos are very bare bones cars that you are lucky to even have A/C and an AM/FM radio in and accelerates about as fast as a wounded turtle, thats what I call an economy car. If you want to call the sentra a compact car I have no qualms about it as it is a relatively compact and lightweight vehicle, but I consider that more of a performance advantage than hindrance so therefore I like it to be such a car. It's obvious you dont think the sentra is crappy because after all you picked a 200sx, but some people persist that the sentra is a cheapo-depot worthless bargain basement econobox and nothing else and I find that offensive and shouldn't be tolerated on a nissan forum.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

I just saw this and I think I'm going to throw up, THIS is Rice with a capital type-R











whoops, too late, throw up all over the keyboard, oh no here comes more...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/niss...oryZ6401QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

neogeon said:


> Well, personally I define an economy car as something no one wants that you are stuck with to save pennies on your commute to work everyday, so calling the spec v an economy car would imply it is crappy and would be derogatory by my definition. Even if the Sentra is the least expensive model in the Nissan lineup, it still offers all of the features and comfort items as my dad's old 88 maxima he had back in the day. On the other hand, something like a chevy aveo or a daewoo lanos are very bare bones cars that you are lucky to even have A/C and an AM/FM radio in and accelerates about as fast as a wounded turtle, thats what I call an economy car. If you want to call the sentra a compact car I have no qualms about it as it is a relatively compact and lightweight vehicle, but I consider that more of a performance advantage than hindrance so therefore I like it to be such a car. It's obvious you dont think the sentra is crappy because after all you picked a 200sx, but some people persist that the sentra is a cheapo-depot worthless bargain basement econobox and nothing else and I find that offensive and shouldn't be tolerated on a nissan forum.


I also own a Altima 3.5.... 

You can define the Sentra how you wish or call it what you want, but it is an economy classed vehicle.. like I said that isn't nessesarily a bad thing and it doesn't imply a lack quality......


----------



## myoung (Apr 15, 2002)

neogeon said:


> I just saw this and I think I'm going to throw up, THIS is Rice with a capital type-R
> 
> 
> 
> ...



more like a total lack of taste....


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

myoung said:


> more like a total lack of taste....


It's as if he walked into the rice aisle at pep boys and said "I'll take one of everything, except the stuff that really makes a performance difference, that won't be necessary."


----------



## WATSON1 (Jul 9, 2005)

neogeon said:


> I just saw this and I think I'm going to throw up, THIS is Rice with a capital type-R
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Damn Neo, looks like your posting pics of your car and making jokes about it to try and redeem yourself from some of your previous posts. J/K
I've seen that car in ATL before, almost ran in a ditch I was laughing so hard.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

WATSON1 said:


> Damn Neo, looks like your posting pics of your car and making jokes about it to try and redeem yourself from some of your previous posts. J/K
> I've seen that car in ATL before, almost ran in a ditch I was laughing so hard.


if my car ever looks like that I give all of you the right to fill the trunk full of C4 and hit the detonator.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

neogeon said:


> The 3 series is the lowest model cars BMW sells in america, so does that make them cheap economy cars since they are the lowest priced model? Also, the regular 3 series cars perform decently (handling is supposed to be superb, but I haven't driven one so I can't speak about it) but then there is the M3 that completely outclasses the regular 3 series just like the SE-R completely outclasses the sentra.


Thats the absolute dumbest comparision i have ever heard, the base model 3 series bmw still have 255hp as opposed to the M3's 333hp. there are loads of differences.. the base model sentra is 126hp vs the spec 5's 175. You dont comare a top model 18k sentra to a base model bmw for 33k. BMW's in their worst still are better than most cars. BMW doesn't really sell shitty cars. Yes they have electrical problems, but thats german engineering.

oh and your def of economy is a lot different than what a real economy car is defined as. the sentra (in all models) is a good economical car. Get over it..


----------



## Joel (Jun 11, 2003)

the 318i is more like 129hp which is on par with the sentra - the base model beamers arent that great but the high end models are great (along with their price tag  )


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

Joel said:


> the 318i is more like 129hp which is on par with the sentra - the base model beamers arent that great but the high end models are great (along with their price tag  )


when i talk, i do new car for new car I dont like to compares cars from a while ago to new cars like neopet


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

Joel said:


> the 318i is more like 129hp which is on par with the sentra - the base model beamers arent that great but the high end models are great (along with their price tag  )


good to have someone with sense post every once and a while, oh, and you live in australia, have you driven skylines before? Would you say that the spec v that has the almost the same weight, displacement, horsepower, torque, dimensions, etc. would likely perform on par with a skyline GTS25 type S stock vs. stock (negating that the GTS is RWD and the spec v is FWD)? After all I figure you would be the one to ask since in Australia skylines are to be had by anyone that wants them and don't get such a fanboy following they get in the US. Also, could you please inform the people of this forum that not all skylines are performace vehicles and that there are lower models that offer little to no performance attributes (the 130 hp RB20 modles)? Thanks. Oh yeah, and would you happen to know of a site with the 0-60 and 1/4 mile of the GTS25 type S, R32 or R33 will do, thanks again.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

psuLemon said:


> Thats the absolute dumbest comparision i have ever heard, the base model 3 series bmw still have 255hp as opposed to the M3's 333hp. there are loads of differences.. the base model sentra is 126hp vs the spec 5's 175. You dont comare a top model 18k sentra to a base model bmw for 33k. BMW's in their worst still are better than most cars. BMW doesn't really sell shitty cars. Yes they have electrical problems, but thats german engineering.
> 
> oh and your def of economy is a lot different than what a real economy car is defined as. the sentra (in all models) is a good economical car. Get over it..


I was just pointing out that since the sentra is the least expensive car in the Nissan lineup doesn't automatically make it crappy or simply an economy car (chevy aveo=economy car, sentra=compact car) because the 3 series is the lowest series of BMWs. I was just proving your statement wrong, thats all, I know the sentra and 3 series beamer don't appeal to the same type of buyer etc.

I got news for you, lowest model makes 215 hp, and for all you know that could be overrated. Also, lets not forget it weighs 3285 lbs and costs $30k. In fact, I bet the spec v could probably beat it on a track because, after all, the beamer weighs as much as a spec v loaded full of people. Oh, and would you look at that, it has almost the same EPA estimates as a spec v, well surely it must be an economy car  http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/bmw/3series/100530523/researchlanding.html 

could we please just do a little more research in the future, please?


----------



## Psch91 (May 18, 2002)

I love you neo. How in the world can you defened the sentra econobox so much? Its pretty good, especially for the money, but you need to stop with your out of this world car comparisons. Its not gods car, sorry to break the news to you.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

Psch91 said:


> I love you neo. How in the world can you defened the sentra econobox so much? Its pretty good, especially for the money, but you need to stop with your out of this world car comparisons. Its not gods car, sorry to break the news to you.


I'm trying to get across that neither is a skyline as a car line as opposed to just a GT-R and am defending a statement I made many days ago. The GTS25 shouldn't be any faster than a spec v and since they are so incredibly similar in all aspects spare RWD vs. FWD and boost capacity it isn't outlandish to call the two similar and say a spec v is like a GT-R without the turbo or AWD since the N/A RB25 makes almost exactly the same power and we all know that the AWD system in the skyline is what makes it spectacular since the godawful weight definently isn't it. Too many people are calling the spec v crap when they haven't even driven one before or maybe even seen one and I'm tired of hearing that on a NISSAN forum. I've had my spec long enough to know what its capable of and to be honest I'm even more impressed with it everytime I drive other people's cars. It's certainly not god's car especially when it comes to tuning potential, I would happily take a WRX STI or lotus elise or C6 corvette in its place but those cars cost from $30-$45k and the spec v is the best damn car you're going to find for the money and very few even over $30k can offer the same driving enjoyment I get from the spec v.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

neogeon said:


> I was just pointing out that since the sentra is the least expensive car in the Nissan lineup doesn't automatically make it crappy or simply an economy car (chevy aveo=economy car, sentra=compact car) because the 3 series is the lowest series of BMWs. I was just proving your statement wrong, thats all, I know the sentra and 3 series beamer don't appeal to the same type of buyer etc.
> 
> I got news for you, lowest model makes 215 hp, and for all you know that could be overrated. Also, lets not forget it weighs 3285 lbs and costs $30k. In fact, I bet the spec v could probably beat it on a track because, after all, the beamer weighs as much as a spec v loaded full of people. Oh, and would you look at that, it has almost the same EPA estimates as a spec v, well surely it must be an economy car  http://www.edmunds.com/new/2006/bmw/3series/100530523/researchlanding.html
> could we please just do a little more research in the future, please?




Its only a shame i took that information straight from BMW's website and from nissans website. BMW's are for comfort you dont fuck, not these race cars. If you want a race inspired BMW, you get an M class. BMW makes the Spec V look like a tyco car when it comes to technology and comfort.


----------



## 1900 (Jul 27, 2004)

neogeon said:


> good to have someone with sense post every once and a while, oh, and you live in australia, have you driven skylines before? Would you say that the spec v that has the almost the same weight, displacement, horsepower, torque, dimensions, etc. would likely perform on par with a skyline GTS25 type S stock vs. stock (negating that the GTS is RWD and the spec v is FWD)? After all I figure you would be the one to ask since in Australia skylines are to be had by anyone that wants them and don't get such a fanboy following they get in the US. Also, could you please inform the people of this forum that not all skylines are performace vehicles and that there are lower models that offer little to no performance attributes (the 130 hp RB20 modles)? Thanks. Oh yeah, and would you happen to know of a site with the 0-60 and 1/4 mile of the GTS25 type S, R32 or R33 will do, thanks again.



Do u ever shut the hell up give it a rest allready. Sometimes it is best to be quiet and let ppl think u are a moron than to open ur mouth and remove all doubt

btw mitchell35758 ur truck looks awesome


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

1900 said:


> Sometimes it is best to be quiet and let ppl think u are a moron than to open ur mouth and remove all doubt


Oh, you mean like everyone else on this forum? I back my shit up with facts and that is more than anyone else of these retards can say. If you have a problem with it, don't post in the same threads as me, period. :loser:


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

psuLemon said:


> Its only a shame i took that information straight from BMW's website and from nissans website. BMW's are for comfort you dont fuck, not these race cars. If you want a race inspired BMW, you get an M class. BMW makes the Spec V look like a tyco car when it comes to technology and comfort.


YOU ARE SO STUPID!!! Why is BMW constantly regarded as a performance car and praised for its handling if its just a comfort car? A pre-revamped cadillac (before they went sports car) was a comfort car, a boat with a big motor and nothing else, a BMW in all forms is supposed to be "the ultimate driving machine." For the love of god will you please learn SOMETHING ANYTHING before you try to tell people shit on forums, my god if someone that knew what they were talking about could read the shit you people say, I would have someone to laugh along with.


----------



## WATSON1 (Jul 9, 2005)

neogeon said:


> my god if someone that knew what they were talking about could read the shit you people say, I would have someone to laugh along with.


The people that know what they are talking about are the ones that are posting it, and they are all laughing at you, not with you.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

neogeon said:


> YOU ARE SO STUPID!!! Why is BMW constantly regarded as a performance car and praised for its handling if its just a comfort car? A pre-revamped cadillac (before they went sports car) was a comfort car, a boat with a big motor and nothing else, a BMW in all forms is supposed to be "the ultimate driving machine." For the love of god will you please learn SOMETHING ANYTHING before you try to tell people shit on forums, my god if someone that knew what they were talking about could read the shit you people say, I would have someone to laugh along with.


But the spec 5 is god.


Listen you ghey fuck, yes, the BMW is suppose to be the ultimate driving machine (im glad you watch the commercials) but they are good sports car for what they are. The M class is directed to performance, the others are sporty models with comfort. They aren't made to be drag or race cars, but fun to drive. Now STFU and go rice out your ultimate driving machine.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

psuLemon said:


> But the spec 5 is god.
> 
> 
> Listen you ghey fuck, yes, the BMW is suppose to be the ultimate driving machine (im glad you watch the commercials) but they are good sports car for what they are. The M class is directed to performance, the others are sporty models with comfort. They aren't made to be drag or race cars, but fun to drive. Now STFU and *go rice out your ultimate driving machine.*


I don't own a BMW...


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

WATSON1 said:


> The people that know what they are talking about are the ones that are posting it, and they are all laughing at you, not with you.


It amazes me that I seem to always prove them wrong, so, how again are they the ones that know what they are talking about again? I forget...

If everyone would stop trying to be a cocky bastard to me I might try to be a little nicer and not flame people so much, could anyone try that for once perhaps? no? well I tried...


----------



## Psch91 (May 18, 2002)

neogeon said:


> It amazes me that I seem to always prove them wrong, so, how again are they the ones that know what they are talking about again? I forget...
> 
> If everyone would stop trying to be a cocky bastard to me I might try to be a little nicer and not flame people so much, could anyone try that for once perhaps? no? well I tried...


Dude. seriously. Youre the one being a cocky bastard. You are not always right. Take some other peoples views into consideration. Just because this is a forum, doesnt mean were bashing you and we want to ban you because you have other views. You are just a complete idiot, who thinks any car can be comparable to another because they have one thing in common.


----------



## xbrandonx (Mar 27, 2004)

Psch91 said:


> Just because this is a forum, doesnt mean were bashing you and we want to ban you because you have other views.


I would vote for the bannination!

I average 28 MPG in my specV. That seems pretty economical. However, it is fun to drive as well. Just because it is an economy car, doesn't mean it has to suck. My sister's scion TC is rated produce 160 hp @ 5,700 rpm and 163 lb.-ft tq. Also pretty fun to drive. Very economical. However since its a hatch does that make it a sports coupe? No.

The specV isn't an awful car, however it has very low limits of what it can put out.

You have 4 doors, 4 cylinders and a very large trunk. You are not driving a car that was geared with only performance in mind. Nissan made it to have an economy car that would please parents, and at the same time, please the kids driving it.

Enjoy your specV for what it is. A car that is fun to drive, but still wont leave you at a gas station every 200 miles.


----------



## Psch91 (May 18, 2002)

xbrandonx said:


> Enjoy your specV for what it is. A car that is fun to drive, but still wont leave you at a gas station every 200 miles.


Leaves me at a gas station every 220 miles


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

xbrandonx said:


> I would vote for the bannination!
> 
> I average 28 MPG in my specV. That seems pretty economical. However, it is fun to drive as well. Just because it is an economy car, doesn't mean it has to suck. My sister's scion TC is rated produce 160 hp @ 5,700 rpm and 163 lb.-ft tq. Also pretty fun to drive. Very economical. However since its a hatch does that make it a sports coupe? No.
> 
> ...


The 1985 porsche 944 had a 2.5 liter 4 cylinder and got 35 mpg, and its slower and has a slightly lesser top speed than a spec v, so surely its twice the economy car a spec v is. The problem with all of you is you can't see past what a car is marketed as and compare pound per pound, hp per hp, dollar per dollar between two cars. Yes the spec v gets good economy, but if you actually look into it most sports cars get good economy: miata, elise, solstice, etc etc. Even the corvette gets 28 mpg highway. Just because Nissan didn't go overboard and make a finicky car that breaks constantly and needs a rebuild at 40k miles (like an evo, its either C&D or R&T online) doesn't mean it sucks and doesn't mean it isn't a worthy adversary for more expensive cars. I honestly don't see anywhere that I mentioned the spec v being more than a spec v. I compared to a skyline GTS25 type S because if you compare numbers, the two are very similar. All of you need to stop the dealership salesman "porsche>nissan because it costs more and we say so" philosophy and see cars for what they really are and the performance they offer.


----------



## WATSON1 (Jul 9, 2005)

neogeon said:


> "porsche>nissan because it costs more and we say so" philosophy and see cars for what they really are and the performance they offer.


I just got back from the track. Raced my SpecV against a Porsche Carrera GT.
He finished the 1/4 before I even shifted to 2nd. Even though he beat me, the SpecV is a faster, more powerful car than Porsche, I just had a bad start. I can't wait for a rematch, I'm gonna show him what the Spec can really do!


----------



## xbrandonx (Mar 27, 2004)

neogeon said:


> Nissan didn't go overboard and make a finicky car that breaks constantly and needs a rebuild at 40k miles


You mean like how the headgaskets go out around 60k on most spec Vs?


----------



## ICP Sux0rZ! (Jan 10, 2005)

dude neo SHUT THE FUCK UP

/thread


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

ICP Sux0rZ! said:


> dude neo SHUT THE FUCK UP
> 
> /thread


who the fuck are you? go to hell douchebag you haven't said a single thing in this thread until now.


----------



## neogeon (Nov 30, 2005)

xbrandonx said:


> You mean like how the headgaskets go out around 60k on most spec Vs?


dude, don't go there, we all know thats the result of improper break in and stupid drivers, there are plenty of V's over 100k with no problems ever so don't start this crap. The evo needed a new transmission, all sorts of new engine parts, new brakes, etc. etc. and that was from just daily driving, the spec v's with problems are driven hard as hell and not maintained properly. Like I said, NO, I am not starting this argument, any more comments on this will be ignored, i've already heard this shit enough, NO NO NO.


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

neogeon said:


> dude, don't go there, we all know thats the result of improper break in and stupid drivers, there are plenty of V's over 100k with no problems ever so don't start this crap. The evo needed a new transmission, all sorts of new engine parts, new brakes, etc. etc. and that was from just daily driving, the spec v's with problems are driven hard as hell and not maintained properly.  Like I said, NO, I am not starting this argument, any more comments on this will be ignored, i've already heard this shit enough, NO NO NO.


and i know people with evo with 80k and no problem, its goes both ways buddy..


ps- Stop comparing one 1984 944 ( a slow POS porche) to a 02 spec 5... If you compare cars, do it right and in the same generation. Now go talk shit on the 00+ porches.


----------



## xbrandonx (Mar 27, 2004)

neogeon said:


> dude, don't go there, we all know thats the result of improper break in and stupid drivers, there are plenty of V's over 100k with no problems ever so don't start this crap. The evo needed a new transmission, all sorts of new engine parts, new brakes, etc. etc. and that was from just daily driving, the spec v's with problems are driven hard as hell and not maintained properly. Like I said, NO, I am not starting this argument, any more comments on this will be ignored, i've already heard this shit enough, NO NO NO.


you're just gonna end up getting every thread you ever post in locked.

Count up the # of 02 specV's that got motors replaced. Then go count the # of specV's that got the tranny replaced.

As PSU said, it goes both ways.

edit: just noticed neo was banned...wonder if he just clicked the ban button or a mod gave him a vacation.
also, the reason the headgaskets MIGHT go bad was discussed in NPM, and brings up a damn good point, and is probably correct.


----------



## xbrandonx (Mar 27, 2004)

Psch91 said:


> Leaves me at a gas station every 220 miles


That'd be about 15-16 MPGs if your running the tank down pretty much to E. That is awful, maybe its time for a tune up?


----------



## psuLemon (Apr 23, 2003)

xbrandonx said:


> edit: just noticed neo was banned...wonder if he just clicked the ban button or a mod gave him a vacation.
> also, the reason the headgaskets MIGHT go bad was discussed in NPM, and brings up a damn good point, and is probably correct.


he's on perma vacation. you should check out the i wish i was neopet thread in OT... you would learn soo much.


and his other user names have been banned.





people are sick of his ways. He was banned for the same reason on the v-boards.


----------



## TwistedGTR (May 19, 2005)

Ok. I don't really know what to call this..I am in a state of shock 
Ricer Cars for sure


----------



## SonsofWisdom (Mar 29, 2004)

those look fake


----------



## TwistedGTR (May 19, 2005)

They are real I believe...from what I hear, its like a japanese gang that goes around beating on other cars when they pass. I am not sure though. Correct me if i'm wrong


----------



## chimmike (Oct 17, 2002)

neogeon said:


> It amazes me that I seem to always prove them wrong, ..



Now that you're banned, I can reply without you posting a novel of opinion.

You never posted proof. You posted opinion. "in my opinion the se-r isn't an economy car" Too bad that's what nissan calls it. Different bracket than the sentra on Nissan's website? That's called MARKETING. It's how they make money. Douchecan.

I'm glad you got banned. Your head is thicker 'n a piston.


----------



## SonsofWisdom (Mar 29, 2004)

TwistedGTR said:


> They are real I believe...from what I hear, its like a japanese gang that goes around beating on other cars when they pass. I am not sure though. Correct me if i'm wrong


I think I went to a different page... :shrugs:

The page I saw looked like pictures of cars in car lot that were mod' out...maybe I went to the wrong site...I'm so confused now

at second glance...they don't look all that fake...that...is really scary HA HA...oh well..

my fav...the red car with 8 pipes coming sticking out the rear HA HA


----------



## 1CLNB14 (Apr 30, 2002)

TwistedGTR said:


> Ok. I don't really know what to call this..I am in a state of shock
> Ricer Cars for sure


A few of those cars kick major ass.


----------



## Trippen (Feb 21, 2006)

I hate to say it but I have been to car shows in Japan and those are real cars. In Nagasaki and Oita. The Big Lipped cars are the hot ones...Why they have them no clue..The long Pipes I hadent seen but may be thats the noise control they have to have. Japan is really picky about noise polution. Peace all


----------



## Radioaktiv (Feb 12, 2004)

TwistedGTR said:


> Ok. I don't really know what to call this..I am in a state of shock
> Ricer Cars for sure


its yankee style

its not rice

there is a lot of styles of tuning in Japan (yankee, VIP, yakuza, EXE, etc.)
too bad we arent as open-minded here


----------



## Russell (Sep 11, 2005)

that link reminds me of that one Mini commercial about the fake Coopers. 

would it be rice if I replace my headlights with black ones? the stock ones are yellowed and cracking. i'm looking at the black background ones not chrome. i dont see this as rice since the oem ones would cost about the same if not more and i don't like the stockers anyways. 

as for the bolt ons being rice-yes and no. yes because they want to say they have "mods" without actually doing a lot of work, and if they get off brand junk from ebay. no because not everyone wants to change their car a lot, like me. i'm still trying to pay my car off, do you really think i can afford to drop a 4 grand turbo kit in there? i'm only in high school, give me a break. plus this is my daily driver and i can't have that much downtime on it. sure, i buy things for my car, but only when i have got the money to spend it on something nice, not rice. my next purchase will be a hot shot header. a lightweight flywheel when the clutch goes. 

so, just because someone just has bolt ons doesnt mean all they are looking for is a bit of chrome and noise, it's a gradual project.

also, my part time job feeds 2 investments. i also have an 87 Isuzu Trooper that i'm building up as well as having a sentra payment and insurance. has anyone up here seen the price of mud tires lately? for a 33" its close to 600 for a set, plus wider rims, another 200. for someone on a ultra limited budget, even the seemingly small mods are a real feat of work to buy.


----------



## TwistedGTR (May 19, 2005)

> would it be rice if I replace my headlights with black ones? the stock ones are yellowed and cracking. i'm looking at the black background ones not chrome. i dont see this as rice since the oem ones would cost about the same if not more and i don't like the stockers anyways.


As long as you don't go tellin people that it adds horse power. just kiddin Lol

Naw, I dont think it would be considered rice cause if the stock ones cost the same and your old ones are crapping out on you, then its no big deal IMO


----------



## TwistedGTR (May 19, 2005)

> its yankee style
> 
> its not rice
> 
> ...


Ya, see I didnt know about that stuff. Back when I used to live in Okinawa when I was 13, I knew nothing about cars. To bad I just started learning about cars right before I moved.


----------



## SonsofWisdom (Mar 29, 2004)

Radioaktiv said:


> its yankee style
> 
> its not rice
> 
> ...


 I see what you are saying but…those aren’t tuned rides…those are more shock value cars. Regardless of how bad ass they may be…I find it hard to accept that 4 foot exhaust pipes sticking up out of the ass really helps exhaust flow or that it really serves any purpose other than to make you say...wtf?

My definition of a “ricer” is if it's ineffective, highly inefficient, non-productive, non-functional, distasteful, and/or impractical modification, then it's ricey.

I have to say...since when does car modification have a fashion since? If someone looked at my car and said "oh that's such and such style" I’d be pissed...tuning like that isn't original at all...making it all the more pointless, regardless of the ineffectiveness of 3foot pipes sticking out of your cars ass. That's really...not the point of modding at all...really. 

It's not just that I'm not into..."that"...nor is it an issue of open-mindedness…it's more because that isn't tuning. It's sticking the most ridiculous things you can on your car to see how long someone will talk about it. Then once you lost your 15 min of "shock" you have to do something even more ridiculous...that just isn't the heart of tuning. 

Sure we can put tuner cars into categories like...turbo...n/a...etc etc...but based on how much it adheres to a set of rules for a specific set of outward appearance mods? 


But even if we are talking show cars…the show cars I’ve seen that are tasteful are at least somewhat based on functionality…they are just really… "pretty" functionality. You can look at a good show car and go..."well I could use that and that...I just don't need an all chrome plated turbo" Like DVD GPS navigation screens...something I plan on having, or lightweight speaker boxes...enabling you to have the nice system you want but not sacrificing anything. Those cars just have too many…non functional mods, mods that make you go..."wtf is the purpose of that...oh wait...there is none." Something like that...I’d just go..."interesting" turn around and go look at something that benefits the true art of car tuning…and the true heart of tuning.

Now sure that may just be my opinion on the matter, and by no means am I saying you shouldn’t like or respect those cars…so please don’t misunderstand me. I’m just saying…

Not trying to change your mind…just saying


----------



## Radioaktiv (Feb 12, 2004)

so that must mean you own 2 white t-shirts, 2 pair of cargo pants, and hiking boots. (i say '2' because, hopefully you'll wash one from time to time) 

as far as functionality and performance, thats a good combination. you wont ever need anything but those white shirts, cargo pants and your boots...right?


----------



## 1CLNB14 (Apr 30, 2002)

SonsofWisdom said:


> My definition of a “ricer” is if it's ineffective, highly inefficient, non-productive, non-functional, distasteful, and/or impractical modification, then it's ricey.


Well, that's your opinion.... :fluffy:


----------

