Jump to content

Domestic Rice, anyone?


TxDoc

Recommended Posts

Posted

Man do I want to injure alot of people right now.  First the guy on the first website who was making fun of domestics like rice burners are cool with all that crap on them :smash: .  Second the people that own the domestics on that site for following the ricers by putting all that crap on their cars :fume: .  If those people would spend the money they spend on body mods (which look like S**T :fume: ) they might be able to afford a car with good looks and respectable power (possibly an F-body :smash: ).

 

I drive what many people consider a rice burner but I don't because:  One, the motor is stock (not even a K&N),  Two, the body is stock.  Three, the only money I have spent on the car was replacing the crapy dash speakers.

 

I have spent no money on the car because I know that it is slow and I really don't care to join the rice burner scene any more than I already have by driving an import.  

 

Dang, I think I may have gone a little to far, but I just can't stand ricers nor the people that drive them (atleast none that I have met).

Posted
Rice is from Japan. Therefore domestic cars cannot be considered rice.

It's, Uncle Ben's Rice--All American.....or maybe it can be classified as beans.  Interesting thought to ponder...what do you call domestic rice?

Posted
I dont understand How you can call domestic cars rice? They are american made. Not grown inthe rice fields of japan. Detriot mini-muscle maybe
Posted
As far as I'm concerned, as soon as they get a big wing or any decals that have nothing to do with their car or a coffee can sticking out their backside, it's rice.  Japanese Steam Fried rice or the American Uncle Bens Oventop Rice....it's all rice to me!
Posted
Okay I'm going to say it because no one else will.  That guy is a b!tch and the peoples cars on there well they need help too.  Anyways that guy yeah he's a b!tch.
Posted
if your going to bash them, then do it correctly, it would be considered canadian rice!   :)  here in southern california, the same cars would be considered mexican rice... or spanish rice... LOL  :D and let me tell you their is pleanty of rice around here!
Posted

Now I am no expert, but alot, in fact most, of those pics on the first site, looked photoshopped. But like I said I am not an expert so I was just wandering if someone who is a little more experienced could look at those. Mainly the grilles on the kamakaze grilles, the mesh looked f'ed up somehow. Just alot of it seemed like it wasn't on the car. Second of all, I think the guy doesn't like GM, they were all GM except what? 1 maybe two? Pathetic...

 

Tom

Posted

Second of all, I think the guy doesn't like GM, they were all GM except what? 1 maybe two? Pathetic...

I think the guy drives some riced out jap mobile and is pissed off that some guy in a riced out chevy wooped his A$$ one Saturday night, so he's holding a grudge.

 

Oh, I can't tell about the photoshop stuff but some of those bumper covers look out of place.  Well $h!t, all the stuff on them is out of place. :cool:

Posted
Now I am no expert, but alot, in fact most, of those pics on the first site, looked photoshopped. But like I said I am not an expert so I was just wandering if someone who is a little more experienced could look at those. Mainly the grilles on the kamakaze grilles, the mesh looked f'ed up somehow. Just alot of it seemed like it wasn't on the car. Second of all, I think the guy doesn't like GM, they were all GM except what? 1 maybe two? Pathetic...

 

Tom

As for the mesh on the grilles, that's normal when taking pictures.  I forget the name, maybe moire effect.  Something like that.  As for the photochopping, I don't think he touched a single picture.  I've worked extensively with photoshop not only for editing frames in a video, but also for a company website and I gotta say, it is incredibly hard to add in the reflections on the paint or the shadows the cars create with the ugly front hood with tons of useless holes in them.  I think that's how the cars were when he took the pics.

Posted

Cool, I guess, that is what I was wanddering, but it isn't too cool because they are still decent vehicles, or were before all of that crap.

 

The Speedy, I was thinking the exact same thing, but I was too lazy :cool: to edit my post :crazy:

 

Tom

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Thanks - I wasn't quite caffeinated this morning. 2:1 makes sense, turning the crankshaft 360 degrees will turn the cam 180 degrees, and had I done that, the cam's dot would be at 6 and the crank's at 12 again.   I went ahead and took the sprocket off anyway, aligned everything dot-to-dot including the balance shaft just for s&g. I'm glad I did because I discovered no Loctite on the timing sprocket bolts. Maybe it's not required, but at only 20 ft-lb torque spec, those bolts aren't in there very tight. Cleaned and reassembled with some thread locker and torqued.   A general observation: Less is more with RTV. If a little doesn't stop a leak, a LOT probably won't, either. RTV is thinly veiled revenge, in a tube...      
    • The timing marks are ok, that is #1, you can turn it over until they line up and it won't change anything, the crankshaft turns twice for every camshaft revolution, I have always set up SB Chevs as your pic shows using a straight edge
    • Someone's been here before.... There is a receipt for a 3-piece timing set, purchased earlier this year.   Is this picture something, or, nothing?   I have the timing cover off and my crank is perfectly TDC and the keyed gear's locating mark is dead on 12 o'clock.   The cam gear locating mark is also at 12 o'clock. Now, I'm not an expert, but all the install guides say the two locating marks should meet and be perfectly aligned when installing a timing set. The mark on the crank should be dead on 12:00 and the cam gear's mark should be dead on 6:00, and both marks should be perfectly vertically aligned.   I believe the timing gear is keyed or has a dowel that ensures it can only be installed on the cam in one position, so I have to believe the cam is out of phase somehow. At the very least, with a triangular bolt pattern, it can only be installed in one of 3 different positions.   Before I pulled the front cover, the truck was running alright, no service engine soon lights except an occasional P0172 / rich condition. Timing -16 timing at idle (should be +16), and total -35% fuel trim, two conditions I haven't been able to figure out.   In related news, my injector tested pretty well, wasn't leaking, but I had it rebuilt anyway, and it's on it's way back to me.         Along with this discovery, the good and bad:   Good: The oil pan seal appears undamaged.   Bad: -The timing cover has been reused, and the positioning dowels have been broken. That could explain some of the leaking. -Some kind of white paste or grease was used to try to seal the oil pan seal and timing cover (since wiped off..). -Then, someone globbed silicone all over the front of the cover and also buried the ckp sensor in it. But, they didn't put any inside the cover or use RTV to try to seal the oil pan seal with the timing cover (good).
    • The guy that owns K&P filters last I checked in with him has over 300,000 miles on his Dodge base Hemi using his own 35 micron absolute stainless mesh filter from its first oil change.    The GM study I've posted a dozen times shows the relationship in engine life based in multiples of base units, not miles or years. That is the base unit is the number of miles the motor ran using the reference filter efficiency.    The above two paragraphs dismantle anecdotal arguments IF one changes oil often enough to prevent particle formation and the motor is in otherwise good shape. That is not full of silica (no air filter) or suffering a metallurgical issue that is not part of the lubrication discussion. Poor heat treat in example.   Data from UOA's I've reviewed from more than a few engines can show remarkably broad variations in oil cleanliness using the exact same filter over the course of an engines life.     Lastly there is the common sense of it. Wear debris WILL circulate the engine BEFORE it ever sees a filter in route to that filter and WILL harm the pump which NEVER sees filtered oil.    Alpha question then becomes, given the facts, how long do you believe is a reasonable service life from a vehicle you are certain you will not pass down? That is the junk yard will be it's resting place when you're done with it? (the moral issue most don't care about).    Omega question is then how diligent are you prepared to be in general mechanical, air & oil maintenance? Preventing particulates and keeping them sufficiently dilute; preventing the precursors from generation, amalgamation and precipitation.    If I get a good look at the engine bay of a vehicle I have a fair idea of the owners commitment to the inside of the power train. That 30 micron WIX is still more efficient than a sieve.                 
    • It also depends on what criteria someone is using for “best” when talking filters.  Are we going off best efficiency?   Best quality/QC?  Etc. because the two may not mutually exclusive.  
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...