jap.slapper

Fantastic news fellas.....now did I mention that Jeff kidnapped my pet tortoise and is demanding a huge ransom!

Once the situation has been resolved or as and when both parties mutually agree that further resolution is unachievable, that would be the time to close this thread. Whether the issues raised could have been dealt with in other ways or whether they should have been aired in public is neither here nor there now, as they have been aired and people are now aware of the dispute. To that end, in order to dispel any possible conspiracy theories or accusations of biase (in my opinion) the thread has to run its course. Anything other would not help either party I feel and could be detremental to future Zedworld business. ...and if all else fails no but on a serious note, I hope both parties can resolve this unfortunate dispute.

Just go's to show how much driver safety has progressed over the years. Not too long ago you wouldn't get this standard of safety in F1 let alone the lower echelons of motorsport.... The GP3 car (introduced in 2010) Monocoque and Bodywork Survival cell – Sandwich Carbon/aluminium honeycomb structure designed by Dallara. Front and rear wings – Carbon structures designed by Dallara. Bodywork – Carbon – Kevlar – Glass composite structures designed by Dallara. Safety standards FIA F1 2006 safety standards. Front side rear and steering column impact tests. Front and rear roll hoops, impact structures and monocoque push tests. Wheel retainer safety cables. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXszF6m_ew8 I've never seen a car hop along like that before....and Daly even remembers to re-fit his steering wheel before leaving the remains of the car to be recovered..

Last time I looked in my zed's engine bay the only things that I lost were my interest and will to live....

Mutual resolution required I think

Gotcha'....cheers mate

Drifted in?

Basically, I can slide the hub onto the driveshaft relatively easily and push it back until it comes to a stop. At the stop point, it looks like this: and when I look at the rear of the hub, there's a small gap the strange thing is the opposite side (at the rear) has the same gap but that one wasn't removed and there's no play in that one at all. after you slide the hub onto the driveshaft and it hits the stop point, do you need to push it further so that it 'clicks into place' or something?

Ok well the hub came off without any problems. I've cleaned it all out (it was pretty clean anyway) and have found that on the hub itself (inside face of the bearing) there is a small rubber washer/grommet with a groove in it. There seems to be an issue with sliding the hub back on so that it's sitting flush; there's about a 2mm-3mm gap at the back. I've given it a quick squirt of copper grease to help it on its way I assume that the outer groove on the driveshaft is supposed to sit inside the groove of the rubber washer/grommet but no matter how much tapping with a mallot or tightening of the nut, the gap is still there and the hub doesn't sit all the way back....any suggestions? any ideas?

I see the Schumacher/Senna incident as a racing incident which they both clearly think was the others fault (the stewards saw it in Senna's favour), the Maldonado/Perez incident is a classic example of 'teddy thrown in corner' and although not pre-meditated in as much as it being decide in the pits, it certainly was a deliberate action by Maldonado and therefore he should have been hit with a much harsher penalty (case in point: the underlying damage to Perez car that 'may' have caused component failure (this is clearly a preventable safety issue). Whereas I'd say that the Hamilton fuel issue is more open to interpretation: A McLaren spokesman said: "We accept the stewards did not agree with our interpretation of force majeure. Our aim is now to maximise the points we can score tomorrow." Hamilton had completed his triumphant lap and was midway round his slow-down lap when his McLaren team ordered him to stop because of a "technical problem". FIA rules state a car must return to the pits after qualifying and then have a litre of fuel remaining for a sample to be taken. Whitmarsh claimed 1.3 litres was ultimately extracted, but clearly the additional 0.3 litres – over and above the required one litre – would not have been enough to see Hamilton return to parc fermé. There was substantial doubt that Hamilton would have had that much fuel left after completing his slow-down lap. An F1 car will use about two litres of fuel every lap. Asked if he was confident that Hamilton's pole would stand, Whitmarsh said: "I don't know. I hope so. Lewis did a fantastic job throughout that session, and we've all seen how difficult it is at the moment to be consistent. It was a massive margin [half a second] by the situation within Formula One at the moment. He undoubtedly deserves to be there." But two hours later the FIA announced they had punished Hamilton severely. The sport's ruling body said: "A team member had put an insufficient quantity of fuel into the car thereby resulting in the car having to be stopped on the circuit in order to be able to provide the required amount of sampling purposes. As the amount of fuel put into the car is under the complete control of the competitor the stewards cannot accept this as a case of force majeure. The stewards determine that this is a breach of Article 6.6.2 of the FIA Formula One technical regulations and the competitor is accordingly excluded from the results of the qualifying session. The competitor is however allowed to start the race from the back of the grid."

You're a Red Bull fan aren't you...

Yeah Vod's is just making the point about the two different severities of penalty mate.....to emphasise this, if you consider that Maldonado only got a 10 place penalty for deliberately clipping across Perez during qualifying yesterday...all considered, Lewis being relegated to the back of the grid in Spain (from Pole) just doesn't tally

Yes mate, it was from the Bruno Senna incident in Spain

There will always/and have always been controversial rules and punishments dished out to drivers over the years, the above is a good example of when two different 'crimes' incur two different 'punishments'....one appearing to be far more serious than the other but resulting in a less severe 'punishment' being dished out at the end of the day, I personally just blame it on the evil ghost of Nigel Mansell's 'tash......It's not there physically anymore but it still influances the stewards from beyond!!! There's simply no other explaination??? It's like the other stewards are powerless against it...

No hasn't been driven on, just loaded and offloaded onto a trailor and truck

So the base of the windscreen is a high pressure area (when travelling at speed), in contrast to under the bonnet which is low pressure area, therefore it'll blow air in not suck it out...would that be correct?

There's conflicting evidence for and against which is very subjective, however independent testing shows that under certain driving conditions (stop and start traffic driving in particular) they can reduce intake temperatures (again very subjective dependent on vehicle in question, engine configuration and air density/pressueres etc...a lot of these tests are South California based) but they certainly reduce the effectiveness of the radiator, which can cause overheating issues within the engine bay (cut and paste) this means that if your rad is super effective you can possibly trade off some of that for cooler intake temps but if you already overheat (due in part to a poorly functioning radiator) then this will make the problem worse.

I'm 99.9% certain that bonnet spacers have the opposite effect (although common sense tells you what they should do) they actually hinder hot air extraction from the engine bay due to the low pressure area at the base of the windscreen

1:26.....****ing hilarious!!

I know what's happened (face palm) the hub was replaced but obviously wasn't pushed in fully/washer fitted/nut tightened as that was something that would be sorted later....later didn't happen as the focus then went on fitting all of the adjustable kit etc. The kit was fitted and then went for wheel alignment...the thing is the hub wasn't fitted properly by some idiot (that'll be me!) and the adjustments just kept pushing the hub further out until it was eventually stopped by the lose fitted nut, then the adjustments started to make effect. The arms now prevent the hub from being pushed back properly onto the driveshaft...so I need to detach the arms from the hub, then fit the washer and tighten the nut...only then will I be able to re-attach the arms and get the alignment done again What a tit!

Yeah thought as much

I think that I've either mis-placed a washer and maybe this has caused the hub to slip as it doesn't look to be sitting far enough in (though that's just a guess)?

A long shot I know but has anybody got a photograph of the washer that go's behind the large driveshaft nut, I've seen it in the user manual but not 100% sure what it looks like

(1) I'm wondering if the electrical short that's causing the rear light issue (ie. there aren't any apart from rear indicators) could be caused by my fitting the grounding kit, and maybe attaching it to something that I shouldn't have. I can't see what though, so here's a quick clip: and (2) I removed the rear drivers side hub from the driveshaft in order to fit the new DW polybushes and since replacing it, I noticed that even with the driveshaft nut tight, there's a fair bit of play. Would this be a bearing issue or have I forgotten to tighten something else/not replaced a washer etc? any ideas guys??

I've just spotted this clip posted up on DW, shows how damp it was... http://www.driftworks.com/forum/drifting-video-pictures/177044-nice-video-first-ta-edc-round-cadwell.html