Page 25 of 25

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2014 10:35 pm
by Bagnut
Image

Image

Image

Posted: Thu Mar 13, 2014 6:53 pm
by ThatKevin
I like!

Posted: Mon Mar 17, 2014 9:24 pm
by skaterking411
Update:

Image
9 by Jeremy J King, on Flickr

Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 6:41 pm
by vader xx
i just got wood thats one sexy stone white

Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 6:57 pm
by dblsg
Ive always wanted to do white on white... looks awesome Jeremy!

Posted: Tue Mar 25, 2014 7:42 pm
by janson
skaterking411 wrote:Update:

Image
9 by Jeremy J King, on Flickr
Saw your car at WBTB, its amazing!

Posted: Thu May 29, 2014 7:12 pm
by ooblio
I is slammed?

Image
Image

Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 7:57 am
by slickneon19
Here is mine.

Image

Image

Image

Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 11:28 am
by FAC3L3SS
Is this the slammed thread or the fitment thread?

Posted: Fri May 30, 2014 11:13 pm
by ThatKevin
ooblio wrote:I is slammed?

psshhh come back when you're tucking 165/30/14's

Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 9:41 am
by Sims426
Skaterking,
suspension/wheel/tire info? Car looks awesome!

Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 3:09 pm
by ThatKevin
Sims426 wrote:Skaterking,
suspension/wheel/tire info? Car looks awesome!
BC's, Work VSXX's, 145/10/17's








Does no one slam Neons anymore? Let's see some updates :tardbang:

Posted: Tue Jul 01, 2014 9:30 pm
by FAC3L3SS
We do but our alignments are so bad the tires are bald before we get a decent picture!

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 6:18 am
by Sims426
What about offset? Trying to figure out what offset to run, thinking 17x8 +20 all around.

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 9:03 am
by FAC3L3SS
Ryan and I run 8" +25 ET on our dailies and it's pretty clean and fills the empty space up the fender. You may still want a roll to be safe, depending on how low you are.

Posted: Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:38 am
by sidepipe87
yeah mine could definitely use a roll or some more camber, especially if I were lower. I'm running mexiflush stretched tires though so no rubbing

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 6:59 am
by Kimonoskunk
Wow... so very well said...
Kimonoskunk

Arro wrote:The only cars that benefit from excessive camber (most notably in front) are RWD drift cars that are relying on their front wheels to keep their car headed in the right direction while the chassis is literally sideways moving around the bend. As someone who gets into dozens of lengthy discussions every year on this (as I own a RWD car popular with drifters), I know very well that EXCESSIVE camber is NOT necessary in other situations (and certainly NOT FWD).

A LITTLE BIT of front camber is useful. But you know what? IMO anything over 1.5 deg. is bogus bullshit that just looks auto-fashionable.

You really wanna know where it all comes from?

Too bad. I'll tell you anyways lol.

RWD Jap cars w/ IRS and poor control arm design suffer terribly excessive negative camber that often can't be corrected without major modification to the control arms. Because racers wanted the lower center of gravity, and because the negative camber had the side benefit of allowing clearance of tire/wheel combos that would otherwise rub, it generally became accepted that lowered RWD cars w/ excessive negative camber and deep-dished or lipped wheels were typical. Over time, even desirable. It meant you lowered the car and got a wider "racing" wheel. Then came the drift craze alongside of that. Everyone wanted to drift.

So there were all those Honda humpers in their Civics, suddenly finding themselves no longer in the spotlight. Their cars were FWD and not "driftworthy" in the new craze. They couldn't sport the same deep-dished oldschool, banana-spoked Jap racing wheel styles. They were getting left out of the new fun! Oh noes!

So... some brave souls decided that the advantages that their Hondas DID have... were no longer worth losing the auto fashion spotlight over. So things like well-balanced FWD suspension setups w/ +44 offset racing wheels were simply tossed aside in favor of deep-dish, low-positive or even zero offset wheels designed for RWD.... but stuck on FWD cars with crazy stupid camber to make that shit "fit" (a term now used very loosely). Awesome, they were back in style! Now you see Honda kids sporting 7" XXR 04's designed for RWD low-positive offset cars, but running 2.5 or even more deg. of negatorre camber, and 195's for that extra stretched sidewall angle that lets them clear their FWD fender lips in relation to their hubs.

It's pathetic. If it was like Japanese bosozoku style that might be different.... intended to be crazy and way far-fetched for purposes of artsy glitz, not to be real "performance". But that's not what's happening here in North America, where kids throw on these terrible wheel/tire combos on FWD cars and try to play off their cars as "tuned".

And now we want to do that with American FWD? Pfft.

I'm all for slammed. Take that center of gravity low, lose that wheel gap, whatever. Not so sure I like the idea of running a biggie tire profile on a 15. Every time I drive through a puddle I'd think I was dunking a donut in coffee. I don't suggest we throw 18's with rubberbands on Neon cars, either.

16 or 17 to me seems reasonable for "slamming". Then again, what do you think "slammed" means? Because every other car community I've seen using the term isn't concerned with wheel gap or even wheel size. They're thinking about how low the chassis is. If you're dragging the car, it's slammed. They throw cigarette lighters and other smaller objects underneath the side rails or ground f/x to show their peers just how low you can go. Wheel fitment is important to them but not the goal, and often they even tuck the wheel up INTO the fender. "Wheel gap? Bitches, my shit is TUCKED."

So what are we really after here in this thread? You have people who put up pictures of 2GN's with little or zero wheel gap and reasonable camber, crying, "This is tastefully slammed." Then you have people in this thread who are following in the footsteps of the Honda kids, looking for ridiculous camber and exaggerated wheel fitment and calling that "slammed".

It all seems like a load of crap to me. But what do I know? I suppose it doesn't matter that my '85 200SX has ZERO gap, running zero offset 15x7's, with reasonable 195's in front and 205's in the rear. And modest camber. And it has flush-fitting fender arches, whereas my two 2GN's have tapering fender arches that will never let my wheels fit like that.

But like I said, what the hell do I know, really :P

There are cars in this thread I like. Then there are cars in this thread that make me realize that some people try too hard to win approval, all the while claiming they're doing what they do because they DGAF what others think.

So why do I come in this thread?

To laugh, to pick on, to praise. I'm no different than most of you really.
:thumbup:

Posted: Mon Jul 28, 2014 7:09 am
by FAC3L3SS
Yeah, we've read the debate a million times. The people who whine about fitment threads stay out of them.