Prepare to laugh...

I wonder if I can remote link to this pic... posted it on streetsourcemag's site.. a predominantly-mini truckin place.
[img]http://www.streetsourcemag.com/uploads/OwnerProfiles/One%20Ton%20Garage/37200711142AM9591.jpg[/img]

Those guys are even more so about the parking way low, yet drive like a 4x4 style. Anyway.. what I found funny about the pic that made me laugh (and will prob make you laugh)... is when I was putting the pics together, I looked at the difference between my ride height and full up height and sorta had to go wtf and chuckle a bit. I prob won't be winning any skyscraping or max height achievable competitions any time soon. But it all works out.. I made the struts to allow me to bring the car down as low as possible... and what's actually stopping it in the full down pic is the exhaust is basically flattened on the ground towards the rear, and the front uca and twisted spindle are bottomed out against each other finally (which, paradoxically, is harder, yet easier with my shortened uca :) ) So, with some tucking of the exhaust, and implementing a split uca/tubular spindle in the front, I would like to ultimately lay this big-body unibody on the ground. 

Hmmm... I'm thinking this collage would also work well as fodder in the air vs. coilover wars that the VW/euro guys have, showing them that going air isn't "selling out" when your max height on air is potentially lower than your static height on coilovers.

I love it! Looks perfect to me. I say lay that bigbody on the ground. We've talked before about it. That's my goal for my Q flat on the ground!

Hahaha, I thought the same thing when I looked at the full up pic.  It's like 1.5" higher than ride height.  Yah Nagisa Auto makes a bunch of the tubular arms and such.  Looks hot though and I couldn't agree more with your sig quote.

Yes, that is whats up. That would make me get air suspension! I'm sure there was a ton of work that went into getting the suspension to go that low, especially in the front.. damn thats hot.

Yeah your full up is about the same as mine with coilovers. Kind of a pain though. I have speed bumps at my job and in Arizona i swear everything is built to be access by trucks with 32 in tires.

I honestly can only go certain places in my Q or shave the underbody sliding over concrete. :mad:

[QUOTE=Damicci;46414]Yeah your full up is about the same as mine with coilovers. [/QUOTE]

Same. Looking hot as always!

[quote=jzz30tt;46412]Yes, that is whats up. That would make me get air suspension! I'm sure there was a ton of work that went into getting the suspension to go that low, especially in the front.. damn thats hot.[/quote]

My thoughts exactly. I'm a die-hard coilover fan, but seeing the rideheight on this car makes me look at airsus in a different way...

How is the ride at that level?

Wow, that is looking great. Definitely liking the ride height picture. You should post pictures of that rolling.

[QUOTE=VIPWannabe;46496]Wow, that is looking great. Definitely liking the ride height picture. You should post pictures of that rolling.[/QUOTE]

haha yeah that would really compliment the saying

[QUOTE=One Ton VIP;46387]I wonder if I can remote link to this pic... posted it on streetsourcemag's site.. a predominantly-mini truckin place.
[img]http://www.streetsourcemag.com/uploads/OwnerProfiles/One%20Ton%20Garage/37200711142AM9591.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]

your Q is nasty! i'm lovin it dude... awesome selection on wheels i must say... +100 points!:smiley:

Car actually feels quite nice at ride height... no probs at all. Have had 3 people in the car (99% of my driving is solo) and just bumped up psi a little bit and no probs. Susp has settled now so that ride height psi is at 125-135psi in front, and 95-105 in back. Since the bags are small and a sleeve type, they require a bit more psi to raise a certain weight vs. convoluted style bags. 
Interestingly enough, I scrape over less things now than I did before air... and I was about 1/4" higher overall back then. Perhaps that's attributable to spring rate. Hmmm... yes, I would like to see how the car looks when rolling from 3rd person pov, too

"crawlin similar to a ant cuz I'm low to the earth"

It looks amazing!  

Sure its a few things to fix so it lays flat.  But how much work is it really?  I mean, is there room to tuck up the exhaust?  

Does someone make tubular arms?  

Even if you never make it all the way flat... Its a ride to be proud of!!!

LOoks beautiful.  Good job.

[quote=One Ton VIP;46837]Hmmm... yes, I would like to see how the car looks when rolling from 3rd person pov, too[/quote]
 
I only just recently got to see my car from the 3rd person when i nervously handed my keys to my friend. Was so scared he would crash/scrape/crunch something. Its a liberating experience though!!! Haha

dammmmmmmmmn looooks amazing!! when are we gonna see full pictures on her??

I love it. I bet with it being so low and going up to ride height and still being low it rides very good since you have the bags pressurized. I'm interested how you said that you made the struts to your liking. How did you go about it? also what brand of air did you go with?

Are you going to remove the mud flaps once you get your exhaust moved so you can lay it on its frame?

Booootiful!!!!

[QUOTE=JLF;46847] 
Does someone make tubular arms?  
[/QUOTE]
look at my post above.  I mentioned them.

what sleeve type bags are you running? been looking around for some

[quote=nyARISTO;46882]dammmmmmmmmn looooks amazing!! when are we gonna see full pictures on her??[/quote]
 
 
wondering the same thing.......I love that car.....fitment is nice too

[QUOTE=One Ton VIP;46387]I wonder if I can remote link to this pic... posted it on streetsourcemag's site.. a predominantly-mini truckin place.
[img]http://www.streetsourcemag.com/uploads/OwnerProfiles/One%20Ton%20Garage/37200711142AM9591.jpg[/img]

Those guys are even more so about the parking way low, yet drive like a 4x4 style. Anyway.. what I found funny about the pic that made me laugh (and will prob make you laugh)... is when I was putting the pics together, I looked at the difference between my ride height and full up height and sorta had to go wtf and chuckle a bit. I prob won't be winning any skyscraping or max height achievable competitions any time soon. But it all works out.. I made the struts to allow me to bring the car down as low as possible... and what's actually stopping it in the full down pic is the exhaust is basically flattened on the ground towards the rear, and the front uca and twisted spindle are bottomed out against each other finally (which, paradoxically, is harder, yet easier with my shortened uca :) ) So, with some tucking of the exhaust, and implementing a split uca/tubular spindle in the front, I would like to ultimately lay this big-body unibody on the ground. 

Hmmm... I'm thinking this collage would also work well as fodder in the air vs. coilover wars that the VW/euro guys have, showing them that going air isn't "selling out" when your max height on air is potentially lower than your static height on coilovers.[/QUOTE]

How is the ride compared to full height and ride height?

[QUOTE=One Ton VIP;46387]I wonder if I can remote link to this pic... posted it on streetsourcemag's site.. a predominantly-mini truckin place.
[img]http://www.streetsourcemag.com/uploads/OwnerProfiles/One%20Ton%20Garage/37200711142AM9591.jpg[/img]

Those guys are even more so about the parking way low, yet drive like a 4x4 style. Anyway.. what I found funny about the pic that made me laugh (and will prob make you laugh)... is when I was putting the pics together, I looked at the difference between my ride height and full up height and sorta had to go wtf and chuckle a bit. I prob won't be winning any skyscraping or max height achievable competitions any time soon. But it all works out.. I made the struts to allow me to bring the car down as low as possible... and what's actually stopping it in the full down pic is the exhaust is basically flattened on the ground towards the rear, and the front uca and twisted spindle are bottomed out against each other finally (which, paradoxically, is harder, yet easier with my shortened uca :) ) So, with some tucking of the exhaust, and implementing a split uca/tubular spindle in the front, I would like to ultimately lay this big-body unibody on the ground. 

Hmmm... I'm thinking this collage would also work well as fodder in the air vs. coilover wars that the VW/euro guys have, showing them that going air isn't "selling out" when your max height on air is potentially lower than your static height on coilovers.[/QUOTE]

Hmm looks like there is significantly less travel from full down to full up compared to the setup on my ls400.

Using easy street's strut bags right now front and rear. Very poor bag and piston design, but it's one of the few readily-avl slim bag over strut setups that can be bought commercially. It's actually not bad, but definitely not ideal.. but for the price it can't be beat, and it works. Oh yeah, and you can't get the front as low if you just fab the eyelets "normally"...my front lower eyelets are notched into the bottom of the strut bodies, and offest, to accomodate for the lateral movement of the lower mount as susp is compressed... and of course, also allows front to go lower than is normally possible with these struts...

Ride is quite nice at ride height, and hardly any more harsh at full up. And yup, difference between full up and full down appears minimal right now bcause I made the struts to go even lower than the current full down.... but that's just me... I've always felt air isn't to drive high and park low, but to drive lower than static susps (whether spring/struts or coilovers) and park way low. Since the car has reached the physical limits of even my modified control arms, the next things to do are to tuck the exhaust (on which note, you technically only need about 1/2" clearance between your exh piping and undercarriage, so pretty much all modern cars can gain quite a bit of clearance by tucking the exh... next time you're under your car, measure how much space there is between the top of your exh and chassis floor.. in some cases, lots of cars have over 2" of gap!), and the front will require quite a bit of major surgery on G50s.

The front twisted spindle multi link is a blessing and a curse...on stock setups, it will hit the top of the strut tower. My fronts go a little bit past that (which is why my front 19" rim can actually tuck under the wheel lip...something that I don't think I've seen on any other G50, or stateside cars now that I think about it), but now they max out as they fold against each other. So about the tubular control arms... they actually won't help in this situation.... and no one makes modified front spindles. The solution is to redesign the uca and spindle so that they do not have two flat sides that bottom out against each other, but instead slip "past" each other, allowing the spindle to go up even further. 

Hmmm... tossed another pic up on street source mag... concurrent project car... actually my friends got bored one day and started cutting w/o me:
[img]http://www.streetsourcemag.com/uploads/Ownerprofiles/One%20Ton%20Garage/38200711118AM82981.jpg[/img]
Yup, that wheel is mounted on the hub... and yup, it will go up into the car a little more :)
Low... and lower!

[QUOTE=One Ton VIP;47160]Using easy street's strut bags right now front and rear. Very poor bag and piston design, but it's one of the few readily-avl slim bag over strut setups that can be bought commercially. It's actually not bad, but definitely not ideal.. but for the price it can't be beat, and it works. Oh yeah, and you can't get the front as low if you just fab the eyelets "normally"...my front lower eyelets are notched into the bottom of the strut bodies, and offest, to accomodate for the lateral movement of the lower mount as susp is compressed... and of course, also allows front to go lower than is normally possible with these struts...

Ride is quite nice at ride height, and hardly any more harsh at full up. And yup, difference between full up and full down appears minimal right now bcause I made the struts to go even lower than the current full down.... but that's just me... I've always felt air isn't to drive high and park low, but to drive lower than static susps (whether spring/struts or coilovers) and park way low. Since the car has reached the physical limits of even my modified control arms, the next things to do are to tuck the exhaust (on which note, you technically only need about 1/2" clearance between your exh piping and undercarriage, so pretty much all modern cars can gain quite a bit of clearance by tucking the exh... next time you're under your car, measure how much space there is between the top of your exh and chassis floor.. in some cases, lots of cars have over 2" of gap!), and the front will require quite a bit of major surgery on G50s.

The front twisted spindle multi link is a blessing and a curse...on stock setups, it will hit the top of the strut tower. My fronts go a little bit past that (which is why my front 19" rim can actually tuck under the wheel lip...something that I don't think I've seen on any other G50, or stateside cars now that I think about it), but now they max out as they fold against each other. So about the tubular control arms... they actually won't help in this situation.... and no one makes modified front spindles. The solution is to redesign the uca and spindle so that they do not have two flat sides that bottom out against each other, but instead slip "past" each other, allowing the spindle to go up even further. 

Hmmm... tossed another pic up on street source mag... concurrent project car... actually my friends got bored one day and started cutting w/o me:
[img]http://www.streetsourcemag.com/uploads/Ownerprofiles/One%20Ton%20Garage/38200711118AM82981.jpg[/img]
Yup, that wheel is mounted on the hub... and yup, it will go up into the car a little more :)
Low... and lower![/QUOTE]

I'm using the same setup, and my upper control arms rest on the body on the front around 120 psi. My restriction on the rear is the wheel resting on the body. I'm thinking about tubbing the rear when my fenders get redone for my new wheel setup. I'm guessing that setup on the ls400 is taller then the g50.

[quote=NG-UCF20;47161]I'm using the same setup, and my upper control arms rest on the body on the front around 120 psi. My restriction on the rear is the wheel resting on the body. I'm thinking about tubbing the rear when my fenders get redone for my new wheel setup. I'm guessing that setup on the ls400 is taller then the g50.[/quote]
 
On some of the really low Celsiors you see in Japan, they often cut a hole in the strut tower to accomodate the UCA
 
Van, that project car looks like it will look wicked when done... But i'm keen to see how you take that experience to bring your own Q to the next level (radiused fenders) :)

that's sorta VANasty.

[QUOTE=Dominik;47163]On some of the really low Celsiors you see in Japan, they often cut a hole in the strut tower to accomodate the UCA
 
Van, that project car looks like it will look wicked when done... But i'm keen to see how you take that experience to bring your own Q to the next level (radiused fenders) :)[/QUOTE]

I've thought about doing that, but I thought I'd check out the arm first because I need more camber in the front. If that don't work It's time to cut out the fender well.

dom: Q prob won't get radiused fenders... at least not any time soon.. yah, that's what the convertible is for! Ultimately, I'd like to get the Q to drive at about 1" above what current full down height is, and have full down = laying frame/xmember on the ground. But yah, not any time soon. It's just been very fun daily driving it...

ng: I remembered this link you sent a while ago:
[url]http://www.lexls.com/tutorials/suspension/fupperarm.html[/url]
I bet if you look in your front inner wheelwells now you can prob see a wear mark where the tip of that uca hits the sheetmetal... so you can get a good idea of where to notch the strut towers. Interesting thing is, if you shortened the uca to get more camber, you could potentially also at the same time be able to go a little lower w/o having to cut any holes... prob another 1/4-1/2" or so

that 240 is insane, cant wait to see it finished

[QUOTE=One Ton VIP;47337]ng: I remembered this link you sent a while ago:
[url]http://www.lexls.com/tutorials/suspension/fupperarm.html[/url]
I bet if you look in your front inner wheelwells now you can prob see a wear mark where the tip of that uca hits the sheetmetal... so you can get a good idea of where to notch the strut towers. Interesting thing is, if you shortened the uca to get more camber, you could potentially also at the same time be able to go a little lower w/o having to cut any holes... prob another 1/4-1/2" or so[/QUOTE]

I ended up buying the youzeland arms....going to try replicate something similar for the rear arm with help from my friend. The youzeland arm is pretty simple it should give me the so claimed 30mm which should put the front on the ground. The rear of the kit is already only about a 1/4" off the ground.

[QUOTE=NG-UCF20;47515]I ended up buying the youzeland arms....going to try replicate something similar for the rear arm with help from my friend. The youzeland arm is pretty simple it should give me the so claimed 30mm which should put the front on the ground. The rear of the kit is already only about a 1/4" off the ground.[/QUOTE]

Where did you get youzeland arms? How much do they run?

I got them direct a little over $1k.

[QUOTE=NG-UCF20;47675]I got them direct a little over $1k.[/QUOTE]
Yah, that shit is bank.  The tubular arms for our chassis (G50) is around 7 bills, almost as bad as yours.

got any pics of them on you're car?? email if you could please?? [email]frankthetank_86@yahoo.com[/email] or just post up here.

Thanks.

I think we need to get more technical with these big sedans...! What I'd like to do is actually measure amount of bumpsteer inherent in the rear ends of all our cars. I still stand by Nissan's multi-link being an awesome design that offers great performance, ride, and adjustability, while maintaining its characteristics even after you majorly tweak it a bit (i.e. running like mass amounts of neg camber). From what I've seen of the Toyota multi-link, it unfortunately seems to suffer from more bump steer issues... so the more you lower the car, and the more you tweak the camber, the more the toe changes during regular susp travel, leading to much shorter tire life. But of course the true test would be to measure! I will give it up to Toyota for using semi-complex alum control arms and such, but the downside to that is it makes modifying them harder for most folks. Expect a lot of cool new (suspension) products popping up both in Japan and stateside for these older toyotas and nissans in the next 2 years though....

Another madness pic cuz I was bored the other day :)
[img]http://www.onetongarage.com/projects/s13conv/flares01.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=One Ton VIP;47817]I think we need to get more technical with these big sedans...! What I'd like to do is actually measure amount of bumpsteer inherent in the rear ends of all our cars. I still stand by Nissan's multi-link being an awesome design that offers great performance, ride, and adjustability, while maintaining its characteristics even after you majorly tweak it a bit (i.e. running like mass amounts of neg camber). From what I've seen of the Toyota multi-link, it unfortunately seems to suffer from more bump steer issues... so the more you lower the car, and the more you tweak the camber, the more the toe changes during regular susp travel, leading to much shorter tire life. But of course the true test would be to measure! I will give it up to Toyota for using semi-complex alum control arms and such, but the downside to that is it makes modifying them harder for most folks. Expect a lot of cool new (suspension) products popping up both in Japan and stateside for these older toyotas and nissans in the next 2 years though....

Another madness pic cuz I was bored the other day :)
[img]http://www.onetongarage.com/projects/s13conv/flares01.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]

I can vouch for the toe changing alot on the rear of my LS. At full up its perfectly straight (where I had it aligned, corrected toe max camber) the toe changes very noticeably at full down it is very toed in. My tire life hasn't been too bad i been running the tires before i switched to my 20's for about 8 months of those 8 months only 3 of the months was after the car had a complete alignment. The tire wear was pretty even but there was noticeable wear on the inner edge not too bad while at drive height the camber is about -5 to -6 degs.

Nice vert, good luck with all that glass going on it, getting it straight is going to be fun.

keep up the good work.  do you have any pics of your suspension.

That vert is out of control.  love the weds.  keep us up to date on the progess!

your g50 looks sick man!! where and how much did u pay for your airbag setup?

So is that vert replacing the roadster?

Hmm the susp on the G50 or the S13conv? I think I have one or two pics of the G50 setup somewhere.. it's nothing special though... easy street's chapman strut bags with oem eyelets/mounts welded to the bottoms... fronts are a little "different" though, as the lower mount is cut into the strut and offset and set inside a separate concentric tube. Rear is welded directly to the strut body also instead of the separate pipe they supply. Since I had to make the bulk of my air setup, the cost would be misleading... and especially since I used parts I still had lying around like the tanks and compressor etc. But if I were to build another such setup for another G50, I'd say I'd charge around at least $3500 uninstalled... including the air ride tech ridepro E2 management that I'm using ([url]www.ridetech.com)[/url]. Figure that's cheaper than anything from Japan, while using prob the most advanced electronic management setup with a nice single-unit valve body. Hmmm shoot, maybe I should charge more..!

I actually was seriously considering still doing the S13's flares in steel... I know I don't have the skill to make them 100% perfect (and i threw away my english wheel/planishing hammer frame when I moved a few months ago), so I was thinking of just getting them 90% of the way, and having a real metalsmith finish them. But the allure (i.e. way less cost, time, and ease) of working with fiberglass is very strong....very, very strong.

Hey Kev, the roadster is actually sitting in a public storage facility with lots of boxes on it right now... dammit

[QUOTE=One Ton VIP;49272]
Hey Kev, the roadster is actually sitting in a public storage facility with lots of boxes on it right now... dammit[/QUOTE]

Color me shocked. :rolleyes: 

Your boyfriend Chris got rid of his after he moved to AZ.
I should've taken it from him but I was out here instead.

That vert looks like it'll be fun. You should put my Amistad wheels on it.

[img]http://www.streetsourcemag.com/uploads/OwnerProfiles/One%20Ton%20Garage/37200711142AM9591.jpg[/img]

what wheels are those?  look awesome!

[quote=Nocturnal;57219]
 
what wheels are those? look awesome![/quote]
Those are Leon Hardiritt Ordens.

Why do all forums have the white GI dudes with Jap wives who always feel the need to post about how they do this or do that over there as if they know it all about Japan? Okinawa ain't even really Japan! Ask any Japanese! 

Now that is funny and I am a white GI dude married to a Japanese.  Not all of us GI dudes are in Oki.  However I have lived there.  Don't ask the "Japanese" if Okinawans are Japanese.  Ask the Okinawans.  They will tell you they are Uchinanchu and Japanese are Naicha.  Okinawa was its own kingdom before WWII and the US gave it to Japan after the occupation ended in 1972.  That of course pissed off the Okinawans.  The Okinawans in no shape or form consider themselves Japanese.  They have their own culture and language, which sadly enough is being forgotten.  
Seriously though, what the hell does Okinawa not being Japan have to do with someone living there sharing their experiences in Japan or Okinawa.  
Us white boys are simply trying to pass along our experiences in Japan.  Who knows someone might actually find that information useful.  I know if I had a question about a country, I would ask someone living there.  But thats just me.  Give me a break

[QUOTE=fergyr31;57303]Why do all forums have the white GI dudes with Jap wives who always feel the need to post about how they do this or do that over there as if they know it all about Japan? Okinawa ain't even really Japan! Ask any Japanese! 

Now that is funny and I am a white GI dude married to a Japanese.  Not all of us GI dudes are in Oki.  However I have lived there.  Don't ask the "Japanese" if Okinawans are Japanese.  Ask the Okinawans.  They will tell you they are Uchinanchu and Japanese are Naicha.  Okinawa was its own kingdom before WWII and the US gave it to Japan after the occupation ended in 1972.  That of course pissed off the Okinawans.  The Okinawans in no shape or form consider themselves Japanese.  They have their own culture and language, which sadly enough is being forgotten.  
Seriously though, what the hell does Okinawa not being Japan have to do with someone living there sharing their experiences in Japan or Okinawa.  
Us white boys are simply trying to pass along our experiences in Japan.  Who knows someone might actually find that information useful.  I know if I had a question about a country, I would ask someone living there.  But thats just me.  Give me a break[/QUOTE]
Exactly.  Amen.

i love it!