Search results

My bro had the RSRs, although I'm not sure if they were the Down or Race, but JustAnotherVictim has them. My bro ran Bilsteins+RSRs, and it was a rough ride but handled pretty well. Hopefully people can actually give reviews/info on Intrax/Whiteline/B+G. I've already seen a decent amount of...

Wow! :aigo:

According to some other threads, the rear is basically slightly stiffer than the stock rear springs. Not sure if that's considered mushy though. I also hear that Intrax is linear though, which is what interested me in them at all :)

* Intrax * Front: 700 lb/in max (12.5005771 kg / mm) * Rear: 220 lb/in (3.92875281 kg / mm) * Drop: 1.6" - 1.3" Looking at those intrax, does anybody have problems with them? They are so soft in the rear, yet they go pretty low. Do you guys with Intrax Springs ever bottom out your exhaust...

Looking at those intrax, does anybody have problems with them? They are so soft in the rear, yet they go pretty low. Do you guys with Intrax Springs ever bottom out your exhaust or anything when you go over bumps quickly (like on the highway)? Also, how's the handling on them? Also, anyone...

Yup, closed.

You think a cheap car like a Cappucino with a swap will amount to anywhere near 70,000 dollars or above? Obviously not...which is why these suggestions are stupid :)

Well one of the more common ways to gain power and have quicker spool is to increase displacement, so 2JZ all the way.

Cosmos engine, right?

The rain was the reason the Cappucino lost. Also... Ford GT with Engine Level 9 = Shits on Cappucino with I6 Swap

Civic Intake makes the engine bay hotter, which is bad. Yeah, it looks cool, but that's about it. Keep the stock intake. If it's not dryrotting on you, then just keep it. It's well-designed, and it's basically a CAI.

Does this link look half-decent for good information? http://www.installuniversity.com/install_university/installu_articles/volumetric_efficiency/ve_computation_9.012000.htm

Nope, but I assumed that they weren't linear due to the way the spring looks. If it's linear, then that's cool.

I was attempting to use those formulas to try and figure out plenum volume, runner length, and stuff like that. I guess it was far too simple to be true. So at our maximum redline, we have around .495 Mach Index (or Mach .495) and .600 is where the best volumetric efficiency is? What else can...

Ahh, so I can't plug in 88% for VE in all of those equations above? I wonder how they get it.

Our VE is 88%, correct? I need to know what it is so I can make some calculations on my own (or at least attempt to) Also, does anyone have calculations on what the plenum volume should be? Also, an interesting reason why ACIS might not be optimal for higher RPM performance...

You realize there is a whole section of this forum dedicated to this question, along with some information in the NA-T sticky that points out that you can? Closed, due to the shear laziness of the original poster.

RSR Race Springs RSR Down/Lowering Springs Stock 86.5-88 Springs Just trying to make a comparison. I'm sure someone knows them, so I figured I'd post here. Thanks.

Tanabes aren't linear.

He's probably poking fun at the "fast n/a" comment :(