matt-c

http://www.thehearingclinic.co.uk

We know EXACTLY why you "choose" not to answer the question - because you know you can't (at least honestly) answer it without showing up yourself as a fool and a hypocrite. Yes, you. And yes, seemingly, I'm far more intelligent than yourself - I wouldn't class tying yourself up and trapping yourself in your own words, then contradicting yourself as intelligent. As such, I do not applaud you. Not in the slightest. Can you? Because you never have - 147mph isn't 150mph, as you well know. So how do you know you can hold you car "over a long distance" at 150mph if you've never done it? The trouble is, you'd know full well that at 150mph (sorry, 147 - you haven't done 150mph), you can only glance at the speedo very briefly. You'd be covering 220 feet per second. And since we know you've never been on a racetrack, then we know it wasn't in a "controlled environment", but rather a public road. So we know the tarmac won't be as smooth and flat as racetrack tarmac, so you'd need both hands on the wheel and full concentration on the road and objects ahead/aside. To be staring at the speedo (and you would need to stare at it for several seconds in order to gauge the distance the needle is from the "140" and the "." markers to guess the speed as accurately as possible, with all the vibrations and bumps from the road surface) at those speeds would not only make you the biggest self confessed fool of all, but also downright dangerous. I hope and prey I am NEVER on the same section of road as you, and I hope you get caught speeding (and/or racing, which you brag about doing a lot of - again, we know it's on a public road as you've never been on a racetrack) and lose your license. The roads are a safer place for all of us without boy racers like you on them. So why not turbocharge the M5 and watch it leave the IS in the dirt? Because that would be the only fair comparison, since comparing a modified IS300 to a standard M5 is apples and oranges. But if you're so confident about the IS300's "performance car" capabilities, why do you feel the need to resort to modifying it with a turbo and head swap?

Are you beginning to see his flaws, Ray? As you've cottoned onto, he cannot answer a simple, direct, question with a truthful and honest answer, and has to divert the subject, circumvent it, or blatantly ignore it, as he knows it will counteract all the other tosh he's posting. Prime example; he tells me he won't reveal what he does for a living, which I asked, because it has nothing to do with the subject matter this thread was originally about. But yet when I ask him directly, and on several occasions, what 0-60 figures, top speed figures, Ferrari's, Nissan Skylines, the Nurburgring, etc etc have to do with winter and/or snow (which is the subject topic of this thread), he avoids/ignores the question and changed the subject. Why? Because the answer, the honest, truthful, answer is that none of it has anything to do with inter and/or snow. He won't admit that, even though he has to agree that's true, because it makes a mockery of him and his spiel. Trouble is he trapped himself in it, and now doesn't have a way out without either lying, or plain ignoring the question. The mark of a fool - as I've said many times before... I mean honestly - this is coming from the boy that says he can hold his IS300 at a constant speed of 150mph, sorry, a LONG constant speed of 150mph, yet only a few posts back he was telling us how he only did 147mph. Now suddenly it's a 150? (and don't even get me started at how he knows it was 147mph, considering the clocks don't have markers for individual points of speed, only numbers that increase by 20 and dots that indicate the 10s between them. Maybe it was 146?

Even for you, that's moronic. (especially since you've never been at 150mph in it) Anyway, please stop avoiding/ignoring the question of what does any of this have to do with snow or winter?

They were sold as road cars to meet homologation requirements to allow them to be rallied. The standard engine is actually a 1.8 litre, but the later "Evo" versions were bored to 2.1 and made over 650bhp. There are some mentally modded ones out there that make in excess of 800+bhp EDIT : just had a look on good ol Wikipedia, and didn't know they ran a 2L version in the IMSA GTO class/spec - they made around 750bhp

come on Youngiceman 'easily provoked' will be a strong word to use dude. if you trace back to the thread i never mentioned about my IS300's performance until Transporter brought it up and i had to jump on it. we all adults and this is meant to be banter and i love banter and a bit of a laugh along the way :D .. So, to confirm, you ARE easily provoked, as you just said you "had to jump on it" after someone said something Can you name one thing you can do longer? Just one...

Yes Martin handling did play a part in those faster time results of the GTR and LFA compared to the Enzo but that cannot only be the main factor. but to say thier lap times around the ring is pointless will be a big understatement. other parts do play a part aswell. and this was all i was trying to let matt , transporter and ray know bigger bhp figure or 0-60 figure does not always mean fast. and I think the mistake these dudes are making is dwelling on the 211bhp, 8.2 secs and 143mph the IS300 has stated in its book and using that as the true performance of the car. but I own the car and drive it everyday and encounter other guys with similar or slightly powerful cars who want to play when its safe to do so and the IS300 tells a different story as to the way it responds and picks up speed in gears when floored. so I wont be wrong if i call it fast car. And what does any of that have to do with snow or winter?

You haven't answered my question Knobby. Surprisingly...

I'm asking knobby because he refused to answer my question about what he does for a living, using the excuse it has nothing to do with the thread topic. So I'm asking him what 0-60 times, top speed figures, engine size, nurburgring lap times, Enzo's, Skylines, and all the other non-relevant spiel he's spouted have to do with Snow and winter - which is the thread topic. Because it'd be very hypocritical of him to say he's not answering a question because it's not relevant to the thread topic, after all the non-relevant rubbish he's posted about the above mentioned points. However, he'll do his usual trick and refuse to answer, or avoid, the question, and change the subject. He does this when he's trapped himself by being a fool. It's so predictable, you could set your watch by it.

I'm asking you, knobby. What does 0-60, top speed, engine size, nurburgring lap times, Enzo's, Skylines, and all the other non-relevant spiel you've spouted have to do with Snow and winter?

So what does 0-60, top speed, engine size, nurburgring lap times, Enzo's, Skylines, and all the other non-relevant spiel you've spouted have to do with Snow and winter?

Oh good, Knobby, you're back. So, what does 0-60, top speed, engine size, nurburgring lap times, Enzo's, Skylines, and all the other non-relevant spiel you've spouted have to do with Snow and winter?

To be fair, it's a magic, law of physics defying IS300, that has a supercharger instead of an engine, and is faster than everything else round a racetrack (except he's never driven it on a racetrack)

So what does 0-60, top speed, engine size, nurburgring lap times, Enzo's, Skylines, and all the other non-relevant spiel you've spouted have to do with Snow and winter?

I'm sure Grom make a unit to fit the LS head unit - http://gromaudio.com If you even remotely have an interest in music, PLEASE don't use a cassette adapter..!!!

Sorry, she falls in the same category as VBH. She's gorgeous - when stood next to Clarkson, May and wotshisface

Whatever part number the dealer has given you, you can bet it has NOTHING to do with the part numbers windscreen companies use for glass. Because they are completely different. Glass companies use something called a Eurocode (previous to that it was an Argic Code, also know as a HT code). For example, a first gen Ford Focus windscreen could be 3556AGSHVW, and breaks down as follows; 3556 - that denotes it's a first gen Ford Focus. A = front glass (windscreen) GS = green solar H = heated V = Vin notch W = With (this applies to if it has a trim, or other fixing, fitted to the screen. Dealers, or car manufacturers, don't use these codes. They'll simply use their own internal code. For example, a Merc screen might be 11455468944 - which to the dealer means it's for a 2010 CLK, is green solar with light and rain sensor and aerial. But to us, it means nothing. I'm sure it'll be fine, we're pretty good in the windscreen game and get it right in most cases ;) (an Argic code is similar, but different, to a Eurocode - for example, using Eurocodes, a gen 3 Transit is a 3731, but using the Argic/HT system, it's an 883. Eurocodes also use left and right (ie, a door glass would be 3556LGSH5FD - Left Green Solar Hatch 5 Front Door) whereas a HT would near side (NS) and off side (OS) - of course NS and OS are no good when you're talking about right and left hand drive cars ;) )

I scanned Knobby's post and yawned over the plethora of figures (he does live figures!) until I got to the (quote) "The IS300 does defy the laws of physics" and LOL'd and LOL'd and LOL'd Knobby, what do you do for a living?

Lovely Holly Willoughbooby....

I think they are, like I said it's been a LONG time since I did a screen on a GS, and the last one I remember doing was an old GS300, which didn't have the sensor anyway (but does have THE most stupid mirror fitting assembly known to man - more on that another time!)

I should do that! :D

Oh, that's a new one from you. So, a 200bhp car, weighing in at say, 1500kg is faster than a 300bhp car, weighing the same 1500kg? How's that work? Because 200bhp in a 1500kg car is a power to weight ratio of about 133bhp per tonne. But a 300bhp 1500kg car has a power to weight ratio of 200bhp per tonne? Must be the magic Knobby's car has, that it defies the laws of physics.

LOL @ VBH - the only "virtue" she has is she's in a programme normally dominated by males. So by default she becomes attractive. However, compare her to the majority of TV show presenters, she actually isn't.

Thank you for those pearls of wisdom. Yes, I do know you can use the headphone out on an iPhone to make handsfree calls - I've been using it like that for the past 5 years. But no, cassette adapters sound like trash, no matter what you say. It's just the way it is. Cassette Vs CD - huge difference. Cassette vs mp3 - huge difference. MP3 using cassette as transport - sounds worse than cassette does on it's own. Why? Cassette's use a kind of pre-amp to boost the signal (much like phono inputs for record players), so you've got the onboard amp of the mp3 player (in your case an iPhone) running through a pre-amp, then running through a power amp. Result? Trash. I have used cassette adapters before, in many applications. I've also used (and still do) analogue input (normally labeled as AUX) 3.5mm stereo input, and also direct input (for example, the Grom, or other dock connected input). The dock connected input will ALWAYS win. Why? Bypasses the onboard amp of the iPhone, meaing you get a "direct pure" signal, which is then handled by the headunits amp. 1 amp is much better than two in series. Likewise, two is much better than 2 plus a pre-amp. So thanks, but no. It sounds like garbage. You'd be amazed to hear your music with a proper set up - by the sounds of it, the difference would blow your head off (ps, you paid FIVE pounds for a cassette adapter? Wow! Why?)

Exactly this. Even if you only intend to use it for the AUX (3.5mm stereo input using a devices headphone output) it's vastly superior to a cassette adapter, which in comparison sounds like listening to music through a paper bag. the standard headunit is very capable, and the standard speakers (and amp) are also very good. Granted they aren't as good as today's premium systems, but they still hold their own for the most part. Aftermarket speakers, and amps, will sound better, provided you choose the right stuff rather than what's on offer or what's cheap. But for the hassle of it all, and if you only want to change WHAT it is you listen to rather than HOW you listen to it, I'd simply plug in a Grom unit (and it is just as simple as plugging it in) and you're done. iPod/iPhone or Android integration, including track and playlist control right from the headunit itself, USB flash drive support (again with headunit controls) or AUX analogue in - even Bluetooth if you want. All in one simple package that even a child could install!