Update 2024-03-27: Greatly expanded the "Samples" page and renamed it to "Glossary".
Update 2024-04-04: Added 5 million mid-2011 posts from the k47 post dump . Browse (mostly) them here .
Update 2024-04-07: Added ~400 October 2003 posts from 4chan.net . Browse them here .
Welcome to Oldfriend Archive, the official 4chan archive of the NSA. Hosting ~170M text-only 2003-2014 4chan posts (mostly 2006-2008).
Threads by latest replies - Page 5
Anonymous
Quoted By:
What do you guys think of this? Pictured: New Vector in production
ComradeGiant !!9vMWYeqV4O4
Quoted By:
I am glad that Gerald Wiegert has made enough money over the years to continue his cocaine fueled quest to build a supercar.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
It is a fucking beast, but lolhennessey so no. Would love to have the time and money to build my own monster exige though, and if somebody who had a history of worksmanship and integrity were building them it would be just about the most orgasmic thing in the world.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Haven't really looked into it, I don't have that kind of money and would rather waste what I do have on building shitty stuff into shittier stuff that goes faster.
Hairy Britfag
WINDOWS XP32bit
Quoted By:
>>4637761 That GTO is the definition of rice.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I'm American, don't believe in rice, and I buy American, buy my question is: Why don't more cars use rotary engines instead of pistons and cylinders? For example: A 1994 Mazda RX-7 is a 1.3L Rotary, Twin Turbo. 0-60 in about 6 seconds. 158 mph top speed. 17 City / 25 Highway MPG. 225 HP A 1994 Ford Mustang GT, 5.0L V8, N/A 0-60 in 6.6 seconds. Around 140-145 MPH top speed 15 City/23 Highway MPG 225 HP
Anonymous
>>4637702 If you think Fords are the only vehicles out there that are "cost reduced", you're smoking stronger shit than I care to even be around. Especially if you're comparing them to another mass production company like Mazda. Especially fucking Mazda, considering the close relationship and parts-sharing that occurs between Ford and Mazda (i.e. cars that are FUCKING IDENTICAL other than sheet-metal, like the MX-6/Probe, Escort/Protege, Ranger/BXXXX, Fusion/6, Focus/3, etc, etc, etc)
Ford apprentice !5zb/EKX0ks
Quoted By:
>>4637690 Yea, no kidding. I especially hate how no one understands the relationship between the engine and the transmission and how it multiplies torque.
HowITripCode? !!DU22SQMj6dQ
Quoted By:
>Why don't more cars use rotary engines lolapexseals
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Rotaries are terribly inefficient in a thermodynamic sense. Nothing you can do aside from developing ceramic blocks and rotors will solve this. Think about it for a second and you'll understand why. In a piston engine the piston and head share both the cooling intake of air and heat producing combustion. In a rotary only 1/3rd of the housing (analogous to the head) is exposed to the uncompressed intake charge and 1/3rd of the housing is always experiencing compression and combustion. Heat localizes in dramatic fashion. That extremely hot face is why rotaries run low compression ratios compared to pretty much anything else that requires high octane fuel, it causes knock issues. The Renesis has a 10:1 ratio which is the same as the 2.0l Mazda3 which runs on 87 octane.
American Focus Owner !!Kyo8bWKHhkp
Quoted By:
>>4637773 >you're smoking stronger shit than I care to even be around. lulz
Anonymous
This is my family's vehicular armada. Please rate. To better shape your insults, I live in Western PA.
ep3_lol !!FP9Bp7VWRiZ
Quoted By:
'05 Civic Si '04 Titan 4x4 '03 9-3 Aero '92 Bronco '83 RX-7 some big stupid Yamaha motorcycle Could be worse.
I now realize how many Range Rovers we have... Dad: 2009 Jaguar XKR convertible 2008 Range Rover V8 5.0 Supercharged Autobiography 2006/7 Porsche 911 Turbo Coupé Mom: 2010 Range Rover V8 5.0 Supercharged Autobiography 2005 Aston Martin DB9 Volante 2008 Cooper S John Cooper Works Me:
Just Expecting Every Problem !2JdOvIfmOM!!jpkjhRHE66J
Just Expecting Every Problem !2JdOvIfmOM!!jpkjhRHE66J Tue 03 May 2011 04:33:00 No. 4637774 Report Quoted By:
thataudiguy !!Ix3EG/L3R/8
Quoted By:
-2007 F150 XLT -2011 A4 2.0T -2009 Honda Fit -2009 Craftsman ride-on fuck year suburbia
Gosai_Ijin
Quoted By:
>>4637461 I lol'ed pretty hard OP. I live in Western PA as well.
You're family has some pretty shabby rides (the Taurus and the Cirrus or w.e) but i like the Charger and im hoping one of those vans is a 4wd to help with the snow and hills.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
There's this Lexus IS 200 at the dealer near me. I am planning to buy it as my first car. Only thing that conserns me is that it has been driven for 296 000km (185 000miles) which is kinda lot I think. What do you think? It would be for daily driving and should be reliable. I know IS 200 in pretty slow but I dont care because it would be my first car. Pic related. Thats the car.
Hairy Britfag
Quoted By:
get something shittier with less miles. something you wont mind getting some scratches and dings on.
Overboard and Self-Assured !!yvm0QrHZZJQ
Overboard and Self-Assured !!yvm0QrHZZJQ Tue 03 May 2011 04:45:00 No. 4637809 Report Quoted By:
>dem wheels its been beaten and will explode soon. it will probably keep running after it blows up though, toyotas usually seem to do that.
nyan !91iMi6CIYI
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Wats ur opinion about the Nsx vs Corvette? same body, size, and capability but way different price and performance...>NSX- Better looking, technologies, advance, track specialist and will last longer. >Corvette- Faster and cheaper.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4637784 He'll be discussing off-camber rolling resistance, trunk lid aerodynamics and key fob tractability AND MORE very shortly.
WINDOWS XP32bit
>>4637786 I never said NSX parts would be cheap, but you're not going to be finding Corvette parts like it's a normal car.
henry_ford !T/cybz7iao
Quoted By:
>>4637796 alright, but they're going to be relatively easy to find compared to a goddamn NSX.
Satellite440(Xephinroth) !!NuqLANSpf21
Satellite440(Xephinroth) !!NuqLANSpf21 Tue 03 May 2011 04:40:00 No. 4637798 Report Quoted By:
>Nsx better looking Opinion>Will last longer Not that I've heard>advance wha?>corvette is faster stock vs stock yes>Cheaper True I'd say the Vette though I do love the NSX
Facel-Vega !!NPyXKZNV85f
Quoted By:
Difficult question.>C5 vs. NSX NSX, because I think it looks better than the C5>C4 vs. NSX NSX>C4 ZR-1 vs. NSX Well, fuck. At that point I think I'd have to go heads or tails.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Just got hired repairing chipped windshields. Anyone do this before? Only pays commission but itll be worth it if I repair one an hour.
Anonymous
sup o, i have a choice of a $17k audi a4 2004 B6 multitronic stock, or a $20.5k audi a4 multi 2005 B7 (the newer version) with modifed rim 18inch (serously the 04 B6 has the shittest wheels and rims ive ever seen), better colour +all that jizazz the newer version has on the B6, last thing the B6 has driven about 68000kms while the B7 has 78000kms i will be selling my car for around 8k btw really fucking confused, help would be appreciated
Anonymous
need more info about engines .... which one is in B6 and which one in B7 'cause B7s have some shitty engines ....
Anonymous
>>4637047 finally some fucking help, champ
both B6 and B7 are 4cylinder multi injection 2.0L if that helps
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Watch out for the multi-tronic. It's made out of paper-mache and putty. and if it breaks thats at least 4 thousand. i just paid 5600 to fix mine. same milage.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4637203 \Well honestly, the exact codes of engines (3 letter codes like BLB, AWX etc) would really help 'couse that's the way I can tell you 'bout them something more ... now I can tell you only that multitronics on Audi are getting better and better, my father has 2004 A6 with 120000kms, he changed oil once and has no problems at all :)
Those engine codes would really help ....
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4636811 I'm in the same boat as you (looking at a $15-$22k car, preferably something fun & european).
Looked at both B6 & B7, read reviews, found out they have crystal transmissions (i.e. fragile as glass and expensive to replace), decided to go with a different brand.
I've moved on, and am now looking at BMWs (or possibly the SAAB Turbo X, if I can ever find a manual one in the upper midwest :-/).
Anonymous
Is it just me or am I the only one that feels that Dodge should've kept the styling of the rear quarter panels on the 2009 models (the only part of that model year that I do like) in with the restyling of the 2011 model? Picture related, I'm talking about just the section from the back half of the rear door to the spoiler
Anonymous
Quoted By:
>>4637785 Rear quarter panel of the '11 for a point of comparison
henry_ford !T/cybz7iao
Quoted By:
they should have just stopped making it
nyan !91iMi6CIYI
Quoted By:
Looks nice, but to make it flow with the rest of the car they had to lose a lot of window and impact visibility a bit. I hate function-be-damned styling. (see: new camaro...) New Charger looks fine in that department, imo.
v-v !KvOCOKjkNc
Quoted By:
Anonymous
Quoted By:
i got these up in my car. shits nice bro.
Anonymous
Quoted By:
Always have been a gm guy but the 64 galaxie with a 427 inside just will always scream sleeper suprise to me.
henry_ford !T/cybz7iao
Quoted By:
galaxies are fackin sweet. was cruising next to a '66 with a 428 and god damn i wanted one so bad
Anonymous
Quoted By:
I don't get when people call old cars sleepers. I mean, if it's still on the road then it must be something special. Any time I see a car pre 70s I expect it to be a beast.