I really don't want to get started in here...

I have this odd love/hate relationship with cars.

Let me make is short and simple. I agree with Talio's comments. I agree with CX's comments.

I just want to state this: Notice to all who argue that expressing yourself through what you've done/built in terms of motor vehicles: Save the very few people in this thread that drive older/classic/"different" cars, most of the posts in here reflect a trend... most of the cars on the road reflect the same trend. If all of you take the same handful of cars and try and modify it differently from the next guy, where's the real individuality in that?

A car is something that gets you around. Someone else made the same point. All the other things about it are just silly. It's not a fashion statement. It's not a reflection of engineering prowess (trust me, most of the vehicles people own certainly are not any measure of prowess at all). And most and foremost, it is not an expression of your inner desires and deep personality traits.

I don't doubt you could make a car faster than the cars I mentioned, I was more trying to argue the luxury aspect of it. Honestly, I could give a shit about speed. No one ever uses it anyway. I don't know where you get your 1/4 times, but I've seen Hennessey Vipers run faster than that, but it really doesn't matter. One last point I have is while you are dropping all that money into a cheaper car, sure it will badass when it is done, but the one clear argument about buying a faster sports car type is that you can put in less work for more speed. My buddy, for example, has an '04 Z06 that runs low to mid 9s. He's only dropped about 5 grand into the thing... that's pretty impressive. Granted, if you do all the work yourself, your mods will cost less. That engine switch you are talking about (supra engine in an RX7) is a lot of fucking work, though. Lots of custom fabrication there. In any case, we both exaggerated at points and have now backed down and I think we are at the best point of agreement we can get on this particular argument.

The page I get my Infinity numbers from is a dealer spec page that can only be accessed from my store LAN unfortunately.


Yeah, Rockford isn't horrible, it's just for the money you can normally get your hands on a better amp. I can't knock their monoblocks and 2 channels, they are pretty decent, but I would never buy one of their 4 channels (again). I understand that you read and ask around, but the only way to really know is experience. The fact that I had to explain the back speaker bass thing sort of outilines how much experience you really have. This stuff isn't rocket science, obviously, but I have lots of experience in controlled environments (ie not in a car where there are hundreds of variables) testing this equipment so I sort of know what most amps are capable of. In any case, I think our points were fairly similair to begin with here anyway... we are just dumb for arguing it. Rockford makes a decent amp, basically what we both said.

And cars, well the only way I would ever modify my car is to run on something other than gas. That would be the shiznat. When I get a car, I'm gonna buy some bumper stickers for it. I like bumper stickers. I like reading them. Does anybody know if it's possible to make your own bumper stickers? That would be awesome, because I've seen many that I would like but I've never seen bumper stickers for sale anywhere.

Sorry to double post, but I don't feel like editing. You can buy cars that run on full electric as well as cars that run on natural gas... both work fairly well.

You can get your own bumper stickers made... do a search online for Custom Bumper Stickers. I found several companies that made them.

I'd say that anything you want can be an expression of your personality.  If you want to use a harmonica, as Talio said, to express yourself then good for you.  If I choose to use my vehicle, which I spend as much as 2 hours a day in when I'm home, how is it any less valid?  And if I can spend $10,000 and have something as luxurious, fast, and all around enjoyable as a $120,000 Mercedes, it certainly is a measure of my engineering prowess.

I'd love to see you spend that much money and get a car as luxurious, fast, and all around as enjoyable as a 120k mercedes. In fact, I'd put money on the fact that that is bullshit. I see enough cars and "project" cars everyday to know that there is only so much you can do to a car to make it better. If you go out and buy a honda civic and drop $50k into it, it is still a honda at the end of the day.

Xedice - I'm looking towards the Kappa 60.5CS components for my front speakers.  Infinity's strength is definitely their crystal clear mid-to-high range.  By the time I make this purchase they may have a new model out, but I'll probably still look at their middle-of-the-line 6.5" component set.  As for rear fillers  I'll probably use my current Rockford 6.5" coaxials, because rear speakers tend to take on mostly low ranges and the rockfords are great for that.  My head unit is currently and will always be made by Alpine, I really like their stuff.  My amps for speakers and subwoofers are also Rockford Fosgate, because they tend to be underrated in terms of power and the sound quality is not affected much by the amp.  My subs are Image Dynamics IDQ series, which I highly recommend - they beat out $700 subs and only set me back $250 for 2.

The only thing I'd say here about the Infinity Kappa series is becareful. I have hooked up a few systems that were all Infinity (my GFs car, for example, is all Infinity Kappa Perfect with Infinity amps and an Alpine head unit), and let me tell you those damn speakers are quite sensitive. If the proper air space and a certain level of air seal isn't present they can be a real bitch. That whole thing about rear speakers taking on low frequencies is some wierd thing that a lot of people think is true... I don't understand it. If you put the same speakers in your front and rear, they both do the same thing... and your rear speakers really don't matter at all anyway. More than 60% of what you hear comes from your front speakers and if you have subwoofers why do you need speakers to handle low ranges? The guys who win the nationwide sound quality comps every year have two speakers and a subwoofer in their car, that's it. Alpine is the shit, agreed. Also, your amps make all the difference in sound quality. They are just as important as the rest of the equipment in the system. Your whole system is only as good as the weakest link... if you bought $20 RCA interconnect cables, then your entire system is only as good as your $20 RCA interconnects. Rockford, btw, generally rates ther numbers a bit higher then they are capable of performing.

Ok, I have seen, both in videos and in person, 1986 Buick Grand Nationals pulling down 10 second 1/4 miles.  Cars that have $10k put into them.  And there are street legal supras that run 8s and 9s.  Give me a car made by any company that can outperform that.  Hell, you said you'd give me plenty that will outperform it.  Give me a single car I can buy from Mercedes, BMW, or Ferrari.  Or even McClaren or Bugatti.  You can't, the fastest Ferrari is the Enzo, and that only runs a 11.20 1/4 mile.  Its possible to achieve things in your own garage that those other companies can't.

Like I said, you go do it and tell me what your car does, not what you have seen other people's cars do. Oh, and here's my car that'll beat it, Mercedes Mclaren whateverthefuck. I've seen it do 8.9. Does a Hennessey viper count? On a side note, I saw a BMW (I have no idea what model it was, but it was a 2000) do a 9.4 at the track about a month back. Obviously it's not stock, but I've never seen a BMW move that damn fast before.

My point still stands, however, that you will not get a car to feel like a Mercedes or some other luxury car unless you were to pretty much completely strip it and recreate it. You won't get the quiet , smooth ride, etc. Quiet especially. I know it is possible, but I don't know many people willing to put time into their cars like that.

The speakers were in a 1997 Subaru Impreza Outback, bottom mount front and rear speakers.  It was tested from multiple listening points, including the back seat and outside the car.  I could be wrong regarding whether or not is deliberate, but I am talking from personal experience.

In that case, you just have a bad ear. Unless there was some other factor in effect, the back and front speakers should be identical if the size is the same unless someone played with the crossovers to make it that way.

They are mid-level amps.  Yes they're second rate compared to Xtant, but Rockford is definitely on par with either Alpine or Infinity.  I'm not asserting their the best.  But unless you're running something like IDMax subs and high-end Focal components, you won't notice a difference.

Rockford is not on par with Alpine or Infinity. Alpine amps are most definetly much nicer, more effecient, and quieter (Ok, i'm not gonna lie, I haven't looked at the 2005 Rockford numbers yet). Infinity are the same internals as JBL which I would have to say are quite a bit nicer than Rockford as well. Just to back it up, Alpine has won sound quality comps more than once and so has Infinity/JBL... Rockford has not. And yes, you can tell the difference with even moderately nice speakers, no question. I have done amp replacements in cars, left the crossovers flat or turned off on the amps and relied only on the crossovers on the head units just to see what happens... yeah, huge differences between brands. Infinity's line last year sounded great, the new amps for this year are kind of bright. Audiobahn has a great sound... probably my favorite next to Alpine who also sounds rather nice. MTX has a rather bright sound, as well (though I haven't tested the 2005 models yet). You do not need the best speakers around to hear it. I may also add that Infinity was involved in the same sound quality competition as Focal, Diamond Audio, and a few other big names you may have heard, and their Kappa Perfect series powered by a JBL amp won first place over the rest.

I'm calling you on that.  Exactly what amps do you own that have less than .01% THD?  Because Xtant, Zapco, Precision Power, and Tru amps don't even put up those kinds of numbers.  Hell, the only time I've ever seen that is on Helix or Brax competition amps that cost $1200 for a 200x4.  So why don't you actually tell me what these amps are?

You are right, I exaggerated on that, though not deliberately. I haven't really looked at any THD numbers in about 2 years because I stopped caring what people had printed since most of it was lies (and companies like Rockford stopped advertising those numbers). I went and looked up a few, and there are many brands that have numbers way better than <.1%. Audiobahn has a couple that are .05%, .08%, .02%. Alpine has a few that are .08%, .03%, etc as well. Memphis amps seem to have around .03% on average. I seem to recall reading a few that were <.01%, but that is probably my shitty memory fucking with me again. A more accurate statement would have been none of my amps have THD as high as .1%THD. I will say this, Rockfords new 2005 models look a lot better than previous years, but they still shy away from advertising their THD. I also will not believe they have gotten better until I hear it. I have had bad experiences with them... as well as MTX. I have owned just every amp company I have mentioned, and a few that I have not including Rockford. My experience is Rockford is on level with MTX... niether of which are much to brag about.

And as a side note, $1200 for 200x4 is rather cheap.

If I take a Mazda RX-7, swap a Toyota 3.0L V6 into it, and drop about 4-5k into the standard engine mods, I'll have a car with more power than a Mercedes SL600, that weighs 1500 pounds less, and has a better front/rear weight distribution.  At the end of the day its still a mazda, but it'll still outperform anything you can throw at it.  By saying "it's still a honda", you're just another one of those people who thinks brand name actually matters.  If you want to judge based on the jokers who think that putting an AEM cold air intake and a "Greddy" decal on their civic makes their car nice, go ahead.

Ok, it will go fast and take turns nicely, but it still isn't as "Luxurious" as a $120k Mercedes, I'm sorry. And yes, the brand does matter. Do you know how Mazda sells their cars cheap but they seem like they should cost more? They cut corners at all the places your average customer won't notice. All of you interior controls and such are still mechanical rather than electronic, there are still vaccum lines everywhere, there are still tension cords everywhere. So yeah, when you do your engine swap and shit, it is still a Mazda, because all of the car was engineered by Mazda/Ford, not just the engine. Go ahead and yank apart the interior of one of those things and see what it looks like inside then go compare that to a BMW or a Mercedes or some shit. Let me just say you can tell the difference. Rather than argue with about it all, just get your car, do the swap and then come back to me once you have taken it to the track and tell me what it gets in the 1/4 mile. Alos, there are plenty of cars I can "throw at it" that will outperform it... not all of them are reasonably priced, but they will outperform it... of course this is where your point comes in that "for the price" etc etc etc... and I agree. However, it's still gonna ride like the car it is, not the car it wants to be.

Regarding rear speakers:
They do get a lower portion of the sound.  But the sound that they do get is heavily balanced towards the lower frequency range.  If you have the same speakers front and rear, and you fade the music from the back towards the front, there is a noticable difference in the frequency balance you hear.  The head unit I've tried this with was made by Alpine, so it's obviously a deliberate effect.

This is the part where I get to see how little you know about what your talking about. No, it is not a deliberate effect. It depends on the car. If you have speakers in the rear deck, they will get more bass because there is more airspace behind it. Plain and simple. If they are in the doors in the front and the back, you will see that they sound identical. Also, keep in mind that bass frequencies travel slower than any other frequency (unless you have a higher-end Alpine with Time Correction) so sometimes the "bass lag" will actually make it sound like more bass is being produced because it is coming milliseconds after the rest of the frequencies which are all hitting at the same time. The airspace is really where the extra bass comes from in rear decks, however. Also, when sound waves bounce off of glass, those soundwaves are going to sound louder, so it's yet another effect that can come from having rear speakers, but only in specific cars.

Obviously amps make a difference in sound quality, but when you look at the major respectable brands there's very little difference between, say, a Rockford Fosgate amp or an MTX amp.  Go to any car audio board and ask them "what amp should I buy" and you'll either get 20 different answers or you'll get a lecture on how it really doesn't make that much of a difference.  Obviously if you buy a $20 wal-mart amp it'll suck, but once you get to less than .1% THD it won't matter because the speakers will give you much more distortion than that.  You're right about the weakest link of a system mattering, but a good amp is a stronger link than great speakers.

There are lots of differences, actually. Rockford and MTX are both considered second rate amps to most car audio enthusiasts, so yeah, they may seem rather similiar. The newer MTX amps may break that trend since they are now using extant components (another company owned by Mitech) which may improve the sound quality and performance, but I have yet to try them out. If you look at the newer CEA 2005 specs you will see much larger differences between the companies now since they are almost impossible to fudge. Before that, however, amp companies didn't really have to publish how they got the results, just that the amp was capable of all the things listed. Now of course, it does make a difference if you are talking about your sub amp or your interior amp (4channel or 2channel amps). On a subwoofer the sound quality is not affected nearly as much by the amp as it would be with a 4channel amp. The subwoofer has such a limited frequency range that it's rather hard to actually make an impact on the sound quailty other than how quiet the amp can be and how little the frequencies overlap. Other things that are different depending on your amp is the cooling (because some amps overheat and go into protection mode much quicker than others), the on-board crossovers, and wether the amp is analog or digital. You will find that the newer all digital amps have a much higher level of sound quailty than the analog amps out there. Granted, I still have an analog amp myself, but the newer all digital amps are very impressive. Oh, and BTW, less than .1%THD really isn't that great... most of the amps I own are below .01%.

About Rockford amps, you're absolutely wrong.  Every amp they sell comes with a "birth certificate" with the stats from when it was tested after it came out of the factory.  The tested power is always higher than the product line's rated power.  For example, I bought a Rockford 700S that was rated at 700 Watts, but when tested it produced 859.  I asked around a lot and that's the norm rather than the exception.

Actually, no, I am not wrong about rockford. Look at how those amps are tested on those sheets... they aren't the most honest numbers around. Often times the amps are capable of doing those numbers for very short amounts of time, or even once out of the several times they test it. They will test an amp several times and simply pick out the best numbers to write down. I might also add that I have seen rockford amps tested to see how close they actually get to those numbers and they are usually quite hard to achieve. If I remember correctly, those numbers are tested at 14.4 volts, as well, which most cars aren't capable of achieving without an upgraded alternator. I know one of the companies prints a 14.4v number and a 12v number on their sheets, though, and I don't remember who that is. Also, Rockford isn't the best for heat management.

Nice try, but untrue.  The Mercedes SLR McLaren does 11.6's on a good day.  Mercedes themselves list the 0-60 time as 3.8 seconds, a time that rules out anything under 11.  If the BMW did 9.4, it wasn't stock, which proves my point.  Someone bought a BMW and made it faster than any production car on the road, which it certainly wasn't before they bought it.

And regarding sound - that's what Dynamat is good for.  It's not hard to cut down on road noise.  Obviously its not easy, but is possible.  When you buy a BMW, you pay not only for the parts but for the energy that went into compiling those parts.  When I modify a car, I pay for the parts and do the research and installation myself, and that's what makes it so much cheaper and so damn cool

Rockford's 2005 line, which is mostly unchanged from their 2004 line, has .08% THD across the board, in tests compliant with CEA 2006 standards.  If you look at Infinity's product page, they only advertise <1%.  Not less than .1%, only less than 1% THD.  Talk about shying away from advertising actual numbers...  Additionally, Infinity amps are rated at .08% THD as well.

If you want to go based on personal comparisons, then go right ahead.  All the tests I've done between Rockford and Audiobahn have resulted in Rockford blowing them out of the water.  So we won't get anywhere arguing based on what we've "heard".  But if you go based on statistics, Rockfords are on par with both Infinity and Alpine for the 2005 models.

You say what you want about the Mercedes, I have seen it run those numbers. You dodged my Hennessey Viper question, though. And yes, I know the beamer wasn't stock, I said that. It still doesn't really prove your point to me as I don't percieve fast as luxurious with a nice ride. I also somehow doubt that your engineering skills are as honed as the people who build these cars, but we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this point. I would still like to know your numbers once you get this all done, however. Maybe even post a few pics of the car because it sounds like you are actually going to do some worthwhile modifications rather than what all the other assholes like to do to theirs (ie Rims, cold air intake, fart cannon, etc). I still stand by my statement that doing these things is much different than talking about them. In any case, I am genuinely interested in seeing/hearing about this car once you get some work done on it.

I do know what Dynamat is for, thank you, but ripping apart the entire interior of the car to lay down dynamat and tighten all the bolts as well as look for any other loose parts and such is a bit easier said than done. Also, my point stilll stands that the things used inside the car that I doubt anyone would be replacing is something that does effect the price of a car... I don't know, if I was gonna drop $10k into a car I think I would want electronic climate controls... possibly with an acutal thermostat. All those little things are part of what makes a car luxury to me. In any case, I've rambled on even though I've said we should agree to disagree on this point. My belief is that you are not as good as the guys who work over at Daihmler Chysler (yeah, I don't know if I spelled that correctly) at designing and producing cars, however you claim you can make any car as good and luxurious as any car out there. We will never see eye to eye on this, so I call a truce on this point.

I couldn't find Rockford's THD numbers, but I'll take your word for it. I'm fairly sure they aren't across the board, however, since mono amps never have the same THD as 4 channels and such. In any case, the page I went to for Infinity has their 4 channel rated at .03% which is pretty good. Alpine still has Rockford beat on the numbers since most of Alpine's numbers are in the .03 and .02 range. Regardless, let's go on what they have won. Rockford won one big comp last year, I do remember that. Alpine wins usually around 2 comps a year for sound quality where Rockford doesn't even enter into the sound quality comps, just SPL. Audiobahn wins SPL records almost every year and Rockford (I believe) won one in the past 3 years ( may be mistaken, might be in the last 2 years). Audiobahn makes things way out of Rockford's range, so I can't really agree with you saying that rockford was "blowing them out of the water". They simply have different product lines... audiobahn makes 5000 watt amps and 5000 watt subs... Rockford doesn't, so it's hard to compare them. Plus, Audiobahn has that line of Full digital amps, a 5.1 channel amp, and several other specialty products where Rockford has nothing really comprable. Possibly Rockford is on par with the Infinity line of amps if you want to make that argument, but they are not on par with Alpine for sound quality or Audiobahn simply because of Audiobahn's vast product line.

If either of us has more experience I'm going to have to argue that I have probably heard more than you have. I don't know what you do for a living, but I install this stuff everyday. I have been doing this for about 4 years now... so yeah, I have a bit of experience. That of course doesn't include the experiences I had before I was professional because I don't count that as real experience. If you want to go ahead and throw all those awards all the companies I mentnioned have won and say Rockford is just as good even though the awards they have won don't even compare to what the other companies have won, that's fine. Go by the numbers and say that .08% is just as good as .02%. Those numbers aren't the same, but it is true that you and I probalby won't be able to tell the difference. What I can tell you is the amp makes a huge difference with your sound. I can also tell you that Rockford is normally scoffed at by the professional car audio society. I can tell you what i've heard in 4 years worth of experience and 6 years worth of swapping shit in and out of my car on a weekly basis. If none of that works for you, than again I will agree to disagree with you because it is rather obvious that your opinion won't change and nor will mine.


The other thing neither of us has taken into account is the type of music we listen to. You may listen to vastly different types of music than I do, which may effect our taste in audio equipment.

On the shiavo thing or whatever her name is... For those who are religous, it doesn't matter if there in a coma forever and are never going to wake up, or if someone is living off a machine or tube. You do not pull the plug. It is gods duty to end your life not someone elses. God chooses when someone should go in a situation like this. Not other people. My two cents worth..

Yeah, God tried to choose and end her life and man kept her alive with machines. Let me put it this way: God has been around for a great long while, correct? Now, 80 years ago there were no machines that would have kept this woman alive... back then people would have said "God chose to take this woman and end her life", now because man has created machines to prolong her life we have taken the choice out of God's hands and into our own. Now when god chose to end her life, we flipped God the bird and said "Fuck you big man, we are keeping her as long as we want". Back then it was God's choice to end her life. Nowadays, we are going to say that it was man who chose to end her life because we took her off the machines that man created to keep her alive. It seems to me that keeping her alive with man-made machines is more against God than pulling the plug. It seems to me that we just prolonged God's decesion to end her life and just now decided to say "sorry for the mistake, God, you can have her now. We are done". Something about that seems wrong. Something about that seems sacrilegious.


(Just to keep things clear: I am in no way stating my religious beliefs here.)

A kung-fu pope would indeed kickass. God that would kick ass. Then he wouldn't need all those body guards anymroe because he would have the ability to kick all ass him self... that would rock.

Of course, the Catholic Church would never have it because not having body guards would actually save them money.

Actually I'm rather, shall we say, unhappy, with the Christian faith this era. Being one myself I look around in disgust at "denominations" and wonder why Christians have to seperate themselves. So why the Catholics, methodists, and so on? Maybe we should be "Christians" instead.

AA

Ha! tell that to the catholic church. lol

'm assuming your'e Jewish?

Disclaimer: This post was a retort to a stereotypical comment, and was back in fact stereotypical. Davis waives all responsibility, and doesn't give a crap, if you were offended by this post.

I'm Agnostic, actually. I was dedicated as a Unitarian when I was young, but that's the closest I've ever had to a relegion.

I understand that it was not a serious inquiry, and I understand the point you are trying to make. Perhaps you should examine it a little better. I wouldn't so much call it a stereotypical comment, so much as a truth. Ok, so that's a bit harsh. Let me try again. It's not so much a stereotypical comment as it is my opinion which I have come to after trying to understand several relegions/faiths in the world. This is not some asshole kid trying to sound like their parents and regurgitating everything he/she hears them say. I understand quite a bit about several relegions/faiths out there and as far as I'm concerned, Catholocism is one of the most recockulous. Christianity I do not hold a grudge against. Just thought I should make that clear.

I think if we could just somehow elect Arnold Pope then we could save some serious time and get this global solidarity thing going tout suite. The time for Captain Popetacious is at hand.

VACC

Agreed. Arnold should definetly cease the position, he would be the salvation of the Catholic church... maybe they could have two popes... one would be a kung-fu pope and the other could be Arnold and they could enforce popeness throughout the world. That or they could just attack eachother all the time and try to take the pope position.. it would be an eternal struggle for popetaciousness...

Great? I'm not so sure. Learned? Yes. Fit for the job? yes. But great?

Like someone mentioned: No gays allowed in the catholic church, no gay marriages... in fact, in the eyes of the church (and therefore the pope) all gays are evil sinners who deserve to burn in hell. Also, no women allowed in the clergy. No women allowed to become priests.

Sure, these are Roman Catholic ideals so to speak, but why uphold them in this day and age? Especially not letting women into the clergy. I'm not saying the pope was a bad man, I just don't see why he was great exactly. He did what his job was. He was the pope, there were certain things expected of him. He had to be a good man. I'm not so sure I would give a man the label of "great" just because he was pretty much the leader of a faith... especially since that particular faith/relegion is one that is so close-minded, hypocritical, and greedy. I'm not so sure this makes a man great. I'm gonna say he was probably a pretty decent guy, but just because he headed up some self-righteous relegion doesn't really make him "great".

I could honestly go on all day about how much I hate catholocism, but I won't.

Yeah...

I don't know where the controversy came from, honestly. The woman was braindead and her own husband wanted to just let her go. The only people keeping her alive where her dumbass parents who took 15 years to come to grips with the fact that their daughter might be dead inside. Fuck that man. Why the hell should anyone be kept alive when they are braindead? How is that heart-wrenching? How is that controversial? I don't know. I really don't. It was a damn shame she was kept alive as long as she was... it was just prolonging everyone's grief. That's what I call media-hype bullshit.

As for the pope... well, I don't really know what he did for anyone, so I have no real comment for it. All I have to say is, for a man who is supposed to be more or less the godliest person on earth (or the holiest to keep from idolizing the man) he sure did need a lot of security around him all the time. I'm not going to elaborate on that.

Edit: Davis is a homo.

Edit: Edit: I find it funny that Davis is more or less making a statement on the pope that would somewhat imply his affiliations with a religious group. It seems he took offense to Famine's comment and went as far as to try and take a cheap shot at Famine in order to more or less stick up for the pope or catholocism, one or the other. The reason I find this funny is because he has Mr. Hanky the Christmas Poo as his avatar. If none of you find this in the least bit funny/hypocritical... well, then I've wasted my time pointing it out.

Well, dammit, you better sign up when everything is back to normal... and so should the rest of you.

Fuckers.

I'm trying to go to the link, but it doesn't seem to want to load up.

edit: Ok, I got it, it's just kinda slow.

Ok, more people need to sign up for this... with all you jerkfaces who make all the comments in the music threads (oh, I listen to this that and the other thing blah blah blah) for 10 damn pages why don't you sign up for this and show everyone. I think it would be interesting.

Jerks.

Ya know, I joined and I have been checking the site every now and again to see how it tracks it all... last night I think I played like 80 songs or so and strangely enough none of them are up today... in fact, it says I've only listened to 6 tracks... odd... odd indeed. All the stuff my girlfriend has been playing all day are in the recent tracks and the stuff from last night were in recent tracks last night, but it generated a list today that says i've only played 6 tracks as I said and my top bands and tracks are quite skewed. Odd. Maybe it just takes a day or two for the list of music to be added? I dunno. Anyway, I registered as Ashplisken in case you couldn't figure that one out. Not that anyone cares. Ok, I'm done typing now.

Ah, ok. I knew they were having server troubles and such, but I thought maybe it just didn't wanna work for me or something...

Anyway, what is with this Personal Radio station thing on there?

Yeah, seriously Wtent, you should really just stop communicating with the rest of the world completely and lock yourself in a small shack away from civilization somewhere. Really, I mean that.

Who, me? I know I come off as this exuberant fellow and all, but I have my dark days. I know, hard to believe... but sometimes I am in a bad mood.

And I agree with Vacc, Hallie Berry should die. Slowly.

If you locked yourself in a shack, you wouldn't really be able to get much of anything from anyone... eventually you would wither away and die. Not that this was the intended idea... but then, maybe I'm not as nice as I seem.

Wtrent, once again I must applaud you on your complete and udder stupidity. Famine already pointed out everything wrong with what you said, so I feel no need to repeat those corrections already imposed. I do, however, feel it neccessary to point out your obvious retardation on a second account. You are once again incorrect as well as stupid.

Remember what I said about the shack and the ostrasizing from the human race and the possible dying and whatnot? Yeah, get on that. ASAP, please.

It rocked, dude.

Wtrent, you are gay.

One of the best comic book movies ever. Yeah. Rock.

Yeah, or maybe rougue might learn to do something that would make her a useful member of the X-men since she has a uniform and all now... or not. Maybe they will just try to play her usefulness off as being able to temporarily steal someone's power and use it in a fight, or something... or just knock them out... I dunno, she just seems somewhat useless without all the Ms. Marvel powers or whatever.

Yeah, her and bobby will definetly get it on, this I forsee.

Maybe a Gambit cameo? Yeah, I know, no chance in hell. Fuck you guys.

Beast would be cool to see, and of course juggernaut. Oh, and way more of Collossus.

There are already loads of practical mods for the CB... there are tons of mods from many different people...

Yeah, that looks about right.

Okay so you just ovoid the plunger tube and that other necessary stuff?

The spot you want to drill through is right where the spring from the plunger sits against the casing. When you cock the gun, the spring is compressed between the plunger and the area I am talking about. It is two plastic posts that the plunger goes through the middle of. I strongly reccomend pre-drilling the holes before you fully assemble the gun so that you don't have to worry about hitting the insides. It is an extremily simple mod. Rather than spending your time cutting out sheet metal and such, this mod should take about one minute of your time.

Do you do anything to reinforce the shell where the screws go through? Otherwise I would think that the screws that the spring sits against would just widen the holes in the shell they go through over time.

You go through both sides of the shell... and you use big screws. The best idea would be to use nuts on the other side of the screws. However, I never used nuts, and my crossbow has been modded for years now and there are no signs of wear.

Ragg's mod is basically a crappy version of what we have been doing for years now.

A few tips:

Instead of cutting out sheet metal to enforce the area where the spring rests on the crossbow inner casing, shoot a pair of thick screws through the area so that the plastic posts rest against the screws. This gives more strength to the mod and it also lessens your chance of flexing.

I didn't notice any real reinforcement to the plunger... get some thin steel rods and mount them on either side of the plunger. Also, very important and often overlooked, you should reinforce the the plastic end of the plunger that the rubber piece sits on. The actual rubber air plunger is the piece I am referring to, all the way on the end of the plunger. I shot a screw through the plunger (after reinforced of course) to give the spring something to rest against on that end of the plunger. This of course reduces the risk of breakage.

Those are the two big things, the rest is pretty simple.

One more tip, if you want to do the "breach loading" idea. I used the stock barrel and fitted a piece of PVC piping on the end of it. Inside this length of PVC is a barrel that came from a chainlink from one of the chain fed guns (Razorbeast and Chainblazer). I cut off the bottom of the chain barrel and shoved it inside the pvc. The PVC then acts as a sleeve that the stock barrel can fit inside and the chainlink can rest against the stock barrel securely. This of course requires you to remove the "extension" to load it, but the reload time is rather short.

Yeah, that looks about right.

I would strongly suggest heavily reenforcing the plunger, latch mechanism, and the posts that the spring sits against and using external bungi cords or industrial rubber bands. You can replace the spring (obviously) but I wouldn't suggest it based on experience. No matter what you do, though, you must reenforce the plunger, etc. If you do not reenforce, some parts will inevitably break no matter which strategy you use.

The BBB spring is pretty much identical, you won't get any additional range from switching a CB spring with a BBB spring unless your CB spring is completely abused somehow. Replacing the spring isn't worse on the plunger, it's worse on the rest of the gun (frame and such). I renforced my plunger with steel along with the posts the spring rests on and use bungee cords or industrial rubber bands to add tension... my CB has lasted me several years and I can put on just about as much extra tension as I desire.

Don't replace the spring. Trust me, it is not the best idea with that particular gun.

I just find it so hard to believe anything intellegent ever takes place on NC, but then I gave up on it after going there for about a week... so I guess I didn't give it much of a chance. It really didin't deserve much of a chance, however.

Hey man, I didn't say it was a bad game, I just said I was totally put off by the graphics.

FFXI has its downsides, but so does every MMORPG out there. I played EQ for a long time, and I played SB for quite a while as well. They both had thier downsides and over time, the economy always dies in those games due to outside influences (character and in game money selling, etc.). I only compared EQII and WOW because they are in the genre, wasn't trying to call them the same type of game. EQII sounds a bit more like FFXI in terms of character and class types, although it is a bit more flexible. Unfortunately, most MMORPGs come down to "Mindless leveling" and "doing something to get money" after a while. Granted, once you accomplish a high enough level and have enough money, you can go back to big quests and accomplishments, but they all require it to some degree. Shadowbane didn't because Equipment meant very little in that game, and it had only so much use to it before it would break (much like EQII). EQ was very dependent on equipment and so was AC to a point.

You couldn't have played FFXI very long if you really think there are "cookie cutter molds" that you are forced to follow. There are some archetypes that most seem to look amiably upon, but for the most part you can do just about anything with just about any race. Once you get higher in levels, you can balance out a character's stats with equipment, so it's fairly flexible. If you don't have the money you need to purchase equipment in the game, most of it is questable. Buying it is really just an option for those with extra cash... most of the higher priced stuff are all quest items. There are also several ways to make money fairly well in game that don't require hours of farming.

In any case, I'm not saying FFXI is all that great an MMORPG, but from what I've seen of WOW and EQII, I'm not convinced either of those games are much better. This was really my only point.

Just because people don't like certain games does not deem them "stupid", as you put it. There are different games for different people. Everyone has different tastes. Unless a game is PVP, most of the games come down to "pointless" leveling in the sense that there is no real point in ever getting to the lvl cap since you cannot directly compete with other players. The only games that i've ever played that really didn't have this dilemma were Shadowbane and Diablo, but of course, they are PVP. Most MMORPGers seem to dislike PVP, so until they come up with a way to compete that will appease the masses, the games will always come down to "mindless leveling" to some degree. I have friends who will be playing WOW, so I will take a look at them and judge for myself then, but for now I'm going off of what I see, and what I see is hardly amazing. A big pull to a game like that is to get your character looking the way you want it to look (to some degree), and I'm afriad in that game all the characters look like cartoony graphics I would expect in an MMORPG made a few years ago (kind of reminds me of Everquest graphics). Warcraft III had better graphics than WOW in my opinion, but hey, that's just me.

EQ has dungeons that load just for your party, so i'm sure EQ2 has the same...

See, I think having parties is part of the pull for an MMORPG. Why would you want to solo at any level in an MMORPG? Why wouldn't you just go play a single player RPG?

Like I said, I will give WOW a chance, but it just doesn't seem appealing yet. I'll give it a fighting chance just like any other, though.

The graphics don't look the same to me... I dunno, it really looks like old EQ graphics.

I really enjoy playing MMORPGs and all, but WOW just looks so... I dunno... cartoony? I just can't get past the graphics on that game. I generally don't judge games based on things like graphics, but the screen shots just look sooo bad for that game it completely kills any interest I had in ever playing that game. It's just... silly looking. I'll continue playing FFXI until I see how EQ2 is, but that doesn't seem terribly promising from what i've heard.

I could tell you some rather entertaining stories involving Vacc and I abusing text to speech in ipods at a former employer... god that was fun.

I'm here. Remember me? I'm the asshole everyone hates.

I've discovered that when you get to the last two rows, it is best to put the tray back in backwards (or try). I also have found that putting them back in the package serves but one purpose: To placate our innate need for packaging for our food products. It really doesn't do anything for them, yet we still try constantly.

I'm sorry Vacc, I ... I just don't know what I was thinking. I think I was overwhelmed by all this ranting or something to that effect.

And for the record, I'm not counting "sticky tabs" or those gay metal twisty tie things as advances.