Church

gavin_t:Slowing from speed A to speed B is to convert specific amount of kinetic energy into heat via brakes, that amount won't change if you do it quicker or slower over longer distance. And there can be both more heat from braking later/heavier (and thus quicker laptimes due accelerating longer elsewhere and higher speeds to bleed/more kinetic energy (which changes square of speed btw) to brake) but also it can be better cooled off (longer driving without braking, more cooling at higher speeds, better heat dissipation from hotter brakes vs ambient temps). Newbies imho often overheat brakes more because they may drive with nannies like SC/ABS/EBD/ediff, that may add up brake use/wear/heat when trying to correct car behaviour via actuating brakes. Imho issues with stock brakes for some on track working worse might be like using too sticky tires (or too much aero, also increasing grip) overcoming max brake torque, and using too street oriented pads with little friction Mu, thus due harder pressing brakes needed it robs from fine-control of brakes. Both can be improved/fixed with right pads for specific use (unfortunately compromising daily driveability noise/dust/cold-stops wise). What pads & better brake fluid won't fix - max heat capacity and cooling efficiency. But if one operates within these known limitations, there is nothing wrong with using stock brakes on track. For exampl-NA car (as forced induction = faster speeds/more kinetic energy (square of speed) = much more heat in brakes) on not too sticky tires and track sessions not longer then 10-15min (fine by me. I often start to loose top concentration past 15min tracking anyway). Also brake cooling ducts can be added (or even electric fans. saw such kit made by ausies, engaging according to temp probe readings) to get more from stockers if wished so. If pads fit well to one's use, recall CSG Mike writing: "As a rule of thumb, if you're getting 4 days out of a pad, you're pad is roughly matched to your setup/driving/experience on the FRS/BRZ. If you're getting more, you should stay where you are, or possibly move down a compound, depending on wear. If you're getting less, you need to move up compounds, and/or get a BBK, and/or get ducting." After all, stock brakes on our cars are not exactly very bad (fronts AFAIK were from wrx, rears - legacy gt), and there are cars with worse stock brakes (eg. heard that S2000 are a bit more underbraked, requiring even more uprated pads). And big bonus of stock brakes - better clearance of small wheels (for eg. winter) and also legality wise (country specific, but eg. in LV to be MOT legal only manufacturer official options can be considered (for example PP brembos), otherwise - just pads/fluid/ducts and very limited number of homologated brake lines, of course one can twice a year change to aftermarket BBK and back to stockers, but i don't want to consider that as option ).

My (65Ah one, that i got in during warranty of going flat stock 45Ah one) still runs fine, but i wonder if anyone can suggest lighter weight, but with as big capacity? Featherweight of mini lithium batteries for summer/track use sound nice, but not fan of switching out them. So thinking of compromise (weight wise), for weight reduction from different battery tech, but capacity wise on par with normal batteries..

Bias is important enough though for anybody actually caring for actual brake performance and safety. After all, bias too off on one end of spectrum means longer braking distances due one end underbraked, and on other end of spectrum - also longer braking distances if with nannies like ABS on, and downright unsafe/unstable, if without. And i don't think that "i never track my car" may serve as excuse if one couldn't avoid accident/crash due brake "upgrade" being done with just two goals in mind - visual bling by getting painted calipers with known branding and to spend as little as possible, even if it meant actually compromise braking. If it looks and budget that matters most, why not just paint calipers? At least one will know that braking won't be worse then. And keep ability to use stock wearables like rotors/pads, possibly also cheaper. Better brake wheel clearance, allowing to use even smaller wheels (for eg. winter). Win-win i'd say.

AFAIK should be no difference. Rear diff FD ratio differed a bit in MY2017 MT in USDM vs EUDM, but gearbox IIRC should be same. But japanese .. sounds like shipping from afar. That + heavy weight of item .. sounds to me like potentially very expensive shipping. I'd try first to find something more local, eg. UK/DE and such ..

Funny theory. And as they are not into this business for charity/to loose money .. such statistics might actually be true, interesting.

Don't know. Which choice is best/cheapest, guess by a lot depends on luck. I know for certain that i wouldn't be able afford new gearbox, priced insanely expensive. Used gearboxes IIRC comes for about 600-1000gbp eg. at ebay. But if it will be lemon or no .. if you choose to replace synchros, possibly i'd order maybe these. For oil i had best feel with Redline MTL GL4 70W80 (2.2lr needed, thus 3x1qt bottles)+ perrin transmission mount and gearbox rear bushing. If gearbox is taken down, at same occasion i'd possibly install new throwout bearing (Toyota P/N SU003-07349 Subaru P/N: 30502AA150) and maybe forged fork & pivot at same installation time. Maybe also these springs (not hard to change even with gearbox mounted) for stronger lever centering feel. BTW, prior doing anything else, i'd check 1) if there is no slight clutch drag (sometimes when misadjusted clutch pedal travel), that sometimes makes engaging into gear harder, and 2) maybe might help clutch shifter adjustment procedure. That is if it's not actually synchro's fault of couse, which also is possible.

But do you really want cover at it's price (+shipping/import costs & +VAT)? I'd just fill with construction foam or something alike and vinyl vrap it for 1/10th the cost.

Trackspec look somewhat better in my eyes then verus, and vent a bit better by at least vendor's data, but they don't have rainguards option and cut across strenghtening ribs (though i doubt for it to be any issue, and not letting snow/rain fall on engine imho is overrated too. Going over any puddle of water will splash there few orders more water anyway, no?). Then again rainguards reduce efficiency, and probably as summer/track use considered, worth removing anyway. Still, if one wants "free" temp lowering and some reducing of front lift without adding much drag, vented hood is nice feature to have, and is cheaper then eg. aftermarket CF or FRP hood with vents. That drag vs downforce would make me aero set that i'd wish - hood vents, rear diffuser and extra underside streamlining panels. Not fan of big ricer wangs, front splitters and canards.

Check Verus hood vent set of four. Made to fit in those "windows". Trackspec motorsports vent set of two but bigger ones goes/cuts across some. As for impact, they work and they do reduce underbonnet temps and also add a bit front downforce. What one should take care of: to cut in right places, where there is low pressure zone, not before or after it. Also if rain/snow worries, maybe also optional rain guards (for eg. verus set).

Do cossie make their own pads at all? Weren't those rebranded of some other vendor? Maybe even from one of those you mentioned as flawless ones ..

If one cannot remove it with hand tools, it was too tight. There is specific torque value lugnuts needs to be tightened, and that torque is well within what hand tools should be capable of. Our cars in boot have stock lugnut wrench (for changing to spare emergencies), which should provide very aproximated somewhat right torque, due which it is of specific length(lever length). At least if one uses tube over that wrench for longer lever, that would be "overtightening with hand tools" .. some googling for torque value returned: Manual reference number: AIM 004 425 - 4 https://www.toyota-tech.eu/Aim/Aim2.aspx?pubtype=AIM&menuitem=1 https://www.toyota-tech.eu/aimuploads/9001c475-3fa4-4bb5-994d-86f55a1f54d2/Torque_values_for_Alloy_wheels_Steel_wheels_Wheel_lock_Toyota_AIM_004_425_4.pdf GT86 Mar'12- Wheel Nut Torque (N*m): 120 TPMS/TWMS Torque (N*m) 4 For aluminum aftermarket lugnuts it might be less, who knows. I don't think that some water getting in might be at fault. Exactly for that these are -closed-end-lugnuts-. Now sloppy tire tech that cluelessly impact overtightened imho is much more possible :).

But stock lugnuts are steel, should much better withstand impact tools usage, at least their threads from stripping when impact used on. It's usually aftermarket aluminum ones that are advised to tighten/untighten using hand tools and tools only for quick light tightening/removal. And imho stock lugnuts if they are of closed end and used on stock wheels, should enough clearance to cap to never shear off even if overtightened. By chance, are your wheels aftermarket (and maybe with deaper lugnut seat bores)? I'd take extra attention to wherever nots were bolted on. Be it just dealership, or eg. tire shop. If one overtightens till some part breaks, something is off. Be it sloppy overzealous tech air impact trigger-happiness, or different length lugnuts needed, if specific aftermarket wheels need such. With overtightening i may expect that they can strip stud threads aswell at some point.

Weird to hear overtightening from officials. Official dealerships often don't want to step outside anything stock, and keep at official manufacturer procedures & torque values, exactly to not see any legal action or something breaking/to warranty and such. To not need overtightening main thing to remember is to clean stud threads before putting nut back, less of usage of misc. anti-seize greases (which btw changes torque nuts need to be tightened AFAIK).

UEL design originally was chosen by Subaru for one reason - less material usage/cheaper to make & better clearance. Power hit could be easily offset with slight extra boost anyway. Funilly, that made that characteristic 'subaru burble' sound, which many liked, and often also put UEL sound as one of reasons choosing them. In my taste high sprung high rpm sound seems better giving off some 'raciness' to that, but some may prefer that bassy burbliness. Longtube headers do better for providing more overall gains under curve due scavenging optimized for actualy used rpm range. Header with short primary runner length usually is more for highest gains .. but at very top rpms. As at daily driving one spends most of time at low rpms, at track at mid to high, long tube headers provide most overall gains everywhere. Unfortunately they often also cost more due harder to design/reduced clearance/more work to make/more material. Thus often generic UEL headers are popular choice. Cheaper, do well with dip, characteristic sound. I wouldn't look for the shortest runners headers though, be it UEL or EL (eg. PTuning, or Ace's Anaconda or Type A with 150 overpipe), as they are beneficial only for very very few/very limited racing application (eg. racing with built motor and risen redline cutoff).

JohnM: i suggest to not get catted aftermarket header, as: 1) catted headers are noticeably more expensive 2) they still don't do main thing one might expect for them - they are not completely sure way to not thrown cat readiness checks related CELs with stock tune, thus probably you won't save on not getting ECU tuned. One won't pass visual checks with those either, if MOT involves such. So legality wise still no "cure" vs their catless counterparts. 3) primary cat in header is in most hurting performance location close to cylinders. So they cost more, perform worse, and you still need ecu tune. Bad price/performance purchase imho. Better good catless header, leave stock 2ndary cat, ecu tune. Should pass MOT tests where they test only emissions, most performance per single bolt-on NA upgrade (with right ecu tune).

Yeah, most UELs do well on filling that dip, and prior Ace's that did both, i thought that UEL in general for twins in is more for filling that dip & mid gains, while ELs still having dip but more top gains (eg. Nameless's/PTuning EL headers). Ace's shown that it's not just about generic design layout.

IIRC from vendor reps/spokepersons there was some bla-bla that they designed gearbox to enhance shifting feel, making it much notchier/more precise, and hard to engage 2nd when cold is just because small tolerances for said feel/precision, but to me it sounds a bit more of excuse. AFAIK very similar Aisin AZ6 gearboxes were used also in S2000/RX8/MX5/S15/200SX/IS200 (i even sourced countershaft bearing from nissan, because toyobaru didn't offer it separately from gearbox case), and do they had similar issues? IIRC no. Well, to generalize, it's annoyance, but minor. As twins themselves even with several known relatively minor (imho) faults/cons are still great overall package (especially for their price), it's just one of things i accept, as there are many more things to like/love, more so then i dislike cons like cold bad shifts, rattling interior, a bit lacking power and such. Still great car overall that i'm still happy to own/drive/track, without breaking bank at that.

It's not that bad once gearbox is warmed up. Also not sure on best gear change being slow. Best gearswitch usually is with revmatched rpms, and if switching too slow, rpms fall off too much, so on mine i get best switch with one steady motion. Usually with such rpms fall off (with stock flywheel) just right on upshifts, and not too bad on downshifts, but for later one can always do throttle blipping, by itself or by heal & toe. After all, the less rpm difference, the less synchros need to work to synchronize lesser rpm delta before slip in gear, the better shift is/feels easier/buttery smoother. On mine one normal steady motion seems best, probably because of right rev-match if such. Not maximally quick forced shift, but not slow one either.

I guess that shipping costs may skyrocket due oversize to not fit into cheaper shipping tarifs .. usual stuff with overseas shipping for something oversized or overweight.

Reasonable drop for these cars is within inch. After all, twins are rather low and with rather short suspension travel to begin with. If you want drop even more, be ready to sacrifice comfort (due very little bump travel left before hitting bumpstops and due need to use much stiffer springs to compensate short travel left), and for more spendings on extra parts, to fix fscked geometry due overlowering, for example whiteline roll center/bump steer kit + some rear diff riser, to get rear axle joint angles back to reasonable angles to reduce load/wear on those joints. And of course be extra careful on speedbumps and steeper driveways, eg. learn to cross them at angle and such. Though .. of course if looks take priority to handling and performance, there are many that do drop their cars very low no matter illeffects using cheapest means possible and without doing anything to reduce/fix them. I'm liking this car for it's handling and thus hate such approach of making it worse, but to each his own what one likes and considers important and what sacrifices are acceptable.

My advise is to throw out that sealant kit, at most only keep compressor. 1) most tire repair shops refuse to deal/repair tires with that gunk used on, 2) that kit won't help with all puncture types, so i wouldn't call it something that i can 100% rely on, 3) very probably you'll have to buy at least two new tires for tires of same wear to be on axle (at least that's what i'd try to at least in rear, due LSD diff), but if punctured tire without that crap used on is brought to tire shop, it often can be repaired for relatively cheap and it will be of same wear as rest of tires on car. Imho full sized spare also has it's cons, eg. it's extra weight, and also robs space from already small boot, due sticking out So .. i'd just spend more time trying to find spacesaver that does fit over BBK. For example here and here, spacesaver that fits over performancepackage brembos, P/N 28151FE030 (+foam spacer 97046CA000 (under wheel), +foam insert 95086CA070 (different from smaller non-PP insert), and just tire P/N 28121VA050 T145/70D17). Here i found for example 18" spacesaver of 5x100 pcd. Maybe it also can provide better brake clearance. If nothing else, then with spacer.

The point with more powerful setups is that one can listen at same loudness but with less distortion. There are not that many people that upgrade audio setup with loudness in mind .. imho more often it's better sound quality. The point of focals - very good price/performance.

It indeed was relatively non-common battery type, it wasn't among types usually carried in fuel station shops and in most supermarkets either. So simplest i guess is to buy online. But as for first time battery running flat i waited too long and at one point simply sat in car that i could open only with mechanical key, with alarm that won't shut up and engine that i couldn't start, i needed to put temporary another, thinner (don't remember type though), 3V battery with some folded paper to ensure contact :). I'm sure you can find it online, but now i finally found one local store that carry CR1632 too. IIRC Toyota's part number was MPN 89745-YZZ03, but searching by CR1632 should widen purchase choices.

My MY2014 has CR1632. I doubt it being changed in later years. P.S. Suggest to buy two batteries & put spare not in spare fob, but in glovebox (to not search shop when one needs). AFAIK with battery in it, fob transmits all the time, for smart key access to work, no? Thus i guess, spare will last longer if not in fob. Also when battery may soon end, it's usually lit on dash. IIRC with low battery there is still chance of smartkey signal to detect if you wave it near start button, to get through pinch, and experimentally i still drove for two weeks when it started signalling about low battery, but better replace in timely fashion for convenience sake.

Not so regarding rebuild kits. See part numbers for my previous post. Repair kits include only rubber bits, like those "cylinder slide bushes" around guides, piston dustboots and such, and those kits are per axle. No tin shims in those kits. Separate part numbers for end shims, but IIRC cover shims and shims between those and pads from scheme in next post are included in set of stock brake pads (i never bought another OE pad set, so not 100% sure, once stockers were done, next set were DS2500 w/o those). Some aftermarket pads also include such in set. When i asked more experienced guys if i should try to reuse them for some track pad sets w/o those, they said no. Just "brake pad support plates" shims.