Church

Instead of training they may also have step-by-step detailed instructions, that they will carefully follow .. at very slow rate. Luckily this time Toyota will pay (and also may have some generic set of time planned/charged for this specific work by some theoretical average toyota servicemen), otherwise, hourly pay rates, ya know ..

Imho that how drastic that problem of carbon deposits might be, is slightly exaggerated, at least with modern fuels, that these days usually contain also misc additives including ones that reduce carbon buildup. I don't expect it to cause noticeable problems any sooner then by mileage wear of other parts engine will need overhaul. Or also possible, that car will be sold prior that.

Seems that i found answer. From thread about this on other forum, there was mentioned url: https://www.toyota-tech.eu/euro5search/Campaigns Entered my VIN there, and seems that i'm affected Never had any experience with any recalls in past. How they are usually handled? Are they fixed free of charge if warranty is ended or it will be at my expense? Can fact, that i'm second owner, be obstacle?

Any more details on which are affected? Mine is registered in 2014 spring, so would prefer data on VIN range or manufactured dates ..

It's more question of not 'how often', but rather for 'how long'. And that is almost always second or less, unless it's some drifting, where one whole slide w/o upshifting keeps readlined with rpms bouncing of redline cutoff..

It's just like with runner lengths on exhaust header (eg. Ace header, with 150/250/350 overpipes) one can manipulate best scavenging on certain rpm range, with making intake longer one can shift optimization of input. IIRC something to do with resonance. Most commonly it's just moving peak elsewhere, not "gaining". Gain somewhere, loose somewhere. IIRC there were cars (or motorcycles?) that had dual path designed intake with valve closing one to switch between shorter or longer according to rpms engine was running at. Here is thread about those spacers if you want to read more. Problem being that since it came about, many images, eg. dyno charts at OP, probably gone due photobucket fiasko. (EDIT: found MotoIQ's blog on this outside forum, with pics) There is one extra bit i don't like in BPB, - their material. Imho being from metal makes them more expensive and also susceptible to heatsoak. As i wrote in previous post, imho these might be nice addition on car w/o aftermarket headers, less so on one with them, but probably wouldn't get in two cases - if car would be running on E85 (as imho most gains from E85 come at top rpms, from were BPB blocks shift power to lower range), and if car will have forced induction (probably one can even loose power. IIRC with turbo/supercharger car benefited from opposite - shorter intakes).

Those powerblocks do well on otherwise completely stock car. For some loss near redline, they add noticeably at lower/mid rpms (which also happen to be used more at daily driving). They move "optimisation", power & torque peak to lower rpms. They make a less sense to be used with custom ecu tune/other boltons though. Imho best bet for NA power gains is aftermarket airfilter+catless header+ecu tune. And, if at local fuel stations available, E85 as fuel (+E85 tune or flexfuel kit & flexfuel tune).

Why powerbank? Why not consider active phone mounts, in which inserted phones will automatically get power cable (which can be routed more neatly at that) connected? Using mounts will also ease phone usage for satnav.

Just better looking? Consider spray painting calipers. (of course using special paint that can stand better high temps). I guess, should cover 80% of that goal, for very cheap.

You shouldn't lump all of aftermarket BBKs together. Some vendors care more about keeping brake bias stock with careful part selection & testing it both on special brake test rigs & also on skidpads, some less, just quickly throw together parts from some part bin, make mounting adapter to fit it to specific car and call it done, some try to keep bias for front only BBK if used with OE rears, some may require to pair with their rear BBKs too, some may intentionally shift bias some way because they "think" that it will be better or for cars with specific aero mods that change grip bias and may benefit from brake bias change aswell. And then there are some users that don't care about bias and brake performance at all, if they only can put eg. brembo branded brake calipers for cheapest budget possible, even if retrofitting from completely different car, eg. cadillac sts, evo or sti. Also some race setups may have installed brake bias adjuster in mind. Hence i'd probably look more to big names/big vendors with proven reputation in field BBK products and look up description for those and inquiring extra nfo from vendor via email, if needed. GT86 tS & BRZ PP brembos, TRD brembos, APR formula BBK, Willwood kit for our cars, APR Essex sprint & endurance kits and such. There are several variables that may affect bias. Not just caliper slave cylinder areas, but also rotor diameter, brake piston distance from wheel center, brake pad shape & area. I'd be careful with trying to "calculate" bias by using just some of variables, if you don't know the rest. P.S. depending on your needs (eg. if driving reasonably short track sessions, not having forced induction and very grippy tires), it's possible that you may get by with stock (imho rather good for OE) brakes, just by changing pads/brake fluid and maybe adding brake air ducts. At very least this should much improve different wheel fitment/brake caliper clearance vs aftermarket BBK options. Should also be much easier on initial investment required and be much better for daily driving in corrosive winter-salt scenarios. (Some BBKs sometimes may let save on wearables in long term, if one tracks a lot).

with DIY replacement .. IIRC one should take care of not damaging wheel speed sensor, when taking hub off .. one DIY. DIY vid.

In future i'd use lucky fact that our cars have square tire setup and rotate tires front to rear every 10K to even out wear and get most mileage out of them, so that i have predictable rear-front grip bias, can easily change to rear in case of puncture tire from front, and change to new set all four at a time, if wished, even of other model tire.

Why custom make single one, if replacement set of all shouldn't cost too much?

Softness/handling feel aside, old tire's grip itself though might be severe limited. Heard once it's past first 1/3rd of thread depth of new, most tires show way less grip, and some cheaper worse tires but simply less worn may come ahead. That alongside little thread depth left making tire much easier to aquaplane. Some vendors claim that their are extra better exactly because they designed for good/reasonable grip even at higher levels of wear, but that might be just sales pitch.

Completely new tires may still have some lubricant from manufacturing mold (and maybe for storage?) left, but it propagates until it wears off after few first hundred miles driven not in extra sidewall softness of tire, but not showing full grip initially. How long have you driven new ones? And are really new ones exactly the same type as old ones? (there are several primacies types IIRC out there). As for whichever additives/oils/whatever added to rubber compound itself drying out/wearing out by long age .. not caring much about that, as not using any tire past 3rd season, and now, when i'm taking car also to track, no tire set lasts even season.

I wouldn't call it no problem running wheel with one nut missing. I'd think of it as driving with spacesaver tire. For not more then few days at most and very lightly, not speeding much, not much side loads, with extra care driving around road holes & speed bumps and such, regularly checking how other lugnuts hold. I have no statistical data, how well lesser amount of nuts will hold, but wouldn't feel myself safe driving without any precautions if not having properly secured all of them.

If one got stripped, out of precaution i'd check state of rest too. There is nothing to "fix" on old, just to replace. Most often i see mentioned ARP studs. If you want thread like OE, it's of M12x1.25 thread. If you change not just one or on not just one wheel, one can also change all to eg. M12x1.5 threaded ones, which imho should be even more thread stripping resistant, but then one also will need to replace all lugnuts with new thread. If you got stripped OE one .. imho not worth getting aftermarket aluminium lugnuts, rather some generic steel lugnuts. If replacement studs are of extra length, to further up chances of not stripping them, then worth getting longer open ended lugnuts, or otherwise closed ended ones like oem may run too short to completely secure the wheel. OE wheels (and most aftermarket ones) need so called in slang "tuners" lugnuts, of conical 60dg taper shape. Don't know anything about local to you service shops, so of course no suggestion on that.

I'd prefer RX8 over twins too .. IF not the rotary. Some turbo 2lr four-pot imho shouldn't worsen CG & add mass that much to ruin it, yet would make it so much more longer lasting/reliable. Otherwise it also has brilliant handling and even more practical body/cabin. But engine is reason why i never considered it (even while for some it was THE reason to get it ).

Nothing wrong with slight stretch within reasonable limits. It removes some sidewall flex and may make steering feel a bit sharper with some tires. It won't help completely and in all cases (eg. with winter & all season tires most probably no matter stretch, steering will still feel mushy), also these days good performance selection at reasonable prices and good availability is much better then in long past ago, with average tire profile being lower, and average tire sidewalls being stiffer. Problems come when one goes to unreasonable hella-stretch levels, because in some groups of people what was once done to counter some drawbacks of tires of few decades ago and to save money on buying normal tires instead of performance race tires, turned out to dumb "scene" "cool" levels with actually compromising handling and safety. Another reason i've seen unreasonable stretch levels, is when people overlowered car too much or installed too wide wheels .. so using that unsafe stretch only to not rub on wheel arches. But one thing is purely show car, not driven anywhere, but i doubt people can enjoy if on high speed track (or even on highway/public roads) someone in front has unexpectedly tire debeaded/separated from wheel due overstretch+high loads. From here, "safe" width ranges, 225 seems "max" reasonable for 7, within "ideal" range of 7.5 & 8" wide rims, and "min" for 8.5, so should be fine safe tire mount wise, and does what you wanted, removed some slack from tire sidewall flex. I'd probably wouldn't try to fit it on even wider then 8.5 though.

It all "depends". For example on slow speed auto-x with many transitions/turns even our cars may benefit from most grip they can get, in addition to that of grippier compound also including wider tire widths. On HPDE/track driving with faster speeds and less turns stock limited NA power limits more, thus extra side grip is offset by slowed down acceleration from more rolling inertia of heavier tires & wheels and more rolling resistance. Also depending on mods. For example if one installs forced induction, then cons of heavier wheels & tires is felt less, but extra grip in turn from wider tires may help. Also with forced induction speeds will be higher, thus also heat put into tires (the more track oriented tires are, the more their grip depends on temps too, seriously underperforming, if one cannot get enough heat into them for best grip, which is possible scenario with very wide tires but slow speed due lack of power, as wider tires need more heat put into them to heat up. (Anybody remembers as exaggerated example TopGear ep with Hamster driving F1 car too slow, and needing to drive back to pits to heat tires, due otherwise dangerous lack of grip on too cold tires from too slow driving?)). Another thing that may enhance or hurt performance might be gearing change via eg. different ratio FD. On some tracks shorter gearing may better laptimes, on others - result in worse ones due possibly extra gear switches with such ratio needed, depending on specific track layouts. ----------- If car is used all year round and weather in country is such, that there are "real" winters, for winter use i'd advocate narrow 16" winter wheel & tire set. Cheaper tires, better grip on ice/snow, more comfort/bad road compliance, and lost steering sharpness .. it will be lost from soft rubber compound and moving around small rubber patches of winter tires anyway. Many 16" wheels clear our stock brakes. To keep stock twins characteristic of lively car/fun to drive even at low/legal speeds, if power is still FA, imho worth not straying far from stock tire sizes of 215-225 R17. Wheels are still light, good performance tire choice in 17" sizing, tires are cheaper, steering is sharp enough, good enough brake clearance for aftermarket BBK options, and simply by choosing grippier tires one may add enough extra grip for most uses. For budget conscious we have "free" stock 17 set. If one's goals specifically target auto-x .. still 17, but eg. 235-245 and of "cheater tires"/"one lap wonders" type, eg. RE71 "Real racing" .. given unlimited choice by regulations & budget, racing teams usually choose smallest wheels they can, that have wished tires for that size and that still clear brakes that are used. There is also bit, that if results differ by split seconds and competitiveness is very high, then every slightest advantage counts is worth gaining upper hand at. Forged wheels set for $4K? Will net just 0.2s per every lap? Sure!! But as tires are single most important component for almost any car, in many race classes/race monoseries, tires (and sometimes wheels) are regulated of specific size and often manufacturer & model, to up/level competitiveness, limit budget, be according sponsorship. If one has forced induction, it may make sense to go a bit wider. Also with FI often one installs BBK, and some of those either may require more limited wheel choice to clear them, so sometimes R18 wheels in addition also may make sense. 18" in general imho might be not that bad choice with something slightly better vs 17", something slightly worse, nor cons nor pros not outweighting by much. I guess, more of subjective thing/choice, though personally i lean to 17". 19-21" with thin & expensive "rubber skin" .. cons outweight almost not existing pros (except looks thing, but looks of such is very subjective, and many dislike), and if such big & heavy barrels are fitted to underpowered car known for good handling that will take a hit, to me it would hint that owner doesn't like car for what i like and is more of poser that pays own money to make car perform worse, in same way if i'd see twins with too wide tires, hella-stance too lowered, hella-camber and alike "trends". Staggered tire/wheel choice not worth going for in all cases, due long list of cons i'm too lazy to write and no pros except simply being able to put slightly even wider maximally tires in rear due wheel arch clearance and misconception that if it's done on some supercars, it will be better on ours too or subjectively will make owner closer to driving supercar that one will never afford. ----------- To each his own. Everybody has different preferences. Just thrown some info to lessen cases of justifying some arguable choices with upping performance, when in reality those will not.

You mean something like Toyota Techstream?

In my imagination synchros are functionally close to clutches. Fast gear changes may force them to even out rotational speeds quicker, but should synchros wear be that different with both slow and fast gear engage, if rpm difference (thus rotational energy to bleed) to even out (if rev-matched) as similar? My line of thought goes that just like with clutch, quicker or slower release (if both done smoothly) won't change much it's wear, but high revving and dumping it (like if with high rpm difference with synchros) - will increase due high rpm difference & higher torque of engine at high rpms? I am driving for 11 years, but several driving technics am starting to learn only now during past two years that i started to track this car. In sense, i admire that you are "doing the right thing" for already so long, but i have to overcome many bad learnt habits and in addition to that learning new stuff at my age takes extra effort & time. Just like original AE86 that was sometimes referred as car that teaches driver, GT86 took up that role for me

Imho biggest wear factor for synchros is non-rev matching + skipping gears. Or costing in neutral and non rev-matching when putting in gear back. Or other scenarios, when it results to not just "normal" 500-1K rpm difference to even out prior gear engage, but 3+K. Synchros might be not that expensive, but unfortunately cost charged for overhauling gearbox/changing them, is. So not sure if slow gear switch is better, as rpms may fall off too much during such, and if combined with non-rev matching .. with timely fast gearswitch engine rpms often fall off just enough for right speed when upshifting. Resting hand on gear stick IIRC wears down more shift selector forks. Many drivers don't rev match or even coast in neutral, but they often get by with synchros still lasting long in their generic family cars by early upshifts and rarely flooring for fuel economy reasons/or to drive with slow & steady traffic flow, when rpms one should rev to for gear one switches in are not that far from idle rpms. Cars that get more pushed with enthusiastic/sport driving, may suffer extra wear from non rev-matching as there might be more occasions of bigger rpm difference, especially on downshifts. Mine didn't fail, but i'm sure i did put enough unnecessary wear through several trackdays, when i still hadn't yet started learning rev-matching/throttle blipping on downshifts and such, and just forced gear shift, and sometimes even (ab)used such tranny & clutch shock to break traction/get rear sliding.

Yeah, and better to do "hummering mod" before mounting undertray back, as it may rub off optional thermal coating

Half leather/alcantara looks good, not that sweaty in summer .. but in these cars imho signs of wear on side supports with leather appear slightly too soon. Not that i care too much, how car drives matters to me manyfold then some interior wear, but seen many complaining, and also worn on mine too just after 10K km. Lauren: i sometimes take off coat too, if it's longer drive (unlike most common daily 20min to work) or performance drive (eg. on ice track) for less obstacles to handling from thick outerwear, but as in many cases my car usage starts with engine startup, then 5-10min brushing off snow from car, scrape ice from windows, by then cabin is already warmed up .. again to not need much heated seats.