How (and why) to Ramble on your goat sideways
09-25-2013, 04:31 PM
got back from visiting my rich brother. Spent most of the time driving cars.
Drove his daily 2013 Jaguar XKR-S
Drove and puked up alcohol sick in his 2014 Rolls Royce Ghost
Test drove a lambo gallardo, and aventador
Now here I am, back home. Dammit.
Here is my hungover goofy *** in the driver's seat before we go eat at the beverly hills hotel.
here I am trying to take a picture of us cruising down Rodeo Drive but then he floored it.
Drove his daily 2013 Jaguar XKR-S
Drove and puked up alcohol sick in his 2014 Rolls Royce Ghost
Test drove a lambo gallardo, and aventador
Now here I am, back home. Dammit.
Here is my hungover goofy *** in the driver's seat before we go eat at the beverly hills hotel.
here I am trying to take a picture of us cruising down Rodeo Drive but then he floored it.
Reply
0
0
09-25-2013, 04:36 PM
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 3,214
Total Cats: 1,687
got back from visiting my rich brother. Spent most of the time driving cars.
Drove his daily 2013 Jaguar XKR-S
Drove and puked up alcohol sick in his 2014 Rolls Royce Ghost
Test drove a lambo gallardo, and aventador
Now here I am, back home. Dammit.
Here is my hungover goofy *** in the driver's seat before we go eat at the beverly hills hotel.
here I am trying to take a picture of us cruising down Rodeo Drive but then he floored it.
Drove his daily 2013 Jaguar XKR-S
Drove and puked up alcohol sick in his 2014 Rolls Royce Ghost
Test drove a lambo gallardo, and aventador
Now here I am, back home. Dammit.
Here is my hungover goofy *** in the driver's seat before we go eat at the beverly hills hotel.
here I am trying to take a picture of us cruising down Rodeo Drive but then he floored it.
We call your brother our poor neighbor.
People are concerned he'll be driving the market price down around here.
Reply
0
0
09-25-2013, 04:41 PM
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 3,214
Total Cats: 1,687
On totally unrelated news, turns out KYB AGX shocks are perfectly revalveable...
They cut the top open on a lathe and go at it.
I spoke with the tech who actually does the work today.
I even located a couple of shock dynos so I can do before and after testing on them.
Things are looking good.
(This is all charity work for a poor neighbor, btw.)
They cut the top open on a lathe and go at it.
I spoke with the tech who actually does the work today.
I even located a couple of shock dynos so I can do before and after testing on them.
Things are looking good.
(This is all charity work for a poor neighbor, btw.)
Reply
0
0
09-25-2013, 07:48 PM
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Istanbul, Turkey
Posts: 3,214
Total Cats: 1,687
I feel like a goddamn post *****, but could you guys just take a look at this:
https://www.miataturbo.net/suspensio...ll-work-75206/
https://www.miataturbo.net/suspensio...ll-work-75206/
Reply
0
0
09-26-2013, 08:04 PM
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Pittsburgh PA
Posts: 1,163
Total Cats: 12
Slow day at the shop, only billed about $1,000(plus another $750 which was waiting on pick-up). So, what's a miata owner to do with his spare time? Remove the baby teeth on the 94.
I can hear the E-stock protests already.
EDIT: Had a 2k job lined up for tomorrow, AC compressor (among other smaller things) on a Volvo, but they guy is gonna find a used pump. Still $750 in labor... W00T!
I can hear the E-stock protests already.
EDIT: Had a 2k job lined up for tomorrow, AC compressor (among other smaller things) on a Volvo, but they guy is gonna find a used pump. Still $750 in labor... W00T!
Reply
0
0
09-27-2013, 01:33 AM
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
Damn it ****, you've clogged up my HDD's. Two 500GB backups can't keep up. It's finally hit that point where it now takes like 30 seconds to populate an album folder, whereas is used to handle that in less than a second. It was time anyway, these old drives are only SATA II, so I"m missing out on a lot of transfer speed. I'm now transferring ~400GB of data and it's estimated to take about 6 hours. Ugh. New drive is a 1TB WD Black, the only brand and model HDD I purchase. Old ones are the 500GB SATA II versions. They will still make a nice backup array.
Reply
0
0
09-27-2013, 01:52 AM
Damn it ****, you've clogged up my HDD's. Two 500GB backups can't keep up. It's finally hit that point where it now takes like 30 seconds to populate an album folder, whereas is used to handle that in less than a second. It was time anyway, these old drives are only SATA II, so I"m missing out on a lot of transfer speed. I'm now transferring ~400GB of data and it's estimated to take about 6 hours. Ugh. New drive is a 1TB WD Black, the only brand and model HDD I purchase. Old ones are the 500GB SATA II versions. They will still make a nice backup array.
Reply
0
0
09-27-2013, 02:18 AM
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
Just realized I was upset with my old USB 2.0 external, not my SATA II internals. So never mind. I would like a USB 3.0 external. These transfer rates are ****! I am still hoping WD has worked some magic to make these drives a little faster than their older ones. Still the same 64MB cache, but double the capacity. Probably much the same transfer wise unfortunately. Not that I've ever been bothered by it much.
Reply
0
0
09-27-2013, 05:29 AM
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Birmingham Alabama
Posts: 7,930
Total Cats: 45
Yeah it has USB 3.0. I bought this old 1TB HDD when 1TB first hit the market, which uses USB 2.0 only. So I'm stuck with super slow transfers. It's a 5400rpm drive based on some old WD Green drive with power saving **** that further drags the speeds down. There just about has to be an issue somewhere though, 15-20MB/s transfer is slow even for this kind of drive. I've tried both FAT32 and NTSF and neither helps with speed. Oh well, it'll be replaced eventually. It only gets used once every few months for a massive backup of everything.
I know it'll only read and write as fast as it is capable of. Like I said, I had a brain fart and was thinking SATA when I really meant USB. This new internal drive will make a world of difference though. I've been noticing things getting slower and slower over the last 6 months as I approached ~90% drive capacity. Now it's just ridiculously slow. 500GB just isn't enough these days. I have two 500's, but I use them as redundant backups to one another. Now I can retire them to other backup and storage use. They are really good WD RE4 Enterprise drives. Should last for as long as I could realistically ever need them to work.
I know it'll only read and write as fast as it is capable of. Like I said, I had a brain fart and was thinking SATA when I really meant USB. This new internal drive will make a world of difference though. I've been noticing things getting slower and slower over the last 6 months as I approached ~90% drive capacity. Now it's just ridiculously slow. 500GB just isn't enough these days. I have two 500's, but I use them as redundant backups to one another. Now I can retire them to other backup and storage use. They are really good WD RE4 Enterprise drives. Should last for as long as I could realistically ever need them to work.
Reply
0
0
09-27-2013, 09:29 AM
Elite Member
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,799
Total Cats: 179
Do you guys go back and re-watch the videos you have saved or are you just digital hoarders?
I have a large photo collection, but I use the pictures for Apple TV wallpapers that I have up while playing music during gatherings at the house. I have virtually zero videos saved.
I have a large photo collection, but I use the pictures for Apple TV wallpapers that I have up while playing music during gatherings at the house. I have virtually zero videos saved.
Reply
0
0
09-27-2013, 10:54 AM
Boost Pope
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago. (The less-murder part.)
Posts: 33,020
Total Cats: 6,588
There are a couple of problems with streaming video sites.
One is that they don't offer a very large variety of content. In fact, I was really blown away by how LITTLE content was actually available on Netflix when I was using my sister's subscription this past December. It was really startling how slim the pickings were, and Hulu + isn't much better.
As someone who has just about filled up a 2TB drive, I think I can speak to this.
Yes, with a but:
Once I have finished watching all six seasons of a TV show that aired ten years ago, I am probably not going to re-watch any of it in the near future. It's quite likely, however, that in several years time, I will say "Man, I haven't seen OZ in forever. I think I'll re-watch that," and enough time will have gone by that by this point, it's pretty much like watching it for the first time.
Now, I could obviously go and hunt down all of the original media again at that point, but with hard drive space being as cheap as it is, it's hardly worth the bother. I mean, right now 3TB seems to be the sweet spot in terms of cost-per-size, at around $130 retail. Assume that I replace my media drive about once every 5 years (a fairly accurate average), and it only costs me 28 cents a year to hang onto all of The Sopranos (at 480p in divx) or about 63 cents a year to archive all five seasons of Breaking Bad (at 720p in MKV).
Now, let's assume that a streaming company actually existed which provided me with access to everything I wanted to watch, and that this hypothetical company charged only as much per month Hulu + or Netfucks. So that's $7.99/mo, or $95.88 per year, or $479.40 every five years. That's about four times as much as it costs me to host the data myself, with the added benefit that I get to carry content with me on my mobile devices (laptop, phone, etc) and access them in places from which I do not have high-speed internet access (on an airplane, in the subway, etc.)
One is that they don't offer a very large variety of content. In fact, I was really blown away by how LITTLE content was actually available on Netflix when I was using my sister's subscription this past December. It was really startling how slim the pickings were, and Hulu + isn't much better.
Yes, with a but:
Once I have finished watching all six seasons of a TV show that aired ten years ago, I am probably not going to re-watch any of it in the near future. It's quite likely, however, that in several years time, I will say "Man, I haven't seen OZ in forever. I think I'll re-watch that," and enough time will have gone by that by this point, it's pretty much like watching it for the first time.
Now, I could obviously go and hunt down all of the original media again at that point, but with hard drive space being as cheap as it is, it's hardly worth the bother. I mean, right now 3TB seems to be the sweet spot in terms of cost-per-size, at around $130 retail. Assume that I replace my media drive about once every 5 years (a fairly accurate average), and it only costs me 28 cents a year to hang onto all of The Sopranos (at 480p in divx) or about 63 cents a year to archive all five seasons of Breaking Bad (at 720p in MKV).
Now, let's assume that a streaming company actually existed which provided me with access to everything I wanted to watch, and that this hypothetical company charged only as much per month Hulu + or Netfucks. So that's $7.99/mo, or $95.88 per year, or $479.40 every five years. That's about four times as much as it costs me to host the data myself, with the added benefit that I get to carry content with me on my mobile devices (laptop, phone, etc) and access them in places from which I do not have high-speed internet access (on an airplane, in the subway, etc.)
Reply
0
0
09-27-2013, 11:20 AM
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
There are a couple of problems with streaming video sites.
One is that they don't offer a very large variety of content. In fact, I was really blown away by how LITTLE content was actually available on Netflix when I was using my sister's subscription this past December. It was really startling how slim the pickings were, and Hulu + isn't much better.
One is that they don't offer a very large variety of content. In fact, I was really blown away by how LITTLE content was actually available on Netflix when I was using my sister's subscription this past December. It was really startling how slim the pickings were, and Hulu + isn't much better.
Reply
0
0
