UAS Pivoting Front Camber Arms (Started 29-4-2009) Current participants only to post

My apologies. I was actually the one to incorrectly point out to John that you were not on the list, but you can see how I could have easily made that mistake. It just seems rather odd, after all, that despite all your attempts to discredit UAS service and products, that you'd opt in for such a UAS exclusive.

I have nothing against you personally, Baz - in fact, I find your posts to be most coherent, sophisticated, eloquent, and generally quite pleasing to read - but, as of late, I've stumbled across a few threads where it is obvious that you have suffered both ire and angst. Unfortunately, as you are well aware, there are better channels of communication than a public forum where such emotions could be addressed - any other means would prove counter-productive, and dangerous. You shouldn't have to resort to vicariously expressing discontent through threads not started by yourself.

I don't know the history between the two of you, and I certainly don't enjoy taking sides (after all, ideally, this is a community) but it appears to me (as it would to any stranger to the forum,) that you're waging a personal vendetta against either John himself, or the business. This is just my view on the matter. I'd rather that those who've allegedly had bad dealings with John in the past to take their issues off the forum, and to discuss it with John through a more private (and constructive) medium.

And as for the very condescending remark on John's competence, I'm quite certain that John makes an effort to follow UAS-related threads, as he has done so in the past with invaluable technical discussions and other UAS-run GBs - maybe not so feverishly as of late - though I wouldn't blame him, considering the sheer amount of unsubstantiated claims and mud-slinging observed lately. Those threads make for very dull reading.

I really do wish that this community of enthusiasts realise that zero-accountability for public posts still doesn't give it the right to unchecked libel/vilification. I don't know about any of you guys, but I certainly didn't subscribe to the forum for that nonsense.

I'm not singling you out Baz (you're certainly not the first,) and, as I have already mentioned, I have the utmost respect for the clarity of your wisdom and for the contributions you've made to the forum, but this does not reflect well on you (and whoever else is interested in forming a lynch mob,) and is altogether very unfortunate.

Sorry for the tirade, but I really am desperate for a better forum.

 

I want em built as good as they possibly can be. If it takes longer I dont give a rats ass.

I spoke to John about the mod and/or alternative methods of accomplishing what was required . This needs to be done so hang onto your chairs. They will be ready when they are right.

 

Yep black baz Rob told me yesterday you were part of this gb which I thought was funny. I assumed you had just stuck your nose in. Rob as per normal is doing a gb and it is his gb after all.
This product willl be top class, and our best ever product release. It has had many engineers all over it. Including V8 Supercar engineers, motorsport engineers, automotive. Plus input from others in the know, like Tektrader, who as mentioned has had input. Plus years of testing on road and track and a few redesigns and improvements.

Black baz or others if you have any concerns, or questions, feel free to email me sales@300zx.com.au

 

very well put post Tek and to the point as per usual .

Others pls note , I am a GB participant, and I am neither a UAS fan nor a UAS critic . I have however been a reasonably frequent UAS customer, and whenever there has been either a hiccup or a disaster, ( neither of which have occurred often, or even when it has occurred have always been their fault ) I have found UAS to be amenable to taking appropriate action when dealt with by me in a courteous and respectful manner, that's always been fine by me.

I'm happy to wait till John is satisfied with his product.

(note : I do however turn 80 in 2037 )

 

A question and concern.

I'm new the GB's, I'm not an engineer.

My question:
I'm concerned that the years of development on the original arm must have surely included the grub screw and the testing must have validated the grub screw arrangement!
Hence, why! do I need a cotter pin if the grub screw theroretically passed such exhaustive and stringent testing.
Given the above testing regime, should there not be such meticulous R&D on the cotter pin.

I hope I've not missed anything that answered this.....
I'm after an answer to the grub screw being 'validated" in the original R&D not the "cotter pin" is better.

My concern as a first time GBer.
I give a rats ass....and would like to know where does the buyer stand. I'm happy to wait and I'm not advocating I want out...I'm just concerned that the below information was rightly advertised.... yet, The buyer is not protected in all of the "fine print"

Price: RRP on these will be $495/pair, group buy price for twenty buyers is $395/pair.
Timeframe: Once I have the 20 orders, we will be looking at eight weeks for production. The commitment from UAS requried to get them at this price is huge, so we need confirmed orders with money on the table!
How to Order: I will need a 50% deposit to confirm your order, please PM for details
Terms: As with all Group Buys, your deposit is your commitment to buy. It is non refundable once we go into production. Balance will be payable within two weeks of advising that the order is ready to send, failure to complete your purchase will result in your deposit being lost and your order being sold.[/I]

I hope my question and concerns can be answered.. and once again, I mean no malice to the GB because I'm in it and I'm keen to stop tyre wear on my own Lovely Z.

I'm new to GB's and simply seeking clarification through the forum.
I guess I'm unsure on this product now because I opted in on the original "selling points" and now they have changed. I hope my queries can be answered

Thanks in advance
Pete

 

Its called " Ongoing R&D " if you dont want continous improvement of the product, maybe these are not the product for you.

There are no other upper front arms in existance similar to these for a Z32. So suck it up.

In short. Dont like it? Go buy Midori arms and get out the GB. I am sure you can have your deposit refunded if you ask.

 

Um, thats an interesting take on discussing an engineering question. Its not that hard to answer surely?

 

No need to be so harsh, I'm guessing cool300zx just wanted to understand a little more detail in regards to the design change. I personally can't even picture the change as I never even knew a grub screw was used and where it was placed. I've never seen this arm first hand or seen a technical drawing.

I agree that theres no other upper arms like these in existance and hence most of us will all wait for these to be completed.

We are all excited to get hold of these arms regardless of grub screw or cotter pin.

If there is more detail on the change it may be worth posting it up.

I personally just want to know what the new ETA is as my current arms are in a poor state.

 

Go Tektrader. It is called and IMPROVEMENT. Not a redesing and only on the fixing used to lock the big threaded main components together. Z32's have list often discussed of small to fairly major functional, and reliable issues, from factory. It was about four years in the desgin and planning but better than it would have been should it have taken one or two years of desinging and testing. It is actually costing my company about an extra $3000 directly to get Terry to make and improve this fastening system. He is buying extra tooling, amortised over 10 units. AT NO MORE COST TO GB HERE. OUTSIDE of GB price will need to be increased understandably. On top of this there have been many more hours spent and more testing.
This slight change did not really need mentioning, other than reason or explanation for delay. I was just keeping everyone in the loop.
Thanks for your support, input and understanding.

 

More detail required ???

The grub screw lock that stops the threaded shaft from rotating and confines the twisting ability to the central bearing has been beefed up.

End of story.

Without a drawing, any explaination of where it is and what is does is just ridiculous as I doubt anyone can recreate a drawing from a verbal description.

As I imagine the drawing is quite confidential and not for release. Any further explaination aside from " we improved it " is a bit useless.

The fundamental design hasnt changed AT ALL.

Lets all just let UAS get on with it. Any delay in the course of bringing these to us is sure not in JP's program as I would think he would want the rest of the CASH ASAP as I would.

 

Thanks for the update John. Im not concerned about time or redesign, just interested in what was going on behind the scenes. Ive been a fan of your design since you first made it public and have been holding off replacing my worn upper arms waiting for these ones to become available:drool::cool2:

Edit: Tektrader I dont know whats gotten into you at the moment but you sound like your taking the questioning a bit too personal lol

 

Gazza, Nothing personal. Just frustrated.

I have been on Johns case for about 6 months to bring this GB on. I need these deperately. But not at the expense of function or quality.

If they needed to be changed for the better I wouldnt question UAS's reasons for doing it if we get a better part.

I would have expected everyone else to think the same.

The fact JP took the time to advise speaks volumes and we shouldnt feel the need give him the third degree when he is trying to give us the best product possible.

Pages of drivel in this thread isnt gonna get them here any quicker.

 

are there any spair sets. i was worried about the securing nut coming loose. if this has been rectified im pretty keen

 

Thanks for the update.

No third degree, simply a question to help understand.

My only dealings with UAS is I've visited the UAS website!, however, the talk on this forum is always positive.
I simply wanted reassurance because I do not have the benefit of first hand experience with UAS's work. Hence, I can NOT be expected to think like others who have had the benefit of their work, because I have not.

Again, as mentioned. Thanks for the info.
I got a good PM re questions... Thanks to the member who sent that.

I did not mean to offend only to understand.
Oh, and to not bog down the GB thread, I'll directly PM those concerned... for now I understand that UAS is highly valued by lots of members and that speaks volumes for the work.

 

that's because 4 of your 5 points were added in after the original post. Rob has already half answered the first point you posted before-edit, and should not be expected to know why fulcrum failed?

 

Yep, you are right. It was meant for the other thread.

As for the rest of it, I guess you really can't tell the difference - a pity.

 

Pedantry?