"hi, my name is Golovko, and I really love it up the ass"

5/7/2007 1:10:12 PM

there is a special thread for you, k?

5/7/2007 1:12:23 PM

stfu, plz, qq... you have absolutely no vocabulary. I can see saving keystrokes for often used words, to lighten the burden of quick conversation, but this is not the goddamn military, and you have a few minutes to say something right.

I've got a deal for you:

say these fucking words into a voice recording program, save it to MP3, post it on TWW in a prominent spot, and if you do so perfectly, and I will absolutely never post about the evo being ugly again. I will merely post :
"BTDT" and a link to another thread.
for "Been There Done That"

Here's what you've got to say, obviously filling in the blanks and not saying the words in parentheses:
"
-Hello, my name is _______ (your real name)
-I am _____ (your age) years old, today is ______ (the date)
-I am/was a student at NCSU. I majored in _____________(your field of study)
-I want to be a __________(job you actually can do with your education.. I don't care what you did, you're still a delusional fuckhead to me)
-I go by Golovko on TWW, or at least I did through early May 2007

-I think that because I have a right to choose what I read, I also control what has been said. Therefore, by ignoring people who actually think about what they say, I can be omnipotent on TWW regardless of what may actually go-around and come-back-around to me some day.

-I drive a Mitsubishi Evolution VIII/ IX (I don't really give a shit which one you have)

-I honestly believe it is a good looking car and has a great shape, even without all the equipment that makes it any different from a Hertz- specification lancer. I do not mean the one that the new Evo X is based on. That may actually be a good car to start with. Time will tell.

-I realize that for the Evo to truly be a decent looking car and that I'm not suffering from a juvenile form of delusion wherein performance and spoilers would lead me to believe that a hideous car is attractive, the shape of the original car must look at least somewhat good first. Which means I believe a lancer is at least a somewhat good looking car, and definitely better looking than an overweight 350z, which looks the same, regardless of specification. Isn't that a silly idea?

-I also would like a CL convertible over a Jaguar XKR.

-I expect people to appreciate how I've contributed to TWW, especially those who might have something to say. Especially those who write a lot and then I pretend they didn't write anything.

-Thank you, and I would really love some cock right now.
"

And just to keep you honest (I know that's new), I know what you're thinking right now, and by saying it here it ought to head you off if you do any of the following or pull any other sort of stunt that is equivalently idiotic and again, at my exasperation of a better synonym, JUVENILE:


"Man, this dude is crazy. What can I do with this crap. I mean, I could keep posting here, but I can go bigger right? I mean, I am a HUGE asshole on TWW, right? You know what would be fun? I could actually do something like what he says but then say his name instead of mine. Or I could do the recording thing and say danmangt40 is stupid or a fag or I could say something about one of the cars he's mentioned, like the jags or the 350z or some other car that I don't like that he's pointed out. That would really boil him"

Prove your mettle. Or you can continue being an ass.

5/7/2007 2:01:03 PM

wtf is all this shit

5/7/2007 2:05:31 PM

^it's me and golovko having it out over the evo. Unfortunately for legitimate posts like the short one I wrote in reaction to the list about cars that were most expensive to insure, this is actually relevant to the Evo, and I won't have it out in another thread because then Golovko got to tell me where to go. And he doesn't have that right. This is where he fucked it up, I'm not moving it for his convenience.

5/7/2007 2:17:14 PM

I wasn't paying attention to it when the thead was started, but Golovko also started the thread for "OEPII's random hot cars". Just what kind of shit are you trying to pull Golovko? Afraid that your threads might actually have people who use TWW in a manner different from you? You know, legitimate conversation and giving new cars their own threads since Oh, I dunno, the car for each thread is why a thread exists and not because you want to shove other users into threads you can ignore? Maybe I should be honored to be so segregated. I've irked you. Well good. I'll take it as a chink in your armor. That's gotta be close to half as good as ripping the spoiler off your evo. OEPII, post wherever the fuck you want. I like the pix you post. No need to have them shoved into a dark corner just because this idiot wants you to.

separate threads should spin off when initiated by those who want a sep thread for their own posts, not when some loser in a corner wants a user he doesn't like out of a thread he wants to read. This is equal-access.

5/7/2007 2:47:45 PM

hey man, go take a walk around the lake before you QQ all over your keyboard.

5/7/2007 5:27:19 PM

this much anger over a turbo'd jap 4 banger!

what the fuck is wrong with you people?111one!point

5/7/2007 6:49:51 PM

*shrug*

5/7/2007 6:50:32 PM

Do you seriously have to get 4 new tires if one goes flat? Why cant you just shave one to match.

Evo Rookie

5/7/2007 7:07:16 PM

posted from other thread.

I never said you or anyone else can't like the look of the evo.

I just said that to think an evo looks good requires that you either think the lancer is also similarly as good looking or that your entire attraction to the car is because of its performance and its visually different parts.

If you can deem a car good looking for pasted on parts that don't actually change the shape, then you've admitted that your attraction is based on the parts. Which is boostgoggles.

Which is kinda like a deaf guy saying he had a preference to one american idol contestant (edit: because she showed some cleavage or she was more attractive or had a nice personality. All these things get noticed, but wtf does it have to do with whether she can sing? not a damn thing.)

YOUR problem is you didn't read shit.

I won't be funnelled off into some side thread when some troll decides to jack my posts that actually say something

[Edited on May 7, 2007 at 7:21 PM. Reason : .]

5/7/2007 7:08:34 PM

^^If you've got different rolling diameters, the evo's gonna think a wheel is slipping. Not to mention the actual grip differences

5/7/2007 7:16:10 PM

hey guys! check out my post from another thread!

Quote :

"Image of a 2006 Lancer Evolution IX Image of a 2006 Lancer ES "

5/7/2007 9:45:51 PM

997 GT3 doesn't change the 'shape' of the 911 yet it looks so much hotter than a 997 911

5/7/2007 9:50:01 PM

Quote :

"^^If you've got different rolling diameters, the evo's gonna think a wheel is slipping. Not to mention the actual grip differences"

I went through this issue myself, got a flat en route to our tail of the dragon trip. I had to get the tire replaced immediately so unfortunately i couldn't get the same rubber as the other three tires.

The worst issue is if the tire diameters are off more than 1/32 to 1/16 you have to worry about your differential overheating. Luckily since my car had only 3k miles on it i was ok, but i have to keep checking since i'm sure the different compounds will wear down at different rates.

Luckily it was the back right tire so the fronts still do a great job, but there is a noticeable difference in performance on what i'll call...'spirited' left turns. i'm just waiting till i can replace all four tires, hopefully in another two months.

Another option is ordering a new tire and having it shipped shaved to the right tread depth, tire rack does it for 20 bucks i think. Advans are way too expensive for me to consider that option though.

5/8/2007 10:04:13 AM

^^

"looks so much hotter" /= "looked good to begin with"
how many erroneous misinterpretations are you gonna make today?

this part is a side note, and unrelated to what follows.
Don't cheat. You know damn well that the lancer pic you've added is a later lancer-models-only facelift. The evo's mods are based on the earlier squarer car that it still looks a lot like, more accurately, the lancer as it was sold in Europe when the VII came out, not even the re-grilled lancer we got. What you've posted is equivalent to posting a pic of the just-replaced ('02-?) jellybean camry (literally in white in a dealer lot on a rainy day) and last generation ES300 coach edition in that flawless cranberry red.

analogy of the 997 is faulty. explanation:
Most people who just love the 997 GT3 probably don't hate the 997 to start with. But let's be clear. the 997 is not a ground-up shape, it's an evolution of the 996. And even that wasn't wholly original. The 996 was a "new" car, but heavily pinned down by what porsche and 911 fans have loved in a shape since Dr. Porsche was call-screening Nazis. If someone hates the 997 Carrera, it's because they think its a poor dressing of the general shape they love, some earlier 911, as though it were some options package they wouldn't have selected out of all 911s that have ever been. Such a viewer might be pointed out as AVOIDING boostgoggles. (defined below: they might actually be suffering from retrogoggles if they're overlooking the change in footprint and curb weight the 911 has sustained over time)


again, I'm not the one saying the lancer isn't attractive to someone. I'm just calling you out on your boostgoggles, which is based on your understandable dislike of the lancer, which I think I ought to define here:

Boost-goggles:
pronunciation: 'bü-st _ 'gä-g&lz
Boost goggles is a slang term for a phenomenon in which one's excess consumption of driving fast incapacitates the viewer by making a car's potential implied ability to be good to drive, through the appearance of go-fast add-ons, regardless of effectiveness, more physically attractive.

The effect is latent and goes unnoticed when the admirer thought the standard car was attractive to begin with (not unlike a guy ogling a woman sober he would have also been attracted to while drunk), but is there nonetheless if the car appears more attractive merely by the addition of visually identifiable go-fast parts, just as beergoggles hasn't done a man wrong if he goes home with someone he's actually somewhat attracted to in the first place.

It is important to realize that because tastes vary, boostgoggles is an effect that must be viewed on the viewers' pre-spoilered opinion of the shape.
i.e.- if the user hates dislikes econoboxes but the addition of expensive wheels and vents has the user changing his mind without the changes doing something to substantially alter the core objected-to shape, such as moving hardpoints or windshield angle or fender shape, he would be identifiable as suffering from boostgoggles to those who are aware of his opinion of the similar, unadorned car.

boostgoggles and its related conditions are only embarassing if the viewer in fact does dislike the unadorned car's appearance or denies that he actually has compromised his judgment by the pasted-on equipment

Boostgoggles has other parallel delusional spinoffs as:

retrogoggles -impairs objection to a car if its appearance is reminiscent of an earlier time/car, excusing some other inadequacy of the car- e.g. those who will buy a (LY) challenger regardless of its curb weight in the future but won't buy some other LX car today because it weighs too much and they would never drive such a heavy car, ever. Especially obvious to those who will not buy a new Camaro when it is available because they have the same curb weight objection to buying a now-departed GTO.

sortedgoggles - impairs ability to remember to affirm a long-held disapproval of a type of technology/ design choice is ignored when a car bearing the tech is attractive to the viewer or has performance in such great numbers as to blind the viewer to the flaw- e.g.- Corvette Z06 idolators who are violently opposed to leaf springs, overhead valves, low hp/L, shitty interiors; Fans of all mustangs who hate solid rear axles (exception: those who specifically have a thing for IRS Cobras)

OBVIOUSLY analagously related:
beer goggles
* Beer goggles is a slang term for a phenomenon in which one's consumption of alcohol makes physically unattractive people appear beautiful. The term is often associated with the awkward experience of waking up the following morning to discover that the person lying next to you is less attractive than you had previously believed (see also coyote ugly).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_goggles


More on the 911 (this is the first part where I'm actually stating my opinion of any specific car in this post):
The 997 is an easy car for a lot of people to say "looks pretty good" in general. It's not my cup of tea, but you gotta admit it's a pure shape. That's why it endures. It also meets a lot of the "looks that represent the machine" and minimum excess fender height and roofline criteria based on wheel height that I praised on the 350Z. The 911 looks like a car with its motor in its ass for a reason (and that reason isn't so it can be assembled quickly and for $pickle, like it might have been for an original beetle), regardless of whether that really makes any sense to the onlooker.

So, it is amusing to me, and REAFFIRMS my suspicions of your beergoggles if another car, especially one you and I seem to both agree is somewhat good looking car (the 911, although its even better if you really arent attracted to the base 997) has a package that allows an evo fan to be MORE attracted to a car of generally the same shape by adding wings and splitter and wheels and lowering the ride height... since they're visually identifiable go-fast parts. If you are attracted to the 911, then that's like the latent boostgoggles I was talking about above. Which in the note that followed, isn't embarassing.

I'll admit to some latent boostgoggles of my own.
I think Jeep GC Srt-8 looks pretty damn good, but I think the Grand Cherokee is not a half-bad looking truck to start with. My attraction to the srt-8 that might lead me so far as to walk up to one and walk around it, however, won't have me calling it hot while saying things like "oh, it's barely related at all to the base car." I also thought the Neon SRT4 was much more attractive than the other Neons... but that certainly isn't because I think it's wholly on one side of the attractive

added in edit from here down:
oops, posted before I finished that last sentence. I had just moved the lancer-facelift note to the top and forgot to go back.

the sentence should have read: "I also thought the Neon SRT4 was much more attractive than the other Neons... but that certainly isn't because I think the base neon wholly on one side of an unattractive|attractive scale and the SRT4 is on the other. They're both marginal boxes."

[Edited on May 9, 2007 at 12:15 PM. Reason : .]

5/9/2007 12:06:56 PM

lol, the 911 hasn't changed its basic shape since before the 70's. 996-997 biggest change in appearance are the headlight casings. you seriously need to give up. no one cares about your bullshit posts, in-fact hardly anyone is reading them. you are nothing but a wind-bag troll.

and again...if i think a car looks good or is hot, that is my opinion. the sooner you grasp this concept the less typing you will need to do in the future. Who died and made you dictator?

Stop while you aren't too far behind. nvm...you are already too far behind.

[Edited on May 9, 2007 at 12:22 PM. Reason : asdfqqloleloheln00btardtroll]

5/9/2007 12:21:07 PM

I hope you have good insurance and can get some attention-increasing drugs, cause I didn't say anything like that

5/9/2007 12:27:17 PM

sounds like someones an Evophobe.

[Edited on May 9, 2007 at 12:28 PM. Reason : QQ]

5/9/2007 12:28:12 PM

here's the thing. You can win this argument. Just admit you think the LANCER is a good looking car, and the the EVO is merely BETTER looking

edit:
'cuz if you were reading, that's the definition of the merely latent, and not embarassing form of boostgoggles

[Edited on May 9, 2007 at 12:30 PM. Reason : ]

5/9/2007 12:30:05 PM

UGLY




HOT

5/9/2007 12:32:03 PM

^boostgoggles. I'm done. Everyone in agreement PM Golovko 'cuz he don't read posts.

5/9/2007 12:34:04 PM

STILL UGLY, and this is going back to 2003.



still not an evo.

5/9/2007 12:34:19 PM

If yo mama ain't impressed by either, it's 'cuz she ain't sufferin from no boost goggles because she's been reading speed limit signs. I dare you to read my post defining that shit

5/9/2007 12:35:18 PM

^^I see identical roof, rolling diameter, height, trunk, length, center body width, and a spoiler that's merely ineffective. You sir, have constructed a temple to go-fast visuals. You better go home and sleep it off

5/9/2007 12:36:42 PM

do you suffer from mental retardation?

5/9/2007 12:36:45 PM

well, at least one of us knows that the other is sufferin from something. Only mine isn't speeding tickets

5/9/2007 12:37:55 PM

if i had known sooner i would have just agreed with you from your first post. I'm not one to give 'special' people a hard time. its not your fault.

5/9/2007 12:39:27 PM

well, at least one of us knows that the other is sufferin from something. Only mine isn't DUI's

5/9/2007 12:40:02 PM

well, at least one of us knows that the other is sufferin from something. Only mine isn't parking tickets

5/9/2007 12:40:24 PM

well, at least one of us knows that the other is sufferin from something. Only mine isn't a moving violation

5/9/2007 12:40:48 PM

5/9/2007 12:41:08 PM

plz to cross-reference this thread.

5/9/2007 12:42:40 PM

^might as well. and throw in a ban while they're at it. I don't know what else is more deserving that open admission of "I don't read posts" and assertions of mental retardation based on a refusal to use QQ

5/9/2007 12:43:56 PM

dude, seriously? *snicker*

5/9/2007 12:44:48 PM

^holy crap, I don't know if I can read all of your post. There might have been a verb or something that forms a sentence in there. Oh wait, I accidentally read all of it. guess I must have sneezed and in the billionth of a second I was looking I understood all of it.

die

5/9/2007 12:55:39 PM

you know what this page needs? more evo love...

5/9/2007 1:00:27 PM

5/9/2007 1:02:54 PM

is that thing a civic? its pretty badass! must be a type R or Si

5/9/2007 1:03:47 PM

I apologize for getting carried away this week.

I even neglected to read one of your posts until now. (Which is silly, considering the length of your posts.) You called me a troll. at first I was insulted, since that's the first time I can remember that being leveled at me, but you're right. My posts were really directed at you and not the evo. sorry. and you're right, you can like whatever you want. And if you really like something, you can think it looks good, I guess. You're merely taking the visuals of something you like and expressing attraction as a result.

I mean, what does it matter really? I mean, if someone wants to take a dump on the floor, stick some bbs wheel keychains on the corners and make a little cardboard spoiler for it and call it beautiful, sure that's gonna look bizarre to me. But if someone wants to worship it, including the way it looks, I guess that's still consistent.

My bad






V---- he was definitely kidding.

[Edited on May 11, 2007 at 4:32 PM. Reason : .]

5/11/2007 4:06:04 PM

Quote :

" that thing a civic? its pretty badass! must be a type R or Si"

you are kidding right? If not by the power vested in me by people who don't see a good turbo header and say its quad turbo... your car will be confiscated. ( i wish )

5/11/2007 4:27:15 PM

pistonheads drives an Evo IX FQ-360 (fucking quick 360 hp)
yeah, they sell 'em stock that way. must be nice.

http://www.pistonheads.com/roadtests/doc.asp?c=106&i=16254

5/11/2007 5:25:35 PM

FQ-400 FTW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1ZWJjC648I

5/11/2007 11:09:42 PM

^New Evo IX FQ-360s have better torque curve than evo VIII FQ-400. They went too big a turbo on that one... The FQ400 is the subject of one of my favorite top gear reviews. On-boost, a murcielago can't get away from it if there's a turn, but off-boost in a straight line, mommy-mobiles eat it for lunch. (granted, anyone in an evo's gonna just drop a gear, get in the torque and disappear, but if tractability's your thing, it ain't no z06 for standing start in 4th gear! I'll go find links... brb

5/12/2007 11:03:25 AM

^I'm pretty sure i've posted that video in the Garage about a dozen times. Its an old episode of top gear. the FQ-400 has never been the 'perfect buy' its always been the FQ-320, because you still get pretty much all the performance of the 400 minus all the set-backs.

5/12/2007 12:05:24 PM

Quote :

" V---- he was definitely kidding. "

who was the evo owner that was dead serious about the quad turbo thing.

5/12/2007 12:52:36 PM

^^oh ok. I couldn't find the vid. If you know where it is, you can go ahead and post it again.nm. here's the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uRmVbzsj0I

^sumfoo, you asked if Golovko was kidding about mistaking an evo 6 for a civic. And I edited and added a note (supposed to look like it was pointing downward), saying that Golovko was kidding.

[Edited on May 12, 2007 at 6:13 PM. Reason : added the vid]

5/12/2007 6:11:26 PM

...did you mean to post the exact same video again?

5/12/2007 10:41:19 PM

btw here's that motortrend article on the best handling car in the land
http://forums.evolutionm.net/showthread.php?t=270236

5/12/2007 11:16:51 PM

*que the "motortrend is not a creditable source blah blah blah" bullshit that some users will post, simply because its not THIER car of choice.

but its nice to see the Evo up there with the best

I can personally vouch for the Cayman S being a superior handling car. I had the hardest time trying to keep up with one at VIR. Out of all the Porsche's in my run group, it was the only one I couldn't pass but managed to keep up with. (although losing some ground per lap but not much)

[Edited on May 13, 2007 at 1:30 AM. Reason : fda]

5/13/2007 1:27:31 AM