Yes, to do it correctly I would recommend taking the rear springs out to adjust. In theory you can just loosen the jam nuts and turn the collars but I wouldn't trust that method to be even side to side. With both perches out of the control arms you can measure and compare to make sure the heights are the same.

Around 2

​@@sqmotorsports9230around 2 what ?

@@JorgeFlores-jw4gk 2 more MPG vs stock

Most of the issues on these cars is due to poor servicing and poor quality workmanship. With a some development and improvement they are a very capable vehicles.

SQ's work on the car was finished years ago; there is another video about the brake and suspension work we did, but that was the extent of SQ'a involvement and I can't comment on the later history of the car other than last I heard it was sold to someone in FL.

According to them, 14hp. Driving impression is more about response than total power.

doubles the horsepower to zero.

Around $600 plus tax

As I recall this set only came with 1 size. My advice would be call Godspeed; their customer service is pretty good.

The Ascot was never sold outside Japan. The Acura Vigor was sold in North America but there are a couple differences - the Vigor was a 2.5L whereas the Ascot is a 2.0, but they're very similar 5 cylinder engines. We have sources in Japan so if you submit your contact info thru the contact us page on the website (www.sqmotorsports.com) we can develop an indicidualized quote

Thank you for watching but no, Godspeed is very specific that the perch goes below. Which is consistent with other manufacturers like ISC and BC.

That’s what I thought. I was waiting for somebody to say something.

6 SPEED MANUAL??? DID THEY EVEN CAME IN MANUAL??

I have an 18 automatic with the 2.5 I’m in love with the handling of it but it’s just super slow.

@@issabendeck1135yup only the 2016-2019 Colorado and canyon work truck version aka extended cab 2 door work the small side doors came in auto or manual option and RWD ONLY

As the title suggests, this car is going to be auctioned on Cars and Bids, and their big concern is making sure any defects are clearly listed / identified. But yes, the powertrain is somewhat unusual. It's a G- series 5 cylinder, specifically a G20a, which is a 2.0 liter. This particular engine was never sold in America but the G25 was, which is identical other than the displacement. That engine found its way into the Acura Vigor, which I believe was the only 5 cyl Honda sold in the US. This engine is 170hp (on 91+ octane fuel) - which for 1994 was a lot of power. IT drives really well. It has a much crisper throttle reaponse than other cars of its era, and even vs the smaller turbo 3 and 4 cylinders of today. Unfortunately, sitting between the Civic and the Accord (or in the case of the Vigor, tge Integra and Legend), this platform filled a niche that didn't really need filling. The cars didn't sell well at the time as people could get the bigger platform car for a small enough price difference that they skipped over the middle child Ascot/Vigor.

@@sqmotorsports9230 Thanks for the info!

W

Me too.. mines says the same thing on the front and rear “Do not adjust, set from factory” … so how do I change the height in the rear 🤦🏻‍♂️

@@jayz_moto Yo so I found a bit easier of a way that's perfectly explained and I think is how Godspeed intended them to be set (since they say the ride height IS on the spring perch and not the shock. Watch from roughly 2:07 into it. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jJLVcmCcbLudpJY Still looks like a guess and check to get it exactly how you want it. I'm literally about to start after I replace the upper forward (with camber adjustment teehee) and rear control arms. I'll let you know how it goes. It's so frustrating not having seemingly a single person who's shared their experience doing coilovers on a Ford C-max hybrid (only 42,000 miles and suspension started going.....ugh). Wish me luck!

To screw everyone over and keep them American people dreamin!

Generally no. Electric conversions are allowed regardless of the donor chassis.

@3rweldingandfabrication375; Though You may have been asking this channel owner with his law background experience, knowledge, it seems clearly he has not responded to Your comment, question. A. If You are referring to the Supreme Courts case of WV vs EPA suit with other combined plaintiffs with the Decision and Ruling in favor of the Plaintiffs, which is essentially the WV State Government 1.-> You would benefit from actually reading the case, briefs, Supreme Court summary decision and ruling. 2. You will also benefit from reading the CAA of 1963, specifically the sections, rules laws which are within the suit, challenge, opposition by, of the WV State, AG. 3. Once you have read and comprehended the Court summary, decision and ruling You will benefit from reading, knowing, comprehending the US Constitution, especially the definitions, Rules, Laws of the Legislative Branch-Congress in Article I, especially Sections 8-10 which define, detail, state, explicit limited, restricted limits, realms, areas of Authority, Power, Jurisdiction 4. You will equally benefit from reading the entire section of the CAA which is for Motor Vehicles to have the proper base of information, knowledge and comprehend the Rules, Laws as they are explicitly stated, defined, etc. 5. Next it is worthwhile to read, know, comprehend the short RPM Act, proposed exclusion amendment within the CAA, 6. It is noteworthy to to know, notice the history of the RPM Act, those involved, authors, 'politicians', sponsors, co-sponsors, failure to pass through the committee in both the HR and Senate during each Congress since it first introduction during 2015-6, repeated in 2017-8, 2019-20, 2021-2 and thus never reaching the floor for a vote. 7. Also noteworthy is the separate bill with a CAA exclusion for, with 'methane' use in power plants, manufacturing, industry, production, etc., passed in 2017-8 Congress, signed by Pres DJT, did not include nor added the proposed RPM Act, then was repealed during the recent 2021-2 Congress, signed by Pres JRB. -a.Thus, clearly had the RPM Act somehow passed the committee, reached the floor for a vote in, within any of the four consecutive Congress since 2015 or the next 2023-4, what the results would be. -b. If the Republican controlled Congress had passed the RPM Act CAA exclusion in 2105-6, certainly Pres BHO would have vetoed it, not signed, as with his explicit political statements, agenda, etc. The Congress would have need a 2/3 majority in both Houses to override the President's Veto - almost certainly would not have occurred. -c. If the Republican controlled Congress had passed the RPM Act CAA exclusion in 2106-8 either separately or combined with the 'methane' exclusion, it seems reasonable that Pres DJT would have signed the exclusion bill also. This was the best possible Congress to have potentially passed Congress, signed by the President, without any need for a 2/3 majority in both houses. -d. Again in the Democrat majority HR of 2018-9, this exclusion bill did not pass through the committees since they control them, though there are many co-sponsors within the Democrat Party, because of the "Green New Deal" Agenda. The Senate possibly may have passed the exclusion bill. through committee with the Republican majority, 52, plus some other co-sponsors within the Democrats, but did not, there are some within the GOP which would oppose as Lisa Murkowski, Liz Cheny, perhaps Mitt Romney, though clearly the main 'leaders', individuals including Democrat Senate minority Charles [Chuck] Schumer, Bernard [Bernie] Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and others, thus would have been quite difficult to pass the Senate and knowing the situation in the HR, the efforts were futile. -e. During the most recent Congress in 2021-2 with the HR Democrat majority control, again controlling the committees, thus preventing the RPM Act to pass through to the floor for a vote, along with the effective 'split' in the Senate, it would not pass a floor vote and did not pass through committee either, again. ->had somehow it had been passed strangely, unusually, miraculously, then Pres JRB would certainly have vetoed it. -f. also including the direction, dictation control which resulted in the repeal fo the CAA 'methane' exclusion passed and signed during the 2017-8 Congress, this current 2021-2, Congress would have certainly included the RPM Act in their repeal, bill, legislation, thus removed and signed by Pres. JRB and publicly celebrated as they did with their repeal. B. The specific suit of th WV AG against the EPA, Decision and Ruling is about the EPA enforcement upon the State(s) to provide a plan for the power plant facilities within their State to reduce the emissions of these privately owned companies, facilities 1. There are several issues involved -a. Requiring the State to submit their plan -b. Requiring the State to require the power plants to reduce their emissions. -c. For the EPA or State to require an existing power plant to reduce the emissions according to a new standard, which is based upon newer capabilities. -d. The Federal Government, including its Agencies have No Authority, Power, Jurisdiction to impose upon the States any requirements per the CAA -e. changing emissions requirements for an existing plant is the same as changing the emissions requirement for an existing vehicle which was manufactured according tot he existing emission requirements for that model year to meet more stringent requirements of, with newer model vehicles -> this is called 'Ex Post Fact' and explicitly prohibited by the US Constitution, Article 1, Section 9: "No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed." Clearly since the Congress cannot pass such Legislation the Agency which is Authorized by Congress Legislation cannot claim, enact or enforce such laws either, since the Congress cannot Authorize, Empower, or give Jurisdiction which itself does not have. Period. Simple. 2. Thus this WV State vs EPA case, decision, ruling has no connection, affect upon any of these other laws, rules of the EPA or its interpretations with motor vehicles as You may think, desire, want or hope. 3. Already the EPA has never attempted to claim apply any stricter emissions requirements upon older model vehicles based upon newer, more strict requirements. 4. The EPA also does not attempt to require States to enforce, inspect, test vehicles for emissions compliance, though many have implemented this within State Legislation, seemingly in cooperation with the EPA, although perhaps not quite as strict as the EPA might prefer as the most strict in CA. All states that require emission testing for registration, remove the requirement with vehicles over 25 model years old [even in NY which otherwise their legislation is similar with strictness to CA]. Many States never legislated requirement testing and some have repealed, removed their legislation. Still the majority of States have some emission testing , inspection legislation for registration with varying requirements and levels. Nearly all also do not require inspection testing with new vehicles, since they are manufactured.sold, delivered with the equipment according to the established EPA regulation standards, requirements as with all DoT including safety. The legislation, laws, rules in these States also removes any requirements for emission inspection, testing for a period of years post model year production, which varies per state from 2-5 years.

@3rweldingandfabrication375; C. The WV AG suit vs EPA was nothing to do with motor vehicles or the aspect of , with any general Authority, Power, Jurisdiction of the EPA or the CAA Legislation. 1. nothing can be inferred or derived from this case which is useful either with motor vehicle except as stated. re is no clear. 2. actually the focus of the WV AG vs EPA was upon the EPA forcing the State to submit a plan and force the existing power plants with the State to reduce their emissions. 3. neither did the WV AG challenge the unlawful, illegal, invalid, Unconstitutional aspect of 'ex post facto' within the law to require existing facilities to modify their emission to newer, more strict, stringent requirements nor does the summary of the decision and ruling. 4. The summary of the Supreme Court decision and ruling also used the actual text of the CAA to prove the EPA cannot force the States nor they to impose, require, force or enforce compliance with newer more strict, stringent standards. 5. Thus the Supreme Court decision and ruling does not contain any presentation with the legality, Authority, Power, Jurisdiction of the Congress, the CAA Legislation or prevent the EPA to enforce their 'interpretations' of the CAA, except this specific set of attempted extension which the CAA does not state. 6. If others would sue , present their cases against the EPA interpretation, which challenging their extending their Authority, Power, Jurisdiction beyond or past the CAA or a any other Congress Legislation, then this WV AG vs EPA case decision, ruling could be used as precedent along with the decision, ruling with the challenge vs OSHA 'COVID-19' 'vaccine' Mandate case, in which the Supreme Court decision an ruling was similar that the Congress Legislation does not Authorize, Empower, or give Jurisdiction to OSHA to Mandate, Regulate general 'Health and Safety' for the public, only within the workplace environments. Thus, since the 'COVID-19' situation, is a general PHE [Public Health Emergency as declared by HSS, January 30, 2020 by then Sec'y Azar within the Pres DJT administration and per his request too - also removed since by HSS within Pres JRB (finally) - though the UN/WHO Secr'y refuses to remove the False, contrived 'Pandemic', status and dexlred a PHE with 'another contrive, false, completely non-harmful 'monkey virus' ], thus OSHA has NO such Authority, Power, Jurisdiction, s stated explicitly within the decision, ruling summary, written by the Supreme Court Justices. [which You have public access to read also, as with me.] 7. The Supreme Court has decided, rules consistently, 6-3, with the same six Judges, Justices agreeing, with the explicit limits stated in the Congress Legislation while the same three opposing, with there direction with extending, adding, claiming more than the text states explicitly, when it suits their given Agenda. 8. There has not been a direct challenge, opposition to, with the CAA or any Congress Legislation since the "Alcohol Prohibition Act' Legislation post the 21st amendment, repeal of the 18th Amendment, "Alcohol [Beverage] Prohibition" which explicitly modified the Constitution, with this Prohibition along with Congress Authority, Power, Jurisdiction with Legislation specifically with alcohol beverages, and no more. 9. Once this Authority, Power, Jurisdiction was removed by 21st Amendment repeal, then their previous Legislation was challenged and deemed invalid, Unconstitutional, null an void, in 1934, thus since. D. This Supreme Court decision, ruling is certainly a precedent, affirmation, confirmation, that Congress has no Authority, Power, Jurisdiction over any substances nor any areas not explicitly stated within and according to the explicit limits stated in the US Constitution, Article I, Sections 8-10. Period. Simple. E. =>Thus, We The People need to 'rise', 'stand up', follow the proper legal due process of law, challenge these massive, all encompassing, broad illegal, unlawful, invalid, Unconstitutional Legislation, Regulations, Limitations, Restrictions, which cover every area, topic, subject within human life without the expressed, explicit Authority, Power, Jurisdiction,. Rather these are as within common Parliamentary Governments with their Authoritarian, "Socialist/ISM", some "Communist/ISM", "Fascist/ISM" Laws, Rules, Regulations, etc., often claimed as "good for the people, society", though just "Good for the "Authority, Dictation, Control" of the People and the Authoritarians, Dictators, Controllers. F. We The People need not be Active not Passive, Strong not Weak, Aware not blind, hidden closed, Informed not Ignorant, Misinformed, Knowledgeable and Educated not remain Disinformed, inDOCtrinate, Directed, Controlled, Misled, Misdirected, Diverted, Accepting, Subdued, Subjected, Submissive, Compliant with the intended, purposeful mindset, attitude of being subjects, subdued with fear, panic, anxiety, hysteria of, with, within, from The Government, Authorities, Agencies, Enforcers, etc !! 1. as the phrase from "V" in the script, opposing the Authority of the Authoritarian, Dictators, Rules, Laws, Enforcement, etc. : "People should not fear their Government, rather Governments should fear their People" 2. the founders, organizers, key persons among the "Rebels", 'Rebellion, 'Revolution' against the King fo Great Britain , George IV, his Authoritarians, Dictating Rule, Governors within the Colonies, Army Enforcers joined together then risked everything, their wealth, property, lives, families, etc., sent their written Declaration of Independence to the King stating their reasons, logic, basis including all attempts to, with requesting, forming agreements compromise, which were all refused, denied by ignoring, lack with any response, thus knowingly led to a physical battle, war against Great Britain, The King, his Army, which was long extremely difficult with massive losses of life. 3.Then, eventually led to a breakthrough, turnaround and victory through great efforts, through consistency, with persistence and determination. Then each Colony formed a State, with their Constitution, key individuals from within each State joined, formed a Congress, discussed, worked together, challenged each other, forming a common Constitution for a Confederation of the States into a "more perfect Union" under a single Federal Government with limited Authority, Power, Jurisdiction, divided Authority, Power, Jurisdiction, into Three Branches, Executive, Legislative with two houses, one with Representatives from each district, selected, elected by the people within each district [HR] districts divided, determined by equal amount of population [majority representation-vote], a Senate with equal number, two from each State, independent of size, population [minority representation-vote] , a Judicial, with 'check and balances'of Authority, Power, Jurisdiction of, with, within each upon the other. 4. They Authored, established, agreed upon into the US Constitution, sent to the States to agree accept, with expected added Individual Rights then authored, sent to Congress, which were compiled, agreed, sent to the States to agree, accept as they had unifying the Federal Constitution forming the [first and still most unique] Confederation, Union, Republic with Representation, not a "Democracy"[with all it s flaws that led to its demise in Greece, attempted once (The Federalist Papers details, explains, describes the issues with a Democracy vs the benefits of, with a Republic)], thus The United States of America. 5. These individuals and all of the people residents which became citizens of the 'new' country, knew clearly from within their lives, experience the detriments with Authoritarian, Dictating, Controlling Rule, Tyranny, thus opposed that form of Rulership, Kingship, Dictatorship, Authoritarian Control, of a single individual Power, Authority, Governance, limited group, 'party',or 'parties', 'Elite', etc. thus thus the Constitution within each State and the Confederation must have limited Authority, Power, Jurisdiction and without individual, 'Elite' group, 'party', authority, power, jurisdiction, control.

@3rweldingandfabrication375; G. However, the "Elite' from outside, which contrived, devise, implemented, directed, dictated controlled the Monarchical Kingships, within Europe along with the ideology of"Socialist/ISM" directed, initiated, implemented, developed their Authoritarian, Parliamentary, Government Systems with 'multiple parities', which they controlled, while they inDOCtrainated the people, population to view this "Socialist/ISM" ideology as 'Good and beneficial for them" with the facade of the apparently elected representative in the Parliament [as previous in England], but are actually chosen selected by the "Elite' and presented to the people to 'choose' . 1. Some as in England, have no Constitution, while others later developed a Constitution, though written by the Government Authorities, retaining their Authoritarian Power, Jurisdiction, while the people were already well inDOCtrianated. with the "Socialist/ISM" ideology, then "Communist/ISM" ideology, much later with Mussolini a lesser Authoritarian form of "Fascist/ISM", thus remained well subdued, subjugated, while their inner desires with 'Freedom' were quelled, quenched withe apparent facade of involvement, 'representatives' in Parliament, which are actually prepared, pre-selected by the "Elite' via each 'party' 2. Does this seem and sound familiar??!! 3.. These same "Elite' which had contrived devised, instigated, implemented, directed, the formation of the 'parities' within 'politics' as they had within the Authoritarian Parliamentary Systems, within England then Europe, also infiltrated within the USA, Government, formed 'parties', politics' thus implemented their system within, gaining control of the, eventually legislating Authoritarian Laws, Rules which are from their "SocialistISM", etc. ideologies to have the necessary Authoritarian control , 'political parties' facade, etc. all to further developed implement, establish, impose their actual One World Governance Agenda 4. do You know the UN is their organization post WWII as the LoN post WWI which they initiated, instigated, funded, supported, incited both/all sides for WWI, WWII , Russian [Lennin & Boslshviks], Chinese [Mao Tse Tung -> led to Kim-Jun in Korea, Ho chi Minh in Vietnam, others in SE. Asia], Cuban [Fidel Castro], others in Central, South America Communist Revolutions [still], and all other world conflicts ??!! 5. do You know of each and every Int'l Organization they '"Elite" contrived, devised, initiated, established, direct, dictate, control as the UN - CFR,TrilateralCommisson,WEF,WTO,ISO,FATF-GAFI,BuilderbergGroup,'ThinkTanks','OpenSocieties',et al, own IMF/WrldBnk/FedResv[USAustralia]/et al,StndOil-Int'l,Allopathy/PharmaceuticalMedSystm,Inst,Univ,Schls,etc. All The Best and Much Success in Your Quest, Health, Happiness and Well Being. Sincerely

Ah, you saw me on Rich Rebuilds... :) The answer is it's difficult but not impossible. Jags That Run has a whole page on it, but the short of it is you have to have 100% of the emissions equipment from the newer car, take it for a full inspection at a smog referee station, and pass the standard applicable to the newer car - in this case a 2011, which is not all that different.

@@sqmotorsports9230 yes, I did see tour post on his page XD and thank you for the advise!

im guessing tires and a front swaybar

Much more that that. Car has ISC N1 Race coilovers, Wilwood 4 piston Dynalite/Dynapro brakes, Whiteline adjustable sway bars front/rear, custom alignment settings, and Hoosier A7s. Plus a bunch of engine mods and race seats/harnesses.