scathing

In the end, horses for courses. One person's "omg hektik" is another person's "what a fnarken retard". If you want to do it and you think it looks good, then you're getting your money's worth. Its not like anyone else is paying for it. Just be prepared for reactions that range from your usual pimply-faced dropkick with about as much clue about driving as they have about nuclear physics giving you props because your petrol-guzzling fashion accessory is "the bomb", as people who prefer their sports cars to be....you know....sporty and go fast, using you as an example of how shallow the car enthusiast gene pool has gotten these days.

One of the best handling Japanese coupes ever made....ruined.

From what I've heard, the boost controller module that comes with the PFC is pretty ordinary. Not sure why, though. Might be single solenoid, but I can't remember exactly.

One thing that the Monaro has done really well for all of us in Australia is reintroduce the idea of a big, GT coupe at around the $55K mark into the mainstream consciousness. When the Monaro was out, there was nothing. If you wanted a sports coupe you either went a small racer (200SX or Integra), or spent up and bought a Euro. The RX-7 and Prelude were gone, and Lexus wasn't interested in bringing in the SC's. With all the attention the Monaro gave to the segment, it made it far easier for Nissan and Mazda to bring in the 350Z and RX-8. Its a lot easier to justify bringing those cars in when you can point at the sales and halo the Monaro brings to the brand, than pointing at the now-dead Preludes and Supras. I wouldn't mind a Monaro as a daily driver. I wouldn't turn it in to a hardcore track or touge weapon, but with a catback and CAI, lowered on rims, and a nicer stereo it would be a pretty nice car to tool through traffic or visit people in Canberra / Newcastle with.

I'd much rather a car that resembles the Accord Euro (which is a very handsome looking sedan) to something people mistake for an old Magna.

While you're asking for advice... I haven't noticed too many of your other posts, but if what's in this thread is indicative of your grasp of the English language, I'd highly recommend that you sell the Skyline, forget about the Silvia, and go back to school. If you need a car for transportation (rather than just a big, shiny, penis extension), get an old Corolla and leave it stock. Rock solid, easy on petrol, cheap to insure and you won't get hassled by the cops.

Tell that to Anton Faber-Castell.

Can the WRX have a few mods to make 180rwkW too? Or shall we compare apples to apples?

Technically it doesn't. DOT stands for "Department of Transport", which is the US government body that covers road usage. E4 designates its ECE Regulation compliance, which is Europe's design rules. The Euro and American standards meet or exceed the ADRs, and Australia's too much of a backwater for big tyre companies to bother tooling up to stamp our compliance logo onto their tyres. So while, in practice, DOT and E4 tyres are Australian road legal their actual meaning has nothing to do with Australia, and they haven't necessarily been tested and certified by an Australian regulatory body.

Yeah, the guy who got busted doing ludicrous speed in his Bentley is meant to be doing time. He's appealing, so we'll see how it goes.

To pre-empt the inevitable reply, I realise the rotary has not had the same research and development that piston engines have. But, for a car I plan on driving most days and out on the track without a professional race team, VC-funded proof of concept, or OEM development, budget I couldn't give a flying fornication what could be. I only care about what is. A nuclear powered car would be heaps better than a fossil fuel one, in theory. It'll make more power, hardly ever need refuelling (relatively speaking), and have no emissions. But if someone hands me the keys to some swoopy vehicle that glows in the dark, I'll politely decline from behind the first lead shield (or perhaps a stack of rotaries) I can find.

1. But, it makes more power at lower RPM. So do you want a street car that makes good power from down low, or something you have to rev the tits off? That said, if you want to talk peak power and a gutless low end, the F20C powering the S2000 makes more power than the 13B Renesis powering the RX-8, with the same redline and far better fuel economy. 2. Tell me, how many all-alloy rotaries are there? None to my knowledge, because they need to be cast iron for strength. The most common motivation for the SR20DET powered RX-7s getting around in Japan is because the all-alloy engine weighs less than the cast iron rotaries they come with, while still making good power. 3. You want to talk noise? Ported rotaries aren't exactly electric motor quiet, and when you're talking about "serious" rotaries (to compare with "serious" piston engines, that make a fair amount of noise) the porting doesn't stay stock for long. Sure it might not be mechanical noise, but unless you're some kind of noise snob that only wants NVH refinement from certain parts of the car its a moot issue... Speaking of fundamental design flaws, apex seals are inherently weak. A right angled seal can't handle the same load as a circular one. You can replace them with tougher ones, but all you're going is working around the problem in a brute force manner, not fixing a "fundamental design flaw". Shall we get in to the rotary's total loss lubrication system? Its thirst for petrol that far exceeds its displacement (whether you take swept volume, or equivalent volume per revolution)? But in terms of percentage per capita, how's the reliability of a rotary compared to a piston engine? Of the rotaries in production, what's the MTF compared to a piston engine? Most people would agree that any heavily performance-modified and thrashed car will make for a poor family car, regardless of what its powered by. But history has shown that even stock rotary family cars don't cut the mustard either. No, the rotary doesn't have the shortcomings you mentioned, but its got plenty of others.

Very subjective. The last time I had an R33 next to me while I was driving, all I could see was the front wheelarch to the nose. Seeing the corner of the front lights, I thought it was a Magna with rims. And I'm not the only one to mistake R33s for Magnas when viewed in certain ways.. The 180SX is most definitely a sports coupe from every angle. It hasn't aged well from some perspectives (especially with the CA-style nosecone), but there's no mistaking its intent. But, visually....whatever floats your boat. Judging by the number of lowered Magnas on rims with loud exhausts there are these days, I guess some people dig the slab sided Mitsubishi sedan.....

The GT-R is Nissan's flagship sports car, which is not the car you're getting. While they share the same base, there's a fair amount of difference in them. Greatness by association only works if you're a poseur. Technically the Evolutions share the same base as every other Lancer, but I wouldn't go and buy a VR-X expecting it to hang on to the back of Porsche 911 up a twisty country road.

The S15 interior looks nice, but I've found it maks easily. Most of the S15s I've seen have scratches or scuffs around the shifter area, just from normal wear and tear. The 6 speed box is OK, but it has some known issues with breaking a circlip and rendering 5th gear? (can't remember which one, but its a high gear). Since its also the same physical size as the older 'boxes, but with an extra gear, there's also less room for oil and so it does suffer more heat issues under sustained load.

If its on the Hume near Mittagong, I can pretty much guess where he did it, too. I'd assume he did it on the northbound side, since it runs downhill. At which point, if he started at 110km/hr or so before hitting this section......200km/hr would be easy to achieve.

The R33 will be a roomier car. It'll have more space, and it should be more comfortable. The S15 gets quite cramped, especially up back. If going at high speeds is your thing, the R33 will be more stable. The question is how often you're planning on hitting 160km/hr+. I've driven an S15 at freeway speeds and the car's fine. I find the S15 suspension a little firmer than the R33s I've been in (stock in both cases). Depending on your requirements from a vehicle, this might matter. On less than perfect surfaces, the R33 does a better job of keeping the tyres in contact with the ground while not causing you pain.

A grand tourer is more of a luxury sports car, rather than an all-out racer. The best term I've ever heard used for it is "gentleman's sports car". Something that's swift and enjoyable to drive in ways that your average family hack aren't, but not as visceral as a dedicated sports racer. Think about what Jaguar and Aston Martin offer. Or the larger Ferraris (456, 550/575, etc). They're not cars you'd go attacking touge in, but if you're on a country road with lots of sweepers you can carry a fair amount of speed through them while still having a plush interior with all the creature comforts, good NVH, etc. As such, they tend to be a bit larger. This gives them stability at higher speeds and in open flowing corners, as well as more interior room. In that class, you'd have vehicles on the sportier end of comfort (like Skylines) or the more comfortable end of sporty (like Soarers), they're still a more enjoyable drive than a Maxima or Camry. But if you're carving through a set of hairpins cut in to the side of a mountain, you're not likely to keep up with the sporty and nimble, but far less comfortable, Silvias, MR2s and Integra Type-Rs.

Any Nissan coupe will get the same attention from the cops, no matter what its model. If you think a 180SX will garner you less attention from the boys in blue, you're in for a rude shock. The brakes on the turbo cars should be better than the NA ones, but if you can do an upgrade its still worth it. If you can keep it off boost it should be a bit more economical. Aside from the lower displacement, the car also weighs a bit less so you don't need to make as much power to commute.

Well, since you're too handicapped to help yourself: Map focused on Bathurst City Centre

The reply wasn't meant to be helpful. But since you appear to be too handicapped to help yourself: Map focused on Bathurst City Centre

Bathurst is the place that Skylines smash Commodores. What kind of Australian Skyline fan doesn't know where Bathurst is?

Happy birthday! Return your damned phone calls!

I had an awesome time the last time I was at Wakefield. It was raining, so it was sideways city. And yeah, my car is a lot more cornering oriented than straightline oriented. Just the way I like it.

Yep, and yep. Very unimpressed with my ET. There's definitely more in the car, but after I set the 14 flat I just got a little too excited trying to break my NA light-tune barge into the 13's, and ended up screwing up the next couple of launches. I figured you were talking about Dale before. The other thing about Dale's car is that his suspension is set up for the track. He did soften the dampers out and run lower-than-normal pressures, but the rest of the geometry is still very circuit oriented. And he was using the D01J's which, with their ultra-stiff sidewalls, aren't the best drag tyre in the world.