STYLN

under $1500 mate. No doubt it looks mean for sure. I like mean, but i just hate the apron look. Its only a personal opinion and in some cases (like s15's) i love it! just ordered my r34 gtr wing it's on its way for a nice price $220! WOOP! gotta sort wheels and im talking to rob about what we can do to mod it for me and get the mould right when its taken off my bar to fix the right hand side.

Pics since fitting the kit. In grey for now before some changes to the kit and a full respray.

guys if anyone can help i wanna swap wheels - see thread here http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/Sw...to-t285819.html Im also looking for an R34 GTR wing now, preferably in grey anyway kit time its back from paint with definately a few issues. The respray i had planned is now definately coming forward to January. The problem was simple, the rear got repaired when i bought the car and the colour they used was too dark. The fuel door was then used to match which means the kit is too dark and especially obvious up front. It was always going to be an issue as my car has obviously had sprays before and is a bit of a grey tone rainbow goin on. The only reason we didnt respray was timing, as he cant do a full spray until later this year. Its ok i guess, given the OTHER ISSUES i have to fix now before its fully resprayed and the money i saved on not going the full respray now got invested in the project car... Perish the thought if id had a full respray done with the kit as it is. The front bar put lightly its shit. The supplier he used was not the normal one and in this case the product quality suffered bad! Pin holes and voids all over it, the thing was twisted cracked and generally roughed around badly. The end result having the top secret front bar looks great for sure but the paint when you get up close shows the pinholes and voids that were missed. He lost count after 600 and said there were thousands easily. Problem being until its painted you dont see them all... If your shopping with rob dont stress though as this supplier wont be used again. The sideskirts theyre an interesting line on the 4 door. Unlike most they dont come up to the base of the doors, instead sitting a little lower. Its not quite the slick integration i hoped for but none the less the overall lines of the sideskirt from front to back linking the front bar to rear is good. Im pretty happy with them i guess. The quality of Robs skirt was great, no holes or issues and they fitted and painted up well. The rear bar symetry is the key to me. and in this regard its an epic fail. The bar fit perfectly across the back and was super high quality, wrapped nicely but then you take a look at the skirt on the left against the skirt on the right and you instantly see the problem. The nismo bar above is similar to what i thought i was getting and wanted in the lower corner areas but the skirt was what i got. I figured oh well it's just going to rice up or look fatter a tad. The left side looks pretty good but the right makes baby jesus cry... Pics Let me just say im still happy with Rob and the Fibre Crazy guys. just got some issues to sort out and given its a first of its kind im keen to work with him on sorting it out not just for me but for the mould that all future bars will be made from. I'm going to get the rear bar modified to look more like the nismo one above (removing the skirts totally on rear bar) to give it the fluted look from the rear wheels back. See how the front bar lasts and keep my options open before a full respray in January. Better that this gets sorted now before the full respray thats for sure.

Having just fitted a kit the wheels now look very out of place. Im looking to swap for something more Drift Spec (dish, chrome or polished lip) that has similar condition or value. NO Buckles or Warps, Flat spots or cracks accepted at all. Tyre condition not overly important as long as they have a few months in them at least. I'll refit with new potenzas soon after. My wheels are true and straight, one wheel has been gutterd and one other scraped lightly on the spoke. This is how i got them so none are recent. See pics. Rim info: Size: 17" x 8" Ray's / Volk Racing Wheels (all 4 are same size and width) Type: Campionato SS7 (7 spoke) Offset: unknown but suits R34 gtt perfectly - Any help would be appreciated!!! Colour: gun metal grey Tyre info: 235/45/17 Bridgestone Potenza RE001 Adrenelin on all 4 wheels Tread front is 4-5mm above wear indicators Tread rear is 3mm above wear indicators I couldnt tell you percentage as i dont know depth at new but the fronts have 12 months in them rears probably 6. Post in here if you have some with pics and details. Ideally im looking for another r34 owner looking for an easy swap.

i fcucking hate sensless damage to cars. Keying, eggs, seafood, milk and brake fluid are evil things in the hand of an immature idiot. as painful as it is mate, camp out on the usual night only just down the road, get the plate and car type and sooner or later you'll get the lil pricks and sure enough on that day you'll get to watch them wet themselves with fear, thus ending their rampage. If you have an intersection they stop at close by camp out there and wait. I had a young fool pranking my work phone once, without fail every weekend. I bide my time simply thinking of funnier and funnnier burns to leave on him when he called so he looked dumber and dumber in front of his mates. Then one day he fcucked up and forgot to switch his number off. HAHAHAHAHA I promptly put him up on facebook, myspace and some forums for all my mates (30,000) of them to call if they so chose. Never heard from him again... His fateful last words were after he realised he just gave me his number "oh f**k" beep beep There is nothing sweeter than getting even. A baseball bat to their car or heads should do it mate.

my aussie 4cylinder 2L sigma turbo came out factory carby suck through with enough hp and toruque plus the fuel economy an 8 could have only dreamed of at the time. Oh and if that wasnt enough it took the title of Oz's fastest car from the GTHO phase 3 at the time until the VK brock commy was later released. www.sigmaturbo.com The arguments started the day little 4's strapped on the turbo'z and started showing v8's how it was done. Since then the scenes, engines and cars have evolved so much that now the argument is as pointless as it is stupid. But none the less in the humour of answering the thread for you killa, If he thinks a turbo is fake power, what is a supercharger? Also fake or is that real? The awesomeness of displacement and v8's comes out when you strap a turbo or two onto a v8 no doubt, and for that i always respect the V8 immensly. Theres no other sound like it, low down torque to strip road pavements and excessive fuel guzzling thirst is something we dont find in ours often. I always turn for a rumbling v8 to look... But then again who can beat the sound of 1000hp rb crackin onto boost??? I think we all had a hard on at the R34 cruise when they launched that crazy GTR!!! WOW!!! Or a rotor when its on song??? even better if its got the turboez!!! You get my point yet mate? tell him to pull his head in and place respect where respect is due.

JULY 31 Minister for Roads Michael Daley today met with representatives from the 4WD community and car industry who asked for the introduction of proposed vehicle modification rules to be delayed and for more time to consult. Mr Daley said he agreed to put the rule changes on hold and that more consultation was needed following the meeting. “I’ve listened to feedback from the industry and the community, and have agreed to set up a working party to look more closely at how we are going to address this road safety issue,” he said. “All of those who attended today’s meeting agreed that safety is paramount and that unsafe modifications of vehicles do need be stamped out. “The working group will include representatives from the NSW Centre for Road Safety, Four Wheel Drive NSW-ACT, Australian Automotive Aftermarket Association, the Australian 4WD Industry Council as well as other agencies and experts,” Mr Daley said. Executive Director of Australian Automotive Aftermarket Association Stuart Charity said this was a terrific outcome. “We’re passionate about road safety and we understand the intent of the regulation is to make the roads safer,” he said. We’re looking forward to working towards a practical solution that meets road safety objectives while also taking industry views into account,” Mr Charity said. Greg Redfern from Four Wheel Drive NSW-ACT also welcomed the outcome and said the working group would have their full support. “We want to eliminate unsafe practices in the driving community and we’ll work with the government to make sure these new regulations meet those objectives without any adverse consequences for the motoring community at large,” he said. “We all agree that there is no place for extreme and illegal modifications, but the clubs in our association follow a strict code of conduct and ethics, and we want to make sure they’re not punished,” Mr Redfern said

A letter to the Minister from Athol Mullen - RTA Engineering Signatory in Cardiff, Newcastle. The "Car Hoons" news release On Thursday, 16th July 2009, NSW Minister for Roads, Michael Daley MP released a News Release titled Tough New Rules for Car Hoons. The intent of the announcement was ostensibly to crack down on "car hoons" who drive vehicles that the minister thinks are unsafe. Unfortunately, the content of the news release is factually inaccurate and the minister (or whoever wrote the news release for him) clearly either does not know or understand the content of the NSW RTA Code of Practice for Light Vehicle Modifications, the Australian Design Rules and Schedule 2 of the Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulation 2007, or is misrepresenting that code of practice and those legislative instruments. The majority of the "car hoons" that the minister seeks to regulate more strictly are driving vehicles that are not legal. That's right, not legal. Some may have documentation that makes them appear legal, but proper inspection would reveal either that the vehicles are not consistent with that documentation or that the documentation has been issued in error. So, if the people that will be affected are not these "car hoons", who are they? The answer is almost everybody else. Examples of people affected include ordinary motorists who replace sagged, worn out suspension springs in their vehicles; infrastructure corporations such as rail maintenance and electricity companies; farmers and hunters who have their vehicles raised for normal day to day farm operations; grey nomads who have heavy duty springs and tyres fitted to their 4WDs so that they can tow their caravan or camping trailer to visit remote parts of the country; predominantly family oriented 4WD enthusiasts and clubs; charity groups who are helped by 4WD clubs to take terminally ill children to places that they couldn't otherwise access; environmental rehabilitation groups who are assisted in removing rubbish by 4WD clubs; emergency response groups including SES; 4WD tour operators; participants in charity bashes; the residents of remote communities for whom 4WD tourism is the basis of their local economy; hot rod and modified car owners and all of the industries that support these people in their activities. What is the minister's definition of a "car hoon"? Elsewhere, he refers to "young hoons". Given that some of the people affected are senior citizens, what is the minister's definition of "young"? The real problem is that the government have starved the RTA and Police Force of the funding required to effectively operate, let alone training Inspectors for Vehicle Regulation (IVRs) and Police Officers, and to assist in ongoing review and training of Engineering Signatories to ensure that the existing system operates as intended. This is not just my personal opinion, but is based upon public and private statements made by IVRs, police officers, RTA staff and other signatory engineers since the current labor government, then led by Bob Carr, came to power in 1995. For example, a few years ago, a Highway Patrol police officer stated in a usenet news group that they couldn't get funds to purchase paper for their photocopier, but that they could use petrol that cost more than the paper and waste considerable time to drive to another station and back to collect a ream of paper, because the fuel was in a different budget. As an engineering signatory, I have offered to run a training "question and answer" sessions for local Highway Patrol Police Officers several times over the past decade. The officers and Patrol Commander that I suggested it to were positive about the idea, but it went no further because there is simply no funding available to do it. So we have unsafe, illegally modified vehicles being driven on the roads, with the Police and RTA not having the resources and training necessary to detect and defect all of those vehicles. The minister's solution is to change the rules, thinking that the vehicles are actually legal because they haven't been defected. The new rules can only be described as draconian, misguided and almost certainly unworkable. The irony is that they won't have the slightest effect on the illegally modified vehicles that were ostensibly the target. Drivers of illegally modified vehicles will continue to operate those vehicles outside the law, regardless of how strict those laws are made. So lets take a look at a few statements from the news release. * "At the moment, vehicles can be raised or lowered by up to 5 centimetres without approval, and by up to 15 centimetres with authorised engineering approval." The statement is completely and utterly false. It may have come about from an attempt to simplify the actual rules, but the result is nowhere the truth. Under the existing Code of Practice, vehicles can be raised or lowered by up to 1/3 of the original suspension clearance without requiring certification. This is a direct function of the vehicle design, varying from less than 20mm on some cars to around 70mm on some 4WD vehicles. The 15cm limit with an engineering certificate does not exist in any way, shape or form. To raise or lower a vehicle by more than the 1/3 of suspension clearance described above, the design of suspension must be changed or an entirely different suspension fitted in place of the original. In these situations, the design of the suspension and the position of that suspension relative to the chassis rails will determine the resulting height of the vehicle. This means that there is no defined 15cm limit. For example, a light commercial vehicle from the 1920s to 1950s that is fitted with more modern suspension components might be lowered by more than 15cm, bringing its front bumper bar to around the same height as a modern vehicle, and hence improving not only its handling and braking but also its compatibility with modern vehicles in a crash. If the existing 1/3 of suspension clearance rule is replaced with a blanket 50mm limit with certification, as proposed, many cars will now be able to be lowered further than is presently legal, and well beyond the vehicle manufacturer's recommendations. The initial version of Vehicle Standards Bulletin 50, the RTA policy document that attempts to implement this ministerial directive is ambiguous on this point. * "I don't want to see young hoons putting their lives or the lives of others at risk, just because they think their car looks better 15 centimetres closer to the ground." This statement is remarkable in how it shows how out of touch with reality the minister is. For cars newer than the 1960s, it would be a genuine struggle to physically lower them by 15cm without major modifications. Even ignoring for a moment the legislated requirement for a minimum ground clearance of 10cm (or more depending on wheelbase), the physical modifications required to lower a car 15cm would essentially require the removal of the entire suspension and could certainly never be legal. On a few models of 4WD passenger vehicles, lowering them can be physically possible because they are a raised version of a normal height car, but they cannot be legal at that height because they change ADR category (MC to MA) due to that lowered height, and they cannot be shown to comply with the ADR requirements for that changed category. Perhaps the minister can name a model of car popular with "young hoons" that has an original ground clearance of at least 25cm, such that it can be lowered 15cm and still comply with the ADRs and maintain the legally required 10cm? * "It can affect handling, braking and safety features such as electronic stability control." A correct statement, but the assumption that the effect is automatically negative is remarkably naiive, as is the assumption that vehicles where these are negatively affected will be legal. Many older vehicles that are lowered are done so as part of modernising the suspension and improving the vehicle dynamics including handling and braking. Such vehicles usually have their other safety features improved at the same time, such as by fitting seatbelts, a collapsible steering column, windscreen washers and demister and improved windscreen wipers. Encouraging such vehicles to continue to be driven without these modifications would be to discourage safety improvements. Modern safety features already limit the extent of modifications that can be carried out on vehicles. For example, because the dynamics of how the front of a vehicle collapses in a crash are critical to the operation of SRS airbags, 4WD vehicles that are equipped with SRS airbags cannot be fitted with a body lift, (spacing the body up on the chassis) unless it is possible to prove that the SRS system will not be adversely affected by the body lift. To date, I have never seen such proof for any vehicle model, and body lifts are not legally fitted to any SRS airbag equipped vehicle that I know of. For vehicles where ESC is fitted, a similar situation applies, with alterations in suspension height and tyre diameter being restricted. As I understand it, aftermarket companies in the USA now offer "piggyback" computers to re-tune the ESC system to compensate for suspension height and tyre diameter changes. Aftermarket companies in Australia already offer re-tuning kits for ESC on several models of car. This needs to be addressed specifically for ESC equipped vehicles rather than trying to apply a rule relating to ESC to vehicles that are not fitted with it. When there is an Australian Design Rule that mandates the performance of ESC, such recalibration will be mandatory for continued ADR compliance. * "Raising a vehicle's suspension can also reduce the driver's ability to see pedestrians and cyclists, and higher headlights can startle other road users," Is the minister allowing Harold Scruby to write his speeches for him? Raising a vehicle within the limits of safe and predictable handling and within the ADR prescribed limits for light heights, including the ADR prescribed legal maximum height for headlights effectively limits any adverse reduction in vision of pedestrians and cyclists close to the vehicle while improving vision of people and objects further away. For vehicles 1994 and newer, ADR 8/01 also prescribes a Primary Vision Area, and legal raising of such vehicles is limited by the ability to maintain compliance with that requirement. An ADR compliant headlight installed at a height within the prescribed limits of the ADRs and adjusted in accordance with those rules is legal in NSW according to the Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulation 2007. Again, the minister appears to be confusing illegally modified vehicles with legally modified vehicles. If the minister is genuinely concerned about vehicle lights startling other drivers, it would be far more productive for him to act upon the continued widespread illegal use of front and rear fog lights and the failure of the checking of headlight aim during registration inspections. It is over a decade since an RTA IVR told my then employer to "at least wipe the dust off the top" of his headlight aim testing machine "so that it looks like it has been used". Judging by the number of vehicles driving around with obviously misaimed headlights today, this problem appears to remain widespread. * "Mr Daley said any vehicle being raised or lowered would require certification stating the modifications conform to safety standard requirements." This proposal means that many vehicles that presently wouldn't require certification will require certification in the future. Leaving aside the issue of how it is determined whether a vehicle was raised before or after the implementation of these new rules, there are the connected issues of the fact that many new vehicles are raised within this range by rural new vehicle dealers before delivery, and the availability and distribution of engineering signatories across the state. Quite simply, the economic implications of requiring certification of these vehicles are staggering and the limited availability of signatory engineers makes it virtually impossible to implement. * "The changes also mean any modifications must meet specific requirements such as the vehicle having at least 10 centimetres ground clearance." This is a misrepresentation of the current situation. Regardless of whether a vehicle is certified or not, the 10cm minimum ground clearance requirement is already an enforceable requirement within Schedule 2 of the Road Transport (Vehicle Registration) Regulation 2007. It is not a new requirement. I also understand that regulations governing licensed vehicle repairers makes it an offence for them to modify a registrable vehicle such that it does not comply with the ADRs or state regulations. Again, the minister appears unfamiliar with the existing legislation and appears to be confusing illegally modified vehicles with legally modified vehicles. * "Vehicles raised above the 5 centimetre limit will only be granted conditional registration for use under specified conditions like competing in an off road competition." This assumes that vehicles raised by more than 5cm are not "daily use" vehicles. That is an assumption that many people in rural NSW would dispute. During the debate about banning bullbars in urban areas a few years ago, one farmer who had to travel to Sydney on a regular basis to take his then pregnant wife to see a specialist asked whether this would mean that he would have to unbolt the bullbar from his vehicle and chain it to a post on the side of the Great Western Highway on every trip. Conditional registration that limits the use of raised vehicles in the city, as Mr Daley's policy advisor has apparently stated as being part of the intent, would seem to imply that rural people would have to change their suspension during each trip. An obviously absurd and impossible proposition. This also assumes that the vehicle owner is rich enough to pay to buy an additional vehicle and pay for registration and insurance on an additional vehicle. So much for the Aussie Battler. I note that the method of implementation of this announcement is by way of a policy document issued by the RTA, and not by legislation. It is extremely worrying that the rule has not been the subject of parliamentary scrutiny and has not apparently been the subject of any consultation with any affected groups outside the RTA. I call upon the minister to immediately order that Vehicle Inspectors Bulletin 50 be rescinded, and given that the minister appears to have displayed gross incompetence and appears to have lost the confidence of a significant portion of the voting population of NSW, I call upon the minister to resign. Posted by Athol Mullen at 3:43 PM

im stoked to hear some reason got made with the minister taking his raules back for revision. It should never have happened without the proper parliamentary and public consultation in the first place. when i first heard it i naturally assumed that the laws had already gone through the right channels but NOPE. For that reason i very openly condemn the ministers actions and still call for his resignation as a public voter. There are many reasons behind it and many effects of what their trying to do. The older crowds, 4wd's, sports cars and service providers (elect, gas, phone etc) are all behind the reason for the changes being revised and relooked over. Put simply the hoons he so quickly hid behind and illegal cars he claimed to be targetting were not going to feel the pinch anything like the majority of law abiding and roadworthy public would have. Hopefully they put some serious thought into what, why and if at all these laws need to be brought in (VSI50). Our current controls and engineering requirements are already suitable as our engineer in newcastle stated, the problem rests squarley with not providing the resources to train the police and enforcers, as well as providing the resources on the street to pull up and remove said vehicles. MAKE NO MISTAKE THOUGH PEOPLE, BUMPER HEIGHTS WILL ALL END UP CLOSER TOGETHER SOONER OR LATER. Just coz sydneykid says its a furphy doesnt mean he's informed. Yes the rear end collision is more common and yep bumper heights vary when it happens but as the statistics show its not the rear end accidents that kill or seriously injure people majority of the time. When we calculate our BCR's for how much money to ask the feds for and how to fix a blackspot itersection rear end crash gets us next to nothing. While head ons and run off roads bring big dollars and big improvements everytime. How does a dilligent RTA employee such as myself improve the accident history of rear ends, when people are so closely following the car in fornt, or traffic waves back with a sudden stop wave? we cant... I'd love to see anyone roll into crashlab and argue the results when its put in front of you. My example was extreme to dumb it down somewhat but i assure you its a real issue. I urge you to go crash your car into a raised 4wd head on and then come back and tell me its a furfy??? Or run a pedestrian over and see where the head impacts the hood on both low and high cars? Will the head hit something soft or something hard i wonder... The example i saw was a BA falcon offset head on with a standard commercial van. Both readily used on our roads day in day out by millions. It clearly showed problems with the crash despite only 200mm difference in bumper heights.

love it! subtle but obvious enough to pack the punch. Cara lookin back a few pages the shots are nice but you should get a someone to do a shoot of it with graffitti'd wall in the background. Be careful to pick the right wall though so your car doesnt fade away into the background. I was fan of the black r34 4dr on page 35 and the white one on this page for sure!

Ok some progress pics. The front bar first. It was real bashed around by transport from overseas or wherever it came from. Cracks, chips, n scuffs but none the less intact. I dont think it'll last long at all but we'll see what happens. Here's it fitted up. The rear bar so far looks too skirty for my liking and really boxed off the ass alot, but until the sideskirts are on im hesitant to judge. I'll give it time once its painted and see how it stays in my eyes, but chances are im going to end up getting it removed and modified to remove the skirt in favour of something a litlle less in ya face.

thats hot! i prefer the corners and blend lines on that bar as it comes around to the vents! Ok some progress pics. The front bar first. It was real bashed around by transport from overseas or wherever it came from. Cracks, chips, n scuffs but none the less intact. I dont think it'll last long at all but we'll see what happens. Here's it fitted up. The rear bar so far looks too skirty for my liking and really boxed off the ass alot, but until the sideskirts are on im hesitant to judge. I'll give it time once its painted and see how it stays in my eyes, but chances are im going to end up getting it removed and modified to remove the skirt in favour of something a litlle less in ya face.

sorry guys lifes been hectic lately and things ground to a hault for a bit. Goes in Monday to get the kit fitted up and sprayed. cant wait to see how it turns out! B3ZA you have me intrigued??? Did you get the same bar for yours and when??? Show us already i wanna see!!!

"dont forget.. in canada we have the 15 year import rule... so R33's still arnt legal.. we have 5-6 more years before R34's can enter the country" Jim bob here's why ^^^^ mate i honestly started reading thinking this guys a fool, then when i realised why you couldnt just buy a r34 i was like WOW this guys crazy!!!!! in a good way.... Top conversion man, full props and respect for awesomeness! I bet your lovin it long time

no idea mate but im going home to check mine.

wow two pages ago i saw a young skyline enthusiast get smacked for her posts not being consistent and her know all approach since joining. For sake of keyboard warriors and argument over who's right etc etc that member will probably lose interest in the forum and run off to some other place witha set attitude that the members of SAU are dickheads. Did you guys forget she's young? God i said some stupid shit in and out of dreaming about my ride in my younger days... While Miss R34 is out there representing the ladies and the skyline scene alike, polishing her pride n joy the very fact that she wants some respect for the N/A skyline was enough to overshadow her accomplishments with the bloodlust to shoot her and any other passionate N/A supporter down. The majority of the people in here are kids, young adults or new drivers guys, so hows about taking your arrogant hats off and using some tact in correcting their misinformed ways.... Oh and the front seat was always the best for sex, no wagon necessary. The imports just limit the girth of the people involved, call it natural selection if you will...lol Admin / Mods lock the bloodythread before it gets any more rediculous.

as long as its your way mate there's no right or wrong answers. Steer clear of engine mods while your on your p's to avoid defects, but also keep in mind if your selling later on what will make it sellable later on. Ie do the basics like suspension, brakes, wheels, zorst. Stereo and kits are great but becareful you dont get too committed and throw bulk dollars at the temporary ride (eg keep it tame).

i run Adaptronic in my sigma and i rate them highy. At the time of buying i was considering the Microtech LT12 but went with the adaptronic for budget but also knowing that the fact that it's price wasnt pushed up by the name. All the features are there and it's proving great results so i went with it. I run the 3 bar map, air temp, after market idle stepper, 02 sensor, tps, fuel pumps via auxillary and single coil setup with dizzy. this is it before it went into it's hidey hole Had no problems at all, love the cold start boost cut preventing you getting stuck in too early, and the after market idle stepper for smoothness. It's a full control system in a car that had no ecu prior so as a stand alone im very happy with it. if i were going to ecu upgrade my skyline i'd be going either adaptronic or vipec (glttoy's advice)

i run the GReddy type s bov to atmo and its wound in to hard setting. It flutters up to three times if im just starting to build boost and back off (driving gently etc). Dont much know why how or what, but i do like the sound. For me the light flutter is ok, but the louder pchsshht is where its at when im up her. For that reason i stayed away from the HKS SSQ on the skyline. Ive seen and heard a few vl's dosing and im of mixed opinion about it. one thing for sure it doesnt say hard tuned to me, it says hello ladies look at me im full sick.... All that said i chose the SSQ on my sigma to keep the noise down on gear changes. It's running short and large intake pipes so it's quite subtle but still doing the job. See how it sounds when i get to 18psi and if it's too invasive i'll go plumb back. With that car its all about less attention is better where skyline it's pose on.

mate i love the pearl white! hot colour for sure... since its become a thread of adding pics of r34 4 doors here's my gtt until it changes within a week or two anyway...

same problem with mine mate. Had the jack but no tool kit. From what i can tell the tool kit must sit with the spare tyre? My jack fits in there with the space saver kinda winds up into a bracket close to the back of the car. As for the tool kit show me a pic of it and i'll have stab at where it goes?

some hot pics in there mate! goin off for sure!!! you totally had my attention at the datto pics... Whats it look like now???

welcome beck, nice 34! Im certainly a fan of the kit and the wing goes nicely too on the classy white!

Thanks B3CKS appreciated! Life took a sharp detour of late and things just havnt been able to be put together until now. Financially i had to push back fitting the kit but here now it's set to go on. Next week it goes in for fitting of the kit and paint matching to the existing grey. I was looking to respray but that'll have to wait for now. This sunday i'll get the front bar off and refit the washer bottle before it goes away, and relocate the horns as theyre poorly placed from the FMIC fit up. In the mean time i've fitted a Greddy BOV to the existing location on the factory crossover pipe. See DIY section if your interested. Ive fitted the FMIC from just jap (cooling pro type 1 i think) in prep for the kit, but also as a small performance improvement. There's a thread under forced induction section showing the hows, but here's the end result. Going back a lil further i also had to fit a set of ngk iridiums and jjr coil packs. Running much better now, no complaints for sure.

i put my forum name and logo on my cooler by simply drawing it onto paper cutting it out and then sticking it over the cooler. Stuck the cooler back in its box, leaving only the stencil exposed and painted away till i was satisfied with it. I think i have it in my DIY thread. FMIC install the harder one under forced induction area???? Good luck man custom and simple but best bit is if you stuff it just turn it round or paint it all black.