Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I saw the car being built and modified, it's defintely not the genuine MINES car... however, it's unreal none the less. :(

Are you 100% autosyle own it? I'm quite sure they are SELLING it on behalf of the corner, rather than own it... as they do with a lot of their cars. Unless they recently purchased it off him.

Edited by TommO

I doubt Mines would sell the real car for any price, atleast not in the trim that it cuts sick laps times in.

Surely the development and yen invested would be more to them, then just selling their full developed product to anybody to copy or immitate?

I can't think of anything better to buy for the money.  You have a supercar fetish Alien and $169k wont get you there.

same....anybody want to buy the states quickest street skyline??

I can't think of anything better to buy for the money.  You have a supercar fetish Alien and $169k wont get you there.

purchase the RPM 33 and then blow the extra 50k you'd need for this one, that would be interesting B)

I can't think of anything better to buy for the money.  You have a supercar fetish Alien and $169k wont get you there.

really? here's just one example:

1998 Ferrari Testarossa. $139K and 22000km.

3541418.jpg

really? here's just one example:

1998 Ferrari Testarossa. $139K and 22000km.

3541418.jpg

I'd be confident in saying this GTR would blow this out of the water if you had to choose between the two.....

But i could never justify $160,000 on a GTR unless i was stupidly rich with nothing to spend my money on.

Edited by MADGT4

This car's got a carbon driveshaft! That's dedication!!!

NO it's not THE real mines car but yes the engine was bought from Mines (that's hardcore!). It's a MINES replica but I think it's great value considering the mods done to it. I would definitely say over $200k spent... easy.

purchase the RPM 33 and then blow the extra 50k you'd need for this one, that would be interesting    B)

Thats exactly what i was thinking. I has air con, is quiet and in my eyes looks almost as good. And thinking about it, i can think of three simple mods that would make it quicker then the Mines car to boot (if it isnt already) :P

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Input shaft bearing. They all do it. There is always rollover noise in Nissan boxes - particularly the big box. Don't worry about it unless it gets really growly.
    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
×
×
  • Create New...