Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

My GTR is just a normal GTR and my model is KBNR32RXFS7, the 7 on the end means it's a normal GTR, if it was an 8 it means it's a V-Spec II, if the number is absent, it's a V-Spec I.

Also the KBNR32RBFS, B means it has 17" V-Spec wheels.

http://www.users.on.net/~goofyhsk/info/chassis_plate.html

Thanks very much.

So it confirrms that it is a V-Spec I

It has the BBS 17's, Finned Diff and Brembos but it is nice to be sure.

Thanks

Ash

Hi

I was reading the post above about "V" Spec 1 identification

Does the build number have to have the B for 17 inch wheels as well as the 7 and 8 missing?

EG The number KBNR32RXFSLMZG built 08/90. It does not have a 7 or 8 but come with 16 inch wheels and seems to early.

In what year and month were V specs first produced?

Cheers

The number you have quoted could be (paste from wikipedia):

The Skyline GT-R 'Nismo', introduced in February 22, 1990, has a total production of 560 units as required for the "Evolution" models regulation (over 500). Its purpose is to homologate a number of aerodynamic changes used in Group A racing. Changes include additional ducts in the front bumper to improve airflow to the intercooler, a bonnet lip spoiler to direct more air into the engine bay, and an additional boot lip spoiler to provide more downforce. The 'Nismo' GT-R was only available in Gunmetal Grey.

The unknown bits on the end, LMZG could indicate the intercooler ducts, bonnet lip spoiler, boot lip spoiler etc (ive never seen a Nismo R32 GTR model string before)

As for it being a V-Spec, impossible (paste from wikipedia):

To celebrate the success of the GT-R in both Group N and Group A racing, Nissan introduced the Skyline GT-R V-Spec ("Victory Specification") car on February 3, 1993. The V-Spec added Brembo brakes and a retuned ATTESA E-TS system to the Nismo and N1 packages, as well as 17" BBS wheels with 225/45/17 tires. The V-Spec has a list price of ¥ 5.260 million.
Hi

I was reading the post above about "V" Spec 1 identification

Does the build number have to have the B for 17 inch wheels as well as the 7 and 8 missing?

EG The number KBNR32RXFSLMZG built 08/90. It does not have a 7 or 8 but come with 16 inch wheels and seems to early.

In what year and month were V specs first produced?

Cheers

Hi

I was reading the post above about "V" Spec 1 identification

Does the build number have to have the B for 17 inch wheels as well as the 7 and 8 missing?

EG The number KBNR32RXFSLMZG built 08/90. It does not have a 7 or 8 but come with 16 inch wheels and seems to early.

In what year and month were V specs first produced?

Cheers

Yes the build number has to have the B meaning 17 inch rims, the missing number in the code and AA on the end to be a vspec. Vspcs were released in 1993 so there is no way you would have one. For some reason nissan didnt always have the 7 in the model code for the "series 1" r32's (built until 1991 some time). They are always in the "series 2" model code though.

As for the last 4 letters of the model code, LMZG, i posted 2 pages back what they are.

You just have a normal r32 gtr.

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

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...