Buying R32, Choice Of Turbo Or N/a

[Sub Lover]

Hi everyone. I'm looking at buying myself a r32 skyline. I am buying through a import caryard and they currently have two models, essentially exactly the same (1990 r32 coupes) Both are the RB20DE's however one is a turbo. There is only $1.5k between the two, so I could possibly stretch my budget to afford the turbo however...

I am worried about insuring a turbo, the n/a model can only get me 3rd party fire/theft, but the turbo will probably make it uninsurable (for my budget anyway!) Also, due to the age of the cars, I am inclined to think the N/A engine will be in better condition due to less chance of it being thrashed and as turbo's naturally put more strain on the engine. However, I doubt I'd be able to turbo a N/A car for only 1.5k. However this car needs to last a while whislt I pay the loan for it off, and a N/A would definately be more reliable.

Another thing is performance, I like the idea of a turbo, however even as a fully licensed driver I am worried that I will not be able to handle the power (and thats saying something since I've managed to push my 1.8L Pulsar to do some crazy things!) and that I would risk crashing the car or blowing the engine or something similar (All you L and P platers out there wanting a turbo, believe me, DON'T, I could give you a long list of people I know who have had bad accidents because they got a car too powerful for them to handle, stick with a low power car for the first few years, you'll be a better driver for it)

Anyway, getting back to it. Even a N/A 2 litre 6 cyl should be a marked increase on my current car so it should be enough to satisfy my need for power. Although I must admit the idea of the turbo appeals to me mostly coz I would then be able to drag off my brothers WRX, which the N/A would not be able to do .

So for all those guys with experience in both, would I be best to stick with N/A and upgrade later and for now have a potentially more reliable engine or will the turbo version be likely to last as long and be worth the extra 1.5k? And will a N/A still have enough kick to satisfy me without being TOO powerful, or are the turbo's fairly easy to control?

Thanks for letting me get that all out, sorry if any of this has been covered in past threads but I really need to get all this info all together in one place to make my final choice. Anywayz, Merry christmas to all, happy new year! Hope to get a good response soon and with any luck will be joining you all in owning a skyline (assuming my loan gets approved of course )

Incidently, the prices of the cars are $8900 and $10500 respectively, neither are registered (So an RACT check is in the pipelines, and yes, the T is for TASMANIA) Anywayz, thanks again

[John-]

n/a

[andylaurel]

turbo

[Sub Lover]

Uhm, thanks for the quick and short responses, from both sides of the coin, however I kinda need to know the detailed pro's and con's of both with the afforementioned concerns, thanks

[slip]

turbo pro's - the power. which doesnt really come on till youve got a few revs on board. better brakes.

cons - more things to go wrong. they are pretty slow, so if you do get yourself into trouble, then you don't have the maturity/car control to be driving anything decent. A BA falcon has more power than a turbo 32.

non turbo pros - easy to drive, balanced, insurance, less things to go wrong.

cons - resale, small brakes (won't be an issue unless you are doing trackdays or if you are a hard braker and doing mountain runs.

who cares about dragging your brothers WRX off from the lights. its not a dîck measuring competition. enjoy driving, and use driving courses/trackdays/skidpan days to be the best/safest driver possible.

[god's rx]

turbo

[IanB]

Posting this in the NA forums will get you a NA weighted response.

I drove a 1.8L NA on my last car then swaped the engine out for a 1.8L turbo. Same engine, but factory turbo. The difference is staggering. You have a much more responsive throttle in the turbo, more pickup and just a better feel.

a 32 GTST is not a terribly quick car. But you will kick yourself if you get a 32 NA, it will be about the same speed or less as your pulsar due to added weight and added drivetrain loss, albeit with more traction. It wont handle as well as the pulsar did in stock form either.

The turbo has lag yes. But not much. At the end of the day the turbo version is the most common and most popular version because its got good power to weight. The NA version is very mild, im thinking of getting one for my daily driver because its a nice slow car with low fule consumption however it still looks the goods (for the record, I drive a 32 GTR, which is a 2.6L Twin Turbo AWD skyline)

[siiick]

RB20DE very slow, if you want reasonable performance just buy the turbo and drive it stock. It's your decision whether or not to up the boost. engine could very well be bad, but there are so many of them you will definately find any parts that need fixing.

Insurance, is very similar.

imo you'll do better with the turbo. The power difference between the RB20DE and RB25DE is quite noticable.

[Munkyb0y]

turbo..... R33

[shaun123]

get the turbo because i dont think a RB20DE would move at all, theres no point buying a skyline with no turbo(i've made the mistake of buying a non-turbo r33 skyline myself ). btw hope its not a WRX STi

[blackprincegts]

well i own both.. iv got a 32 gts manuel anda 32 gts t auto..believe it or not my gts will beat my gts t through the hills etc.. well as long as i keep the revs above and 7 grand where the power comes in.Iv weighed both the cars and the gts is 90kg lighter than the auto gts t so thats probably why i can getit goen quicker through corners and crap..

Line the 2 cars up at the lights and the gts will normally have the gts t by about half a car through 1st.. then, dead even right through 2nd.. just after changing into 3rd in the gts (about 100km/h) the gts t will pull away a decent amount.

As for the fuel economy, the difference between the 2 is nothing in my opinion..actually if anything the gts t (which is driven by my wife) gets about 30-40kms more per tank nowadays than my gts.

I can tell you that after driving both cars that the gts t feels a hell ov lot more powerfull. The problem with the gts is there really isnt much power below about 4500rpm, if you want to make it go well you gotta take the revs up. The gts t just powers away easily with plenty of torque pull from about 2700-2800rpm. Oh and the gts has bugger all torque and doesnt like hills much either, once again unless you drive it above 5000rpm. The gts t just powers up big hills extremely easily.

I would say if you can afford the turbo car then go for that one. Gts's can get a bit annoying to drive around sometimes due to their lack ov torque, believe me you get sick ov revving it out all the time.

And also if it helps you at all, a gts will easily beat your pulsar ina drag. I know people with them and yeah, they get eaten by me.lol. Ina straight line you will be around 2-3 car lenghts ahead ov VN commies etc, which is always a good... ahahaha..

all the best with making your decision.

[Greg]

If non turbo find a R32 with a RB25DE, otherwise get the turbo R32 (RB20DET).

As said, non turbo R32 with RB20DE would be like a pulsar in terms or speed. could still have fun in the wet on a skidpan etc though