Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 508
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • 2 weeks later...

shan,

current model bB or classic shape?

because toyota is bringing out the "rukus" in about a week's time... which is the current model bB

toyota saw a market opening for it when kia introduced the soul

....i prefer the true box... the cube.

current model bB or classic shape?

current model the QNC2-something. Maybe a good thing, it'll no doubt be expensive and people looking for an alternative might opt for a fringe-dweller spec Cube.

I'd laugh so hard if someone started bringing in Subaru Dexs? Dexii? as Subaru haven't sold em here, and they're basically the bB with a suby engine.

yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhh the thing is though... (this has been my opinion since the day one)

is people who are going to buy the "rukus" will know that it's a bB

as in... people will go to toyota looking for a bB van... the kind of buyer of the "rukus" isn't the kind of person that's

"just having a look around for a new car tossing up between the tiida the jazz and the swift"

they'll be going to TOYOTA because they want the bB van

does that make any sense??? i hope it does... i'm not very good at portraying my point there...

but

the customer will know about bB van from the internet... they'll want it because it's a box car

i highly doubt that the "rukus'" target market is going to be willing to pay the ~22k price tag for ... what is essentially a car people buy for teh lulz.

they will be more attracted to the more iconic, better priced and better equipped (yet older) nissan cube.

i know i would be - as far as "box" cars go... my preferences are as follows

honda stp wgn

honda jazz / fit

nissan cube (2nd gen - the one featured in this thread)

nissan cube (3rd gen - SERIOUSLY you guys need to get SEVS compliancing in on these cars before nissan cottons on!)

toyota bB first gen

suzuki wagon R

toyota bB 2nd gen (marketed as the Rukus)

and

the kia soul

in other words i don't find the rukus very desirable...

and - that's great news about your cube kris

are you serious.. i will EAT YOU.

ok i put up heaps of pics but "dynamic images" aren't allowed

so i'l bow out with merely a suzuki Wagon R

pregia-tissimo_wagonr.jpg

IMPORTERS TAKE NOTE.

the glory days of the japanese powerful car of the 1990's are over. the market is shifting and there is a new market of bean / toaster cars waiting to be SEVS approved!!!

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

    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
    • @GTSBoy yeah sorry i know thery are known for colors bud those DBA are too in colors 🙂 Green will be good enough for me  
×
×
  • Create New...