Why A Naturally-aspirated Skyline?

[ish]

Na's are Na's ... cool cars for their intended individual purpose's

I highy doubt that you gain better driver skill buy driving a NA same model over a turbo version... Sure you will end up trying harder but thats nothing to do with the end result of learning skills to Race . Racing is combo of Accelration, Handeling, braking and genoral control over a distance course >not try harder in less power will equip you better .....the fact is you will lap faster in any car with practice

Your getting defensive for no reason there EUG, No gtr owner has bagged anyone in this thread i just found that few lines about the NA supra higly amusing.

Edited May 24, 2007 by ish

[Spunky Munky]

I find it quite bemusing that some GTS owners are trying to justify why they bought a NA vehicle instead of a turbo one. You did it because you wanted to regardless of whatever reason. Therefore, in other words - it's fate neverless.

I don't think any NA owner should make comments that they think they can outrun, outspeed a turbo car as this is totally incorrect and dreamy. That said, doesn't matter what kind of vehicle you drive, as long as you're happy that's the main thing Turbo or otherwise.

[ish]

Nice Avatar Spunky

[Spunky Munky]

Nice Avatar Spunky

ha ha ha ha.... thanks mate... is that my STAFF??? that's spinning in your avatar??? LOL

Kingggg Muunnkkkkkeeeeey oh yeah!

Monkey Magic rode a SkyCloud - I ride a kick arse GT Skyline! oh yeah!

[Victory]

I have a R33 GTR V-Spec and a R33 GTS-T and I love the performance that these cars provide. I am talking about overall performance, great handling, braking, high speed stability and acceleration.

I attempted to talk my son into a NA Skyline (R32 with a RB25DE) as a first car because of the overall dynamics that the car offered without too much power. Instead, he started off with a modified 323 Mazda which he managed to put into a rock wall and write off.

My first car (34 years ago) was a Mazda 929 Coupe. As a young bloke I learnt a lot about driving in that car. The progressive engine, exhaust, suspension, body modifications developed the car’s performance to reflect my increasing skills through to the point where it even had a cage and full harnesses.

From my experience a NA Skyline is a perfect first car because it has the dynamics of a Skyline without the performance. Also, as your skills improve there are so many upgrades that you can do from a GTS-T – suspension, brakes, etc.

[Eug]

Na's are Na's ... cool cars for their intended individual purpose's

I highy doubt that you gain better driver skill buy driving a NA same model over a turbo version... Sure you will end up trying harder but thats nothing to do with the end result of learning skills to Race . Racing is combo of Accelration, Handeling, braking and genoral control over a distance course >not try harder in less power will equip you better .....the fact is you will lap faster in any car with practice

Your getting defensive for no reason there EUG, No gtr owner has bagged anyone in this thread i just found that few lines about the NA supra higly amusing.

of course i am getting defensive - because countless times we have had to explain to others that we simply do not want a turbo car (if we did, we would - and the gtst/gtr guys seem to be continuously pressing their own ideals and are constantly trying to sway us). when we start threads as to how to extract a little more power from the na engines, you get narrow minded people who simply come in here and think a turbo will solve all. it wont.

as to learning skill, i'm not saying everyone must get an NA car to gain skill, it's simply a stepping stone. where do people start? go karts, production classed races, not everyone jumps straight into a formula 1 car. i see countless written off gtsts, gtrs, turbo 180/s13s/s14s/s15s, because people simply cannot handle the sudden hit of boost. this is by no means a generalization - and i'm certainly not saying any one particular model is better than the other.

find what you may - this has just been my personal observations of a select few. each model serves it's purpose, otherwise people wouldn't buy them. it's like telling rb20det owners not to bother with modifying them and that an rb25 is the answer, and likewise for them and that an rb25/26/30det is the answer...

victory (charles) is pretty much spot on and highlights what i said before about having a stepping stone... the case study about his son is also a prime example and re-enforces the fact that regardless of what car accidents/control/etc can and do happen. just having a more powerful car would more than likely increase the chances of a spin out/crash/etc because people simply cannot encompass all aspects and the dynamics of the car in one go.

that said i am currently in the pipeline for more power - to get more power from the current motor is futile for my budget, and although i have yet to max out the car's braking and suspension capabilities they are pretty much done to death and are far exceeding the power output of my car. i am a fairly open minded person, and it's these narrow minded people with "the gtr (gtst) can never lose" mentality that not only makes me want to prove them wrong, but simply put - they are no better than the bogans who yell out: "get a v8"

[are33]

of course i am getting defensive - because countless times we have to explain to people that we simply do not want a turbo car, and when we start threads to extract a little more power we get narrow minded people who simply come in here and think a turbo will solve all. it wont.

as to learning skill, i'm not saying everyone must get an na car to get skill, it's simply a stepping stone. where do people start? go karts, production classed races, not everyone jumps straight into a formula 1 car. i see countless written off gtsts, gtrs, turbo 180/s13s/s14s/s15s, because people simply cannot handle the sudden hit of boost. this is by no means a generalisation - and i'm not saying anyone particular model is better than the other.

find what you may - this has just been my personal observations of a select few. each model serves its purpose, otherwise people wouldn't buy them. it's like telling rb20det owners not to bother with modding them, and that an rb25 is the answer, and likewise for them and that an rb25/26/30det is the answer...

victory (charles) is pretty much spot on and highlights what i said before about having a stepping stone... the case study about his son is also a prime example and re-enforces the fact that regardless of what car accidents/control/etc can and do happen. just having a more powerful car would more than likely increase the chances of a spin out/crash/etc because people simply cannot encompass all aspects and the dynamics of the car in one go.

I was thinking it, He said it. NA skylines get picked on so much from narrow minded people... Gets on your nerves after a while.

[R33GTS25]

P plate restrictions, 149kw isnt bad either.

[are33]

P plate restrictions, 149kw isnt bad either.

wheels or engine?

[scathing]

I don't think any NA owner should make comments that they think they can outrun, outspeed a turbo car as this is totally incorrect and dreamy.

Not in the straights, but on the right winding road I don't see it as being incorrect or dreamy.

[Eug]

Not in the straights, but on the right winding road I don't see it as being incorrect or dreamy.

touché scathing, another turbo owner who thinks they have the answer.

and lets face it, there are other events such as motorkhanas, hill climbs, tight tracks and deca rallies - this is where turbo lag, and high power come at a disadvantage, and where driver skill and car control dominate.

the point? people need to learn observe the whole motorsport scene as a whole, that races aren't just measured in the time it takes to cross a 400m straight, and that surprise surprise underpowered cars can also give you a run for your money.

[smurf80]

I don't think any NA owner should make comments that they think they can outrun, outspeed a turbo car as this is totally incorrect and dreamy.

That has to be the stupidest comment I have ever seen here and just shows how narrow minded you actually are.

Before you bag me out and say you own an NA you dont know what your on about. I had a lightly modified Series 2 R33 Gts25t which would of put out around 200rwkw so I have driven both and know what they are like. Sure the NA lacks power etc but it still is a skyline to drive and it behaves exactly like my previous car, just power challenged.

The reason I got rid of it as I couldnt of been bothered to buy a cheap runabout as it was my daily driver and im saving for a house so the toy needed to go. And id take a NA Skyline anyday over a Commodore or Falcon

Having said that I have seen a s13 with a modifed s14 NA motor in it give the turbo boys a scare. Also check some of the threads around here with the RB30DE build ups as they seem to be getting some respectable power or check out the 33 with the infinity V8 in it he made some good power when it was still NA. My point is turbos arnt the only route to making power.

Edited May 25, 2007 by smurf80

[SKiT_R31]

Aggreeing with the above post, i have had numerous R32's/R33's even 34's etc (most likely typical stock, with FMIC and 3" exhaust) pull up beside me, want to give me a go, even had people laugh at the thaught of dragging me.

I chop them, over 150rwkw now, with short gearing, light car, locked diff, no lag, she just walks away from the typical attitude people, omfg fully sik turbo beat everything.

in stating that, yeah you can get more power cheaper and easier from boost, but its not as fun and satisfying, and would never sound as good .

its all about deciding what power you want, and how you want to get it.

i would much rather 160 at the wheels, in an N/A screamer 3L than the same from a 20det

11L/100 avg, enough torque to happily pull up a hill at 1500rpm [not labouring, any more accel and it quickly accelerates] (5th gr) with 7% acceleration (SAFC) what more could you want.

that said, thats my daily, and thats how i like my daily, and i am going to build another turbo as a thrasher, because they are fun and easy.

[ish]

lol typo somehow posted it before it was finished see below

Edited May 25, 2007 by ish

[Eug]

there's the door... cya

[DivHunter]

That has to be the stupidest comment I have ever seen here and just shows how narrow minded you actually are.

Before you bag me out and say you own an NA you dont know what your on about. I had a lightly modified Series 2 R33 Gts25t which would of put out around 200rwkw so I have driven both and know what they are like. Sure the NA lacks power etc but it still is a skyline to drive and it behaves exactly like my previous car, just power challenged.

The reason I got rid of it as I couldnt of been bothered to buy a cheap runabout as it was my daily driver and im saving for a house so the toy needed to go. And id take a NA Skyline anyday over a Commodore or Falcon

Having said that I have seen a s13 with a modifed s14 NA motor in it give the turbo boys a scare. Also check some of the threads around here with the RB30DE build ups as they seem to be getting some respectable power or check out the 33 with the infinity V8 in it he made some good power when it was still NA. My point is turbos arnt the only route to making power.

Do you even read what you type? Seriously?

We're talking about the same car with different engine configurations and because he says the one with more power will be faster you call him stupid and narrow minded. WTF? Then say the NA is power challenged and list engine transplants as some kind of NA is awesome so ner. Get a grip, remember the turbo model also has slightly better susension set-up, 33 at least cbf looking into the others for this post. Same driver the turbo is going to be faster, straigh, twisty or backflips. Same car + more power = faster car mmkay. Your listed transplants don't forget will again make more power with FI.

As for "on the right winding road" yeah well under the right conditions I could beat Mike Tyson to death with my wang but those circumstances are pretty specific and don't really apply to anything.

Aggreeing with the above post, i have had numerous R32's/R33's even 34's etc (most likely typical stock, with FMIC and 3" exhaust) pull up beside me, want to give me a go, even had people laugh at the thaught of dragging me.

I chop them, over 150rwkw now, with short gearing, light car, locked diff, no lag, she just walks away from the typical attitude people, omfg fully sik turbo beat everything.

in stating that, yeah you can get more power cheaper and easier from boost, but its not as fun and satisfying, and would never sound as good .

its all about deciding what power you want, and how you want to get it.

i would much rather 160 at the wheels, in an N/A screamer 3L than the same from a 20det

11L/100 avg, enough torque to happily pull up a hill at 1500rpm [not labouring, any more accel and it quickly accelerates] (5th gr) with 7% acceleration (SAFC) what more could you want.

that said, thats my daily, and thats how i like my daily, and i am going to build another turbo as a thrasher, because they are fun and easy.

You sure they were 'racing' you? Sounds more like you are just one of those wankers that 'races' everyone at the lights. Just because you think everyone is challenging your manhood doesn't mean they are.

i give up, to much dribble in here. I am sure no one cares why you choose your NA's except the thread starter... if you cant take a bit of stic for your na with out having a winge and writing a 400 word essay on your rather stange take on motor sport, get a counciller. I come from and era when a turbo was a joke and NA v8s were the sheep car .. i have spent 18 years in turbos now coping crap from the start for my huffer going back before r32's were invented and i can tell you straight eug your taliking shit.

in the 80's it was turbos blow up , to much lag , bearings wear out, wont beat a V8 etc etc.all complete BS!!! now after years of ignorance it has been proven to be one of the most efficient ways of making power thu results and refinments

The points are as stated NA> good to learn in, fairly instant response and better fuel economy. you get the same car although slightly not as factory streghthend as a turbo release in certain arears.

I know what i would rather take up a hill a buetiful loading turbo or a na that i have to rig to get its cam on power

This post makes sense and clearly doesn't belong here.

there's the door... cya

You're delusional.

This post it too long.

[R33GTS25]

wheels or engine?

Engine

Wheels is about 90 - 100. still not bad ;o)

[ish]

i give up, to much dribble in here. I am sure no one cares why you choose your NA except the thread starter... if you cant take a bit of stic for your na with out having a whinge and writing a 400 word essay on your rather strange take on motor sport, get a councilor.

I come from and era when a turbo was a joke and NA v8s were the sheep car.. i have spent 18 years in turbo’s now coping bad crap in the start for my huffer going back before r32's and FF were invented. I can tell you straight eug you’re making things up about things you don’t understand.

In the 80's it was turbo’s blow up, to much lag, bearings wear out, Australia is to harsh, never beat a V8 etc etc. All complete BS!!! Now after years of first ignorance and then later results it has been proven to be one of the most efficient ways of making power thu results and refinements

The points are as stated

NA Factory> good to learn in, fairly instant response governed by cam specs and better fuel economy. You get the same car although slightly not as factory strengthened as a turbo release in certain area’s> brakes, drivelines, fuel systems.

Turbo factory> Faster, adjustable power, perpetual motion system and a much wider scope if you possess the understanding

I know what I would rather take up a hill or round a track….. a beautiful loading turbo or a na of the same kilowatt that I have to ring to get its cam range on power…. This is where a turbo comes into its own and cancels anything you claim will slow it down ie lag which is only ever a take off or driver problem.

[Eug]

it's apples and oranges - i dont see why all the turbo owners want to compare the two types of cars? keep in mind you are in the NA section, where we talk about NA stuff. so don't come in here preaching about how a turbo car is all this and all that. do you want a medal for having a turbo car, do you feel superior for owning one to the point where you have to come in here and think you're doing the world a greater good trying to "show us the light"??

Same driver the turbo is going to be faster, straigh, twisty or backflips. Same car + more power = faster car mmkay.

although you are right in some regard - the fact that you can apply power more linearly and progressively means you're out of the tighter corners faster and smoother than turbo cars. it's all about driveability and personal preference of each individual driver. F1 cars arent forced induced? only the "push to pass cars - the name escapes me at the moment" run forced induction...

i'd like to see this comparison end, i'm sick of justifying and defending why we have chosen the cars we own in OUR OWN SECTION. i'm not a moderator nor would i like to get one involved, if you have nothing constructive to add then i am politely asking you to post no further.

thanks.

[DivHunter]

it's apples and oranges - i dont see why all the turbo owners want to compare the two types of cars? keep in mind you are in the NA section, where we talk about NA stuff. so don't come in here preaching about how a turbo car is all this and all that. do you want a medal for having a turbo car, do you feel superior for owning one to the point where you have to come in here and think you're doing the world a greater good trying to "show us the light"??

although you are right in some regard - the fact that you can apply power more linearly and progressively means you're out of the tighter corners faster and smoother than turbo cars. it's all about driveability and personal preference of each individual driver. F1 cars arent forced induced? only the "push to pass cars - the name escapes me at the moment" run forced induction...

i'd like to see this comparison end, i'm sick of justifying and defending why we have chosen the cars we own in OUR OWN SECTION. i'm not a moderator nor would i like to get one involved, if you have nothing constructive to add then i am politely asking you to post no further.

thanks.

The relatively brief reign of turbocharged engines in F1 witnessed some of greatest raw horsepower ever unleashed on the famous circuits, coupled with personal rivalries among champions that continue to affect the sport today.