r33 gts-t series 1 vs r32 gts-t

both of them completely stock

which has better handling

which is faster?

bold question but i'm curious

the r33 is faster stock, and with similar mods.

handling. both in perfect condition - i'd hae to say the 32. having said that though, in terms of it being faster, that's only provided the components are in good condition (momst of which aren't, the average 32 being 3-5 years older).

having said that though, the 32 is not THAT much better in terms of handling. few mods on the r33 will see it quick (most cars aren't stock anyways).

33 has better response off boost compared to the 32.

Drive both and decide for yourself. I drove several 33 gtst and a few 32 gtst's and decided I could live with the lag (for a while) on the 32 but I felt it was a much more spritely drive (although my car has coilovers etc so it's not quite stock handling wise)

33 for sure.

why would Nissan release a new model that was inferior?

when it comes to non GTR skylines each new model has out done the one before.

R31<R32<R33<R34<V35

(I would include GTRs here personally but someone will no doubt bring up 1/4 mile times)

Your right Mud someone who finally agrees with me. But alot of people think that quarter mile times are the be all and end all. There are more to GTR's then how fast they go down the strip.

that answers my question thanks guys!

33 for sure.

why would Nissan release a new model that was inferior?

when it comes to non GTR skylines each new model has out done the one before.

R31<R32<R33<R34<V35

(I would include GTRs here personally but someone will no doubt bring up 1/4 mile times)

Thats HIGHLY debateable

Thats HIGHLY debateable

Please explain?

Please explain?

CBF

But to say each car out did the one previous is very general and I dont think that is an accepted fact.

For one, I personally think the R33 styling was inferior to the R32 from every angle and I am not alone.

CBF

But to say each car out did the one previous is very general and I dont think that is an accepted fact.

For one, I personally think the R33 styling was inferior to the R32 from every angle and I am not alone.

We arnt talking about styling though we are talking about the mechanical side of things. It has been stated many times over that th R33 was more of a step sideways than a step forwards. Why would a car manufacture release a new model that isnt superior to the previous model? Perfect example is ford going from the EL to AU styling wasnt widely accepted but it was a superior mecahnically to the later.

We arnt talking about styling though we are talking about the mechanical side of things. It has been stated many times over that th R33 was more of a step sideways than a step forwards. Why would a car manufacture release a new model that isnt superior to the previous model? Perfect example is ford going from the EL to AU styling wasnt widely accepted but it was a superior mecahnically to the later.

agreed. r33 is faster despite the fact that they're slightly heavier. re: looks, both are nice in their own unique way.

I've owned both and the R32 gts-t is a pile of poo compared to the R33 gtst. Personal opinion.

Why would a car manufacture release a new model that isnt superior to the previous model?

Its not unheard of. Case in point - The current Holden Barina is inferior to the model it replaces, as Holden have obviously decided a lower priced/lower quality car will better suit the marketplace.

CBF

But to say each car out did the one previous is very general and I dont think that is an accepted fact.

For one, I personally think the R33 styling was inferior to the R32 from every angle and I am not alone.

Would I be right in guessing that R32 GTS-t owners who have never owned a R33 GTS-t be the ones thinking that?

If thats the case, I dont know anyone with a R33 who would EVER consider buying a R32 GTS-t.

Broken a/c vents, no torque, weak geaRboxs etc etc.....

The R32 vs R33 debate will seemingly never be put to rest.

Long live the BIG whale which, in the GTS25t coupe form, is only 80kg more than the R32 GTS-t but has the extra torque and power of the RB25...

Its not unheard of. Case in point - The current Holden Barina is inferior to the model it replaces, as Holden have obviously decided a lower priced/lower quality car will better suit the marketplace.

Not a great comparison, the Japanese, in the early-mid 90s, did not make vehicles to "better suit the marketplace" by having lower priced or inferior vehicles.

The R33 GTS25t retailed for about $24100 in 1993 when first released.

The R32 GTS-t retailed for about $19000 in 1989 when first released.

The R33 was not an inferior vehicle, however, it was when the R34 GT-t was released AND interestingly enough, the base model R34 GT-t 5spd retailed at $24100 in 1998.

***Not that any of the above matters. Simply drive both vehicles and see what feels right for you, because on here there are far too many one eyed R32/R33 fans. The pro and cons can be discussed but at the end of the day, you want a car best suited to what you want.

Edited May 5, 200719 yr by _8OO5TED_

Why would a car manufacture release a new model that isnt superior to the previous model?

Its not unheard of. Case in point - The current Holden Barina is inferior to the model it replaces, as Holden have obviously decided a lower priced/lower quality car will better suit the marketplace.

Not a great comparison, the Japanese, in the early-mid 90s, did not make vehicles to "better suit the marketplace" by having lower priced or inferior vehicles.

It was not a comparison, I was answering his question but I guess you missed that bit.

Edited May 5, 200719 yr by r32line

Well the Nissan Skyline isnt an example of that in any way, shape or form.

The R32 has better handling from very similar suspension geometry but less weight. The R33s suspension was revised to spread the load on the upper control arm over a larger area resulting in the bushes lasting longer.

R33 has superior engine though.

Which is faster is another matter, are you talking lap times, straight line or something else? Lap times are hard to say as there are a lot of variables.

But straight line, simplistically R33 is ~5-6% heavier but has ~16% more power, so R33 is faster.

Edited May 7, 200719 yr by salad

But straight line, simplistically R33 is ~5-6% heavier but has ~16% more power, so R33 is faster.

Hahaha, i dont agree with that statement at all. You cannot apply rules like 16% more power but only 6% more weight means its faster... I know the R33 is quicker (in a straight line) but just because one cars power to weight ratio is better than another cars it does not mean that car is going to be faster. How a car puts its power down introduces countless other variables....Tyres, AWD vs RWD vs FWD, Traction control system, launch control.... I wont bother continuing