Cyprus Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 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 Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/ Share on other sites More sharing options...
MANWHORE Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 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). Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3093077 Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf80 Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 33 has better response off boost compared to the 32. Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3093460 Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubba Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 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) Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3093517 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mud Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 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) Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3093525 Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf80 Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 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. Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3093787 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyprus Posted May 3, 2007 Author Share Posted May 3, 2007 that answers my question thanks guys! Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3095372 Share on other sites More sharing options...
r32line Posted May 3, 2007 Share Posted May 3, 2007 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 Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3095594 Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf80 Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 Thats HIGHLY debateable Please explain? Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3096958 Share on other sites More sharing options...
r32line Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 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. Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3098856 Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf80 Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 CBFBut 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. Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3098934 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spunky Munky Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 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. Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3099163 Share on other sites More sharing options...
sewid Posted May 4, 2007 Share Posted May 4, 2007 I've owned both and the R32 gts-t is a pile of poo compared to the R33 gtst. Personal opinion. Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3099374 Share on other sites More sharing options...
r32line Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 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. Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3099668 Share on other sites More sharing options...
_8OO5TED_ Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 CBFBut 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... Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3100325 Share on other sites More sharing options...
_8OO5TED_ Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 (edited) 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, 2007 by _8OO5TED_ Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3100332 Share on other sites More sharing options...
r32line Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 (edited) 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, 2007 by r32line Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3100412 Share on other sites More sharing options...
_8OO5TED_ Posted May 5, 2007 Share Posted May 5, 2007 Well the Nissan Skyline isnt an example of that in any way, shape or form. Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3100924 Share on other sites More sharing options...
salad Posted May 7, 2007 Share Posted May 7, 2007 (edited) 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, 2007 by salad Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3104667 Share on other sites More sharing options...
r32line Posted May 9, 2007 Share Posted May 9, 2007 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 Link to comment https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3105572 Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now