Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

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

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) :P

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3093517
Share on other sites

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

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

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.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3098934
Share on other sites

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

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

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...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3100325
Share on other sites

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 by _8OO5TED_
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3100332
Share on other sites

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 by r32line
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3100412
Share on other sites

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 by salad
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/167183-33-vs-32/#findComment-3104667
Share on other sites

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

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



  • Latest Posts

    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
    • Well this shows me the fuel pump relay is inside the base of the drivers A Pillar, and goes into the main power wire, and it connects to the ignition. The alarm is.... in the base of the drivers A Pillar. The issue is that I'm not getting 12v to the pump at ignition which tells me that relay isn't being triggered. AVS told me the immobiliser should be open until the ignition is active. So once ignition is active, the immobiliser relay should be telling that fuel pump relay to close which completes the circuit. But I'm not getting voltage at the relay in the rear triggered by the ECU, which leaves me back at the same assumption that that relay was never connected into the immobiliser. This is what I'm trying to verify, that my assumption is the most likely scenario and I'll go back to the alarm tech yet again that he needs to fix his work.      Here is the alarms wiring diagram, so my assumption is IM3A, IM3B, or both, aren't connected or improper. But this is all sealed up, with black wiring, and loomed  
×
×
  • Create New...