Jump to content
SAU Community

Strawberry Face 180 or R33 GTSt series II?

strange
 Share

Recommended Posts

predator Grand Master

predator

Posted
Posted

Hmm...

I'd go a 1994 or greater 180. I've been looking around a bit myself, as strongly considering a 180 towards the end of the year (amongst other things), after I sell my R33. Nothing particularly wrong about my R33, and its got power a'plenty, however they can get a bit boring after a while... To have a "good" gts-t (that draws attention) you gotta throw $10-15k at it... whereas with a cheaper car you can spend that and still not break the bank.

Thing is you spend so much on the car itself, but to do serious mods you gotta spend big bucks. And there is this like "barrier" of around 190rwkw where you have to spend big to jump that extra to 220rwkw+ and replace the stock turbo and computer, etc.

What is tempting for me is get a 12k car, and spend 10k on it and have a 12sec car. And that gpsports kit - i don't care whether it costs me $5k or more but i want one! With sensibly chosen mods, you'll be pushing 180rwkw or so. In a 1250kg car, with better weight distribution you're not going to find many GTS-T's (or anything else) that will give it a run for its money.

Parts are cheaper, weight distribution is better, insurance probably cheaper, and the car is cheaper so you'd probably experiment more with it.

Noise? well a R33 skyline is hardly quiet either.. I am sure a bit of noise insulation can get that down.

Interior? Yer, looks pretty basic to me.. but spend $2-$3k getting the interior retrimmed in something sexc , different seats and you'll be happy i think.

Don't forget also - 4cylinders has one key advantage over a 6.. if you have to/choose to rebuild the engine, you only have to replace 4 pistons, 4 hypo injectors, 4 sets of rods, etc. Much cheaper!

So if you want good power "out of the box", and don't want to spend much on it and like the visuals maybe go the skyline, but if you want more power available for less, and have some knowledge and want to tinker around a lot more with it, go the 180.

EVOIV Community Regular

EVOIV

Posted
Posted

I'd go for a late model 180 (1996+) with the black rocker cover SR20. Then do a s15 front end conversion, black out the round tail lights. Put a nice bodykit, or even better a widebody kit on it. Slam it to the ground on 18s and it'll look lurv-e-ly!! You can't beat the look :) Except maybe a damn nice looking chaser.

I feel that the R33 is too big a car to really get around. But then again, the interior of the 180s REALLY suck!! I would rip out the front two seats and replace them with Bride Seats. Also you can change the steering wheel and gear knob, but I don't know how much you can do about the dash...because they are pretty old looking. Maybe get a dash off the s15? They're nice! And I'm pretty sure it would fit without too much hassles.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kapr
      RB20DE NEO smallbox clutch.

      By Kapr · Posted

      For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...