Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Even better in that mag JC jumps into a F430 Scuderia and the Stig 'tries' to catch him in the new GTR...

..can't wait for it to hit our shores (the mag that is :whistling: ) so I can have a read.

Nope, JC drives the 430 but the Stig doesnt follow him in the GTR.

Its GTR vs 911 Turbo. And its not JC driving the GTR, its Bill Thomas.

The Stig does pop out of a bush at the Nurburgring, jumps into the GTR for a few laps and then disppears back into the bushes. :lol:

To be expected. Promote the new japanese superweapon on a yankee redneck car website, and this is what will happen.

Its exactly what happens when people talk about the Z06 or the VE Commodore on here. Neither are bad cars, for the price and intended market.

Hell, when the Veyron was released there were a whole bunch of SAU keyboard warriors saying how its shit and Skylines are better. :/

hahaha, i bet some people said something like "why should i spend 1 mill on a Veyron when i can spend 1 mill on a gtr and be faster than everything else "

Its like you've got a direct connection to the Internet. :banana:

Its either that or "I could spend half that and make a 1000hp GT-R that would run faster than a 9.8s quarter and use the change to buy XYZ", ignoring the fact that the Veyron can repeat those numbers with a few thousand kilometres between minor services (rather than a pull-down after every run), can do 400km/hr with rock solid stability, doesn't require the use of ear plugs, go around bends, and not be slower than a pedestrian when off-boost, and every other drivability compromise you'd have to make in a big-power GT-R.

That's true, nobody with a hot modded GTR talks about what happens below 4000 rpm. What happens in Ball bearing single turbo club, stays in Ball bearing single turbo club

Edited by MikeClark
  • 3 months later...

the new z06 is actually quite good.. does 105km/h in first gear.. im a big fan of it.

The GTR hasnt lost a single comparison/race so far.. i didnt think it would be quicker then the R8, but hell!!! :)

Its like you've got a direct connection to the Internet. :P

Its either that or "I could spend half that and make a 1000hp GT-R that would run faster than a 9.8s quarter and use the change to buy XYZ", ignoring the fact that the Veyron can repeat those numbers with a few thousand kilometres between minor services (rather than a pull-down after every run), can do 400km/hr with rock solid stability, doesn't require the use of ear plugs, go around bends, and not be slower than a pedestrian when off-boost, and every other drivability compromise you'd have to make in a big-power GT-R.

That's true, nobody with a hot modded GTR talks about what happens below 4000 rpm. What happens in Ball bearing single turbo club, stays in Ball bearing single turbo club

Lets not forget that the owner of the Veyron can choose to also spend big bucks on a fast GTR if they wanted to (if you have 1 mil euro to spend on a car then you can easily buy as many GTRs as you wanted to), while the GTR owner most probably couldn't afford to buy a Veyron.

ill be honest guys, when i first saw the specs for this thing i was a little doughtfull it will deliver but after reading this little quote from the mag i am very satisfied and take my hat off to nissan for there effort...

(sorry if my grammar is shite , extremely shmashed as im writtting this)

Can i get some of what you've had?

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...