Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys i am sebastiaan i from the netherlands. And i was searching for more info over the stagea so that way i found

this forum but now i am sitting with a problem of choosing between a WNGC34 or a GH-NM35 what is the best choise

If you are planning major engine modifications i think parts are more readily available for the RB25DET of the C34 and i prefer the look but the standard turbo M35 has more power and more upmarket features (and actually looks better in the metal than in the photos).

It would be more a matter of personal choice and whether or not you will be doing modifications to the car. The C34 probably has more aftermarket support and for the most part is easier to work on, especially if you want to change the turbo later on.

Either way, the Stagea is proving to owners (of both C34 and M35) to be a dream car to own - right guys and girls?

id agree! its got good performance and creature comforts. and youre right, the aftermarket support of the M35 isnt as great as the C34. that said, the C34 HAS been around a lot longer. give it time and the M35 parts will come down in price. hopefully with the yen and when i have some cash :)

hi sebastiaan, a warm aussie welcome to you, it's a hard choice you are considering, obviously both models are great cars, i think it,s personal taste really although the c34 is an older model they are well advanced and you can still find excellent examples, the m35 is an exciting car with more aftermarket bits available to make it look more desirable, but the main reason i purchased a c34 apart from all the extras that come with my car the one thing that sold me was a tried and tested RB MOTOR.

goodluck with your choice whichever way you go you will not be disappointed.

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

    • 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.
    • Yes they do. For some maybe. But for those used the most by abusers, ie Skylines, the numbers are known. The stock eyebrow height for R32/3 Skylines is about 365/375mm or thereabouts. The minimum such heights are recorded in adjacent columns in the database.
×
×
  • Create New...