Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

A neighbour of mine asked me what I think of the Skyline series and whether it is a good idea to buy one as a first car. He's 17.

What do you guys think? Is it a good idea to learn how to handle a powerful RWD car while you're young or should the youngens drive a small FWD to begin with and why?

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Why do these type of threads come up all the time? Ask yourself what do all young male drivers do in there first car. - Hammer it. Why do you think they want a skyline then? Ask him if he would drive a turbo or non turbo version to find the answer. If he just likes the power (which all young drivers do, don't kid yourself), tell him to chill out till hes older. Then he'll at least get older.

ummmm im plannning to get a skyline for my first car....n not because of the power but simply because i have a love for this car. But then again im having a problem at the moment coz im trying to decide between an S15 or a skyline..

any advice guyz?

im 18.5yrs atm..

well, most of the people think they can control their car - well!

but in real world, the driving ability of people is bad.

i am pretty sure that there is NO p plate can control a tubro skyline well, why don't get something easily and pratice yr driving ability? beside performance, the car is still way too big to drive and park for a P plate.

i had a silvia as my first car and i am quite regard not buying a FF(civic).

not offence, but young people just can't control theirself to do stupid thing, we all know coz we have been there.

I drove a toyta hilux 2.4 litre as my first car! And then I bought my parents EB falcon. (cliche?)

Now I have my 1st nice car, didn't get it till I was 22.

When I 1st got my licence there was an old blue celica (the datsun/escort style) coupe that I really wanted. It wouldn't have been fast, but a cool 1st car.

If you are in Victoria, forget about the Turbo Skyline's, they are too powerful, power to weight. (and the weight is determined from the factory figue) As is a rex.

Just get some car you like, thats not a skyline. 15-20k is a lot to spend on a 1st car, and as it was said before, most people have at least 1 little scrape, in their early years.

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...