Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Guest INASNT
Originally posted by deorbit

inasnt - ever raced a 300ZX Twin turbo 2 seater? A mate of mine has one and it is a beast of a machine.  

And btw its not that heavy compared to something like a Supra coming in at 1500kg.

one came on a cruise awhile ago with skylines, 180sx and silvias and it was nothing special through the dande mountains

  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

having driven a 300TT manual, 32s, 33s and my room mate has an s15 i'd say that the 300 definately feels the quickest.

206kw is the claimed output - 225kw is probably more accurate figure from tests on dynos, combined with 390 or so Nm of torque.

all are fun cars to be in for factory cars!

Originally posted by Jimbo2000

thats kinda like saying a skyline's nothing special  if you raced a stock one

Oi, stock skyline is quite special I say

I think Kr1sh is right, the 300zx must be fastest because it has 2 turbos.

Next quickest is the S15 because it has an A pillar mounted boost guage.

ok i'm sick of everyone crapping on about their sub par cars so i'm just going to tell "use all" the definative answer to all these VS questions.

My 1980 Datsun Sunny will rip you all to pieces!! In the straights around the twisties - doesn't matter maaait! :burnout:

k?

lol as if u get an R32 GTR instead of an S15..well for me anywayz as the "date" issue would be the main factor. talking about which car is fastest is stupid as many people here have outlined that they can easily be modded off there "tits" lol.......so yeah go for the one who brings most value to you and the one most worth buying. =)

Guilty:

Lets remember we're comparing a car that cost $180,000 ten years ago to a car that costs $40,000 today.

As for modern features the r32 still has digital climate control.. I believe the australian delivered s15 has analogue controls that look like shit? I guess the r32 is missing air bags. But it does have racing-standard ABS.

Oh right we're talking styling right? Well I guess the s15 looks more modern inside and out.. and if we're going to be spending 10k to make the s15 keep up with the GTR, why not spend 10k making the GTR look more modern.. a tasteful kit, leather interior, respray - wheels? Not for me but it would certainly make it comparable styling wise.

Or do you mean the fact that the S15 won't break down as much.. are you sure about that? the part's in the GTR are thoroughly overengineered and i dare say will take more of a beating than the 200's. They have to. I'm sure if you spent the 10 grand you where going to spend on performance mods for the S15, you could get all the major components like the turbo, brakes, suspension etc. in this 10 year old car replaced with new.

It comes down to your priorities on what you want in said car.

I think the reason we buy these cars is because of how they drive.. I'll take the gtr over the s15 in that department. Hey there's a whole new VS thread!

:bahaha: :bahaha: :bahaha:

Originally posted by pentae

I think the reason we buy these cars is because of how they drive..

I think that a lot of people buy a car based on stock quarter mile times. Or at least, that's what they say in here. I find that mode of choice dubious at best.

For some reason when I clicked on the thread I expected this 'Versus' thread to be about these 5 cars in a demolition derby. My money's on the 300ZX :)

Anyway, supra, if you want the stock specs of the cars go to http://imports.motortraders.net

the 180 isnt faster than the r32... my mate has one and if we both get perfect take off's we stick together the whole way but if its a rolling start at like 50 than the 32 ****s the 180... and 300's arnt worth it. i was lookin at gettin one cause i thought they were fast untill i ****ed a turbo'd one up the other night so ive decided to stick with mine ay....but s15's are nice have to admit...

These X vs Y threads SO remind me of two little kids in a playground starting with "Superman could beat up Batman" :argue: and eventually getting round to "My Dad is tougher than Your Dad." :fight!:

Originally posted by 95SKY

isnt there more important things to worry about then what car is quicker from factory eg. what suits your needs whats made well ect

Exactly! All of these cars are fast enough when stock to be considered "fast", and they modify generally easily and fairly cheaply (300ZX may be an exception due to V engine). About the only thing that you could say is "better" about some is that the lighter ones (180SX, Silvia) will get more bang per buck from performance mods, because of lesser weight. The 300ZX being the heaviest obviously gets the least value from its mods, with the Skylines somewhere in the middle. But they can all be made to be bloody fast, so I don't know why so many people care so much how fast they are from the factory.

i think u's are all losing sight of the actual question being asked here, the cars...STOCK.

he aint askin about mods.

and as others have said, due to the 300 coming STOCK with twin turbs, it might have a chance of winning! but then he didnt exactly specify whether the 300zx was the tt or the na.

so....lets talk about stock baby...lets talk about stock baby...

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

    • As I've said elsewhere, I am using the stock intercooler piping path in the engine bay, and a return flow cooler, and making ~250 rwkW (without any effort put into trying to turn it up past there just yet) and expect to be able to make some more, and frankly, I would be perfectly happy with 260-270rwKW. This is peak road Skyline usability territory. You go past there and, sure, the car will snap necks more when it's on boost, but it will also break shit all the time, cost a (even larger) fortune in tyres, etc etc. Anyway, I also do not like the over-the-fan pipe path, and you don't have to do it.
    • I see, honestly I’m not too fussed about the looks. The only reason to go plenum is to make the piping easier instead of the classic over the rad etc. 
    • Not easy to quantify wrt something like how many fractions of a second slower it would be over 0-100. But given that a 250-300rwkW car is able to do that launch sprint in 5-6 sec (and faster with appropriate tyres, and surface)..... giving up as much as a second would feel like torture. A ~450HP capable turbo is not going to make lots of boost in the 2000-3000 rpm range. So, whilst with some boost on hand it will be faster accelerating in that rev range than your engine currently is NA, it will not feel like a fast car until the boost is solidly in. You know what your car feels like right now when you open it up at 2000rpm. if you've ever been in an actual fast car, you will appreciate that the NARB25 is.... not exciting. Well, add some boost and it will be better. But shorten the intake runners and it might not be better at all. It might come out better, but it could end up feeling the same. For me, it's not the 0-X km/h sprints that matter. It is easy to fry the tyres with anything over 200 rwkW. You can't use all the power available in 1st and 2nd anyway, you have to modulate the throttle. What matters is how the car reacts when you're driving in traffic in 4th or 5th and have maybe 2000 rpm on board, and you want/need to add some speed quickly, and don't have time for the downshift. It won't make boost, it will be all NA (at the speeds we're talking about - remember how fast you're going at 2000 in 4th! and don't plan on breaking the limit by too much.) So giving away NA torque is not what I would consider practical for a street car. And retaining that NA torque builds boost faster which makes the car faster. The flashy plenum is not actually better, unless you're looking at a track car where you can keep it on the boil all the time.  
    • So how much difference does it make you think? Like 1 second in the 0-100?  I was have smaller turbo so hopefully that spools quick GTX2871.  currently it’s NA so you can imagine pretty slow, but I do want fast accusation a little as there’s not many places I’ll be driving where I go over 80 even near me. So 0-60 and 0-80 targets   
    • Short inlet runners cost quite a bit. Dulls off the off-boost torque, and delays boost onset, because arrival of boost is driven by gas flow is a product of the ability to flow air which is torque. This is the reason that the stock manifolds have longer runners. On a 3L, or bigger, you can usually accept the compromise of giving away some torque because the extra capacity gives you a little extra to waste. But on a smaller motor, there's not a lot there to start with. Example, I swapped RB20 out of my R32, 25NeoDET in its place. The "wall of torque" that I experienced afterwards made it all worthwhile. That's because I came from RB20 land where torque is not a thing. But I would not do anything, anything at all, to reduce the low/mid torque I have now, because I remember what it is like to not have it!
×
×
  • Create New...