Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

ok just woundering how a manual r33 stock will go up against a Toyota aristo with cat back zorst, safc neo, fmic and running about 14psi at 217rwkw in a drag if any one knows

The only chance the R33 has is if something goes seriously wrong with the Aristo's run, they really don't mess around. Almost any single one of those mods on the Aristo would have been sufficient.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/261452-r33-vs-aristo/#findComment-4481774
Share on other sites

The only chance the R33 has is if something goes seriously wrong with the Aristo's run, they really don't mess around. Almost any single one of those mods on the Aristo would have been sufficient.

exactly

depends on which one your talking about...

but if its the performance acheiver Aristo TT

the Aristo TT runs a 2JZ-GTE with VVT-i

and to many tuners over the world....... its actually a more efficient....more bullet proof and much more capable for power motor than the RB26DETT.

id definately put my money for a STOCK aristo vs R33 GTS-T anyday

but with all those mods man.........

no way in the world the stock R33 will even smell it dude

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/261452-r33-vs-aristo/#findComment-4482760
Share on other sites

1700kg and auto hampers the aristo's performance no matter what you do to it

but a stock manual r33 is nothing much . a few mods on the 33 would tip it back that way though

yeah 1700 is a burden..

but the 2JZ-GTE is alot better and more responsive of a motor than the RB25DET

anyhow............he said the figures were coming out soon so he'll let us know the result

i still have my money on the Aristo

(plus, i think the aristo is ALOT better looking car than the 2DR R33 GTS-t as well)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/261452-r33-vs-aristo/#findComment-4483324
Share on other sites

I was very close to getting an Aristo before I settled on the R34, and if I was a betting man I would have quite a bit of money on the Toyota.

these things are beasts

as i said, these things in my eyes look 100 times better than the GTS-T or GT-T or GST.....or any other "Goods and services tax"

jw92ta05.jpg

aristo_lexus_gs300_1.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/261452-r33-vs-aristo/#findComment-4484993
Share on other sites

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 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...