Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 127
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I got an old Motor mag that pit this GTS-R against the R33 GT-R :D

well no verdict needed

the GT-R R33 would smash it..

even the standard WRX ate it for breakfast

the power to weight ratio speak for itself as well as the AWD ATTESSA would smash that ugly dog at the track

no comments from the article needed......................

i think you will find the particular jap models your talking about would have been alot more expensive than local 4 doors of the era if they had been sold here new. More expensive cars always look better than ones that cost half as much.

eg AUS new skyline GTR in 89-90 was 100k when a local Commodore SS Group A was about 50k so Im guessing if you could have brought a GTST new in australia in 95 it would have been more expensive than a similar mid spec commodore.

Also you have to remember australian car import prices are artificially inflated by import tarrifs and the SEVS scheme which protects australian manufacturers like holden and ford from competition from second hand imports by artificially raising the landed complied price, in NZ which has no import tarrifs there is very few holdens or fords on the road and almost all cars are 2nd hand imports from japan. If you could just buy a car in japan and import it to australia with no complience costs, there would be alot less 10-15yo holdens and fords being driven by australians.

Another thing is that import cars in australia are primarily two door sports coupes like Skyline, sylvia, rx7 and supra. There is plenty of cheap jap 4 doors which arent allowed in australia like nissan primeras, mitsibishi lancer GSRs, mazda familias, honda vigor and even toyota altezza which is already sold here as lexus IS

The Aussie delivered R32 was around $108k compared to the SS Commodore coming in at around $38k, so you're right, it'll be a bit of a difference. A better comparo would be the same era 911 that Nissan has always aspired to was around $160k, so the argument could be made that the R35's $170k versus the current 911 turbo's $320k+ is becoming even more of a bargain, particularly now that Porsche is now getting worried rather than flattered by Nissan's goals....

The Aussie delivered R32 was around $108k compared to the SS Commodore coming in at around $38k, so you're right, it'll be a bit of a difference. A better comparo would be the same era 911 that Nissan has always aspired to was around $160k, so the argument could be made that the R35's $170k versus the current 911 turbo's $320k+ is becoming even more of a bargain, particularly now that Porsche is now getting worried rather than flattered by Nissan's goals....

THe R32 Australian delivered was 120,000$ to be precise... a price for a decent house back then

The VH commodores SS were not as expensive as you mentioned back then.....for both your information it was only 13,000$ brand new back in 1982.

and Nissan had their eyes set on the Porsche's performance 6 years ago when they built the R34 GT-R NUR.....which did not perform better than the porsches...

its only till this day Nissan had triumphed and pissed Porsche off...

Edited by eeiko321
I think that part is kind of obvious.... :P

yeah man.....

they compared the R33 GT-R on wheels magazine against the BMW M5 and late model Holden Clubsport R8....

obviously all cars had thier pros....

but the summary the GT-R was described as "its just TOO good......"

so if the GT-R was an all round better car than these 2....... no need to compare the DOGZ-BALLS of a car the GTS-R

^ I believe Nissan Skyline were pursuing Porsche since the first GTR was built.

The earliest predecessor of the GT-R, the S54 2000 GT-B, came second in its first race in 1964 to the purpose-built Porsche 904 GTS.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_gtr

"The great-granddaddy of the new GT-R, the "Godzilla" R32 Skyline GT-R produced from 1989-'94, was designed to equal the performance of the iconic Porsche 959.

Nissan's benchmark for the 2009 GT-R? The mighty Porsche 997-series 911 Turbo."

- http://www.edmunds.com/nissan/gtr/2009/review.html

^ I believe Nissan Skyline were pursuing Porsche since the first GTR was built.

The earliest predecessor of the GT-R, the S54 2000 GT-B, came second in its first race in 1964 to the purpose-built Porsche 904 GTS.

- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skyline_gtr

yes it states the 904 was 130KW and the early GT-R was around 120kw........

but from then on..... porsche had really sky rocketed in performance, stock vs stock...the Successors of this particular GT-Rs couldnt compare

Even the NUR V-spec could not compare with the 911 turbo or GT2 at the time.

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

    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
    • @GTSBoy yeah sorry i know thery are known for colors bud those DBA are too in colors 🙂 Green will be good enough for me  
×
×
  • Create New...