Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

O.k in a year or so i will be wanting to do one of a few things car wise before i save for my house

Options i am considering

1.Sell current gtst and but and slightly modify a R34

2.Sell current gtst and buy a stock 33gtr/lightly modded 32 gtr

3.work on my current gtst upgrade turbo ect

just wanting your guys opinion on what i should do as i havn't made up my own mind yet and its still far off

should have just above 20g's to spend (with car sold)

asking your opinions

Cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/289773-decisions-decisions/
Share on other sites

Think carefully. Once you get that mortgage you have in effect shackled yourself in a huge chain never to have ready cash to spend on toys again. lol

If your 33 is good and you are happy, I'd keep it an mod it. 20k would have it singing. 'Better the devil you know' in some ways? Buy a new car and it could be a lemon.

Edited by Tony de Wonderful

I like the look of the 32 gtr's better than the 33's, just has a tougher stance when its dumped on 18's. however it is almost becoming a classic. I wouldnt want to have to fret about it (if things go wrong), with a house waiting to be paid off..

IMO dump the house and live in your car then you can make a 7 sec godzilla streeter.. whilst having insane banana dance raves.. :P;):banana:

tough decision man.

yeah im tossing up between a stock 33 gtr or a nice 32, how common are the 33's compared to the 32's (GTR's)

lots less 33 gtr produced than 32's

but the 33's are a hell of a lot fuglier imo

<3 my 32R. I was eyeying off a 33GTR for a while aswel. Thing that made me change my mind was the 33's are heavier (not by much, bout 50-100kg more, very negligible) was that you can't disable the AWD systems on em, same as the 34's. 32GTR's have for me always looked a lot better and have the true "cult" recognition aswel, coupled with the fact that they were the reason australian touring cars went to V8's and RWD only :(

My opinion would be, keep the R33 and drop money into it and get out of it what you want performance wise. Reason being, it's better to modify a car you already have and know where to put the $$ than to i nherit someone elses potential problem and then have to spend more money on it than you originally intended.

Think carefully. Once you get that mortgage you have in effect shackled yourself in a huge chain never to have ready cash to spend on toys again. lol

If your 33 is good and you are happy, I'd keep it an mod it. 20k would have it singing. 'Better the devil you know' in some ways? Buy a new car and it could be a lemon.

I agree with Joe.

With 20g, you will not find a 33gtr and not much change on a modded 32gtr + stamp duty. So if you need to do any maintenance....its extra $$ needed and you'll be digging into the house fund.

Having said that....i've never walked my talk and bought cars on impulse.

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


  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • 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...