Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So, I may be panicing prematurely, but pretty much everyone who has seen my car so far has said "Nah, that'll get written off" - assessor is yet to see it though. As I'm sure we all are on this forum, I am very attached to my particular car and really don't want it to be written off. But if it does, I'm thinking I'm going to take the money and start saving for either a R33 GTR or R34 GTT... maybe something completely different, I don't know.

The thing is, in the mean time I'd want to buy a car that is as cheap as possible but pretty much bullet proof. I don't particularly care about looks, age, ride comfort, anything other than something that keeps going and going and going. The old mid-80s toyota corollas spring to mind. My old Daihatsu Charade was also a bloody amazing car and nippy too for its little 1300cc engine.

We're talking about sub $1500 cars here - I don't want to eat too much into my budget if worst comes to worst and the 33 is a write off.

So, harken back to the days of your P-plates and lets hear about your best old bullet proof bunkie!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/313237-bullet-proof-bunkies/
Share on other sites

If you don't mind looking like a farmer or a tradesman look over the episode of Top Gear trying to kill an old mechanical hilux [talking about zero electronics here, except obvioulsy lights/battery etc].

That and, dare I say it, I've had mates with Skylines, and daily Excels that have overcome some phenominal situations.

Edited by That_timothy

I am also thinking of buying a bunky, but more to save kms when the new engine goes in... Will be following this thread.

Should throw good fuel economy into the mix as well, no point having a car that never stops but costs you as much in petrol as it would to service...

I drove thru the hail storm in my 21yr old A31 Cefiro and the only damage was pin prick dents in the roof which u can only see if u look hard enough, all the windows survived which i was sooo surprised about. Awsome hardy car but i would say MOST reliable.

Doh!...Nana is off the table...hairdresser parts are taking longer than expected.

Dude! I thought you'd dropped off the face of the planet, how the hell are you? Too bad about the nanamobile. I haven't seen you in... well.. must be getting on a year and a half. I'm in Balcatta now incidentally.

Assessor STILL hasn't been so I don't know if I'll be needing a bunky or not. I like the idea of a little shitbox to tool around in though - I really hated taking and parking the line anywhere unusual...

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

    • 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...