Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

We were all talking about the R34 GT-R that had 380,000kms on auction last week (or was that 2 weeks ago). Well it was sold today for 1,560,000 yen which equates to about $18,500 in aussie dollars. Then add the usual FOB, freight, taxes, compliance, and other misc fees and you will have yourself a GT-R for under 30 grand.

I can't wait until she lands on our shores, so everyone stay tuned for this baby.

http://ayp5.nihoncars.com/cars/37815341/0/...T__sl__6yyn.jpg

http://ayp5.nihoncars.com/cars/37815341/0/..._sl__6yy%3F.jpg

http://ayp5.nihoncars.com/cars/37815341/0/...T__sl__63y3.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/315902-the-380000km-r34-gt-r-sold/
Share on other sites

Other pearlers worth mentioning as well.

2001 M Spec (well it's claimed to be but I doubt it's the real deal), 165,000kms, grade 3.5/B --- sold for 2 mil yen

http://ayp5.nihoncars.com/cars/37792099/0/..._sl__nynO3l.JPG

http://ayp5.nihoncars.com/cars/37792099/0/..._sl__nynO3x.JPG

  • 2 weeks later...
That raises a point; how often do r34's come up with mechanical issues?

Eg a blown motor (bearings or similar), surely they would be priced close to this 380,000k one?

I saw a rolled NUR Spec in Millenium Jade at Nagoya a few months ago. There was not an undamaged panel on the car and it sold for 1.1mill. Prices lately are just bizarre, absolutely all over the place.

I saw a rolled NUR Spec in Millenium Jade at Nagoya a few months ago. There was not an undamaged panel on the car and it sold for 1.1mill. Prices lately are just bizarre, absolutely all over the place.

Rolled? Bloody hell, what a waste.

I mean one thats structurally fine, clean enough inside etc but a blown motor, or a blown gearbox (or just no motor and box altogether)?

Motors over here are easy enough to buy, or just build :ermm:

As you can tell by the prices they pull at auction, if a 34 has a blown engine or box it will simply be replaced or repaired.

It's not like they're at a value whereby if the engine is blown they're worth nothing. So, if you were to find one with a blown donk, it would likely only be cheaper by the value of a rebuild engine.

Even if you were to find one like this, the extra shipping costs due to it not being drivable with outweigh any real benefit.

I saw a rolled NUR Spec in Millenium Jade at Nagoya a few months ago. There was not an undamaged panel on the car and it sold for 1.1mill. Prices lately are just bizarre, absolutely all over the place.

I remember that one, I think I put 500,000 or something on it just for the engine/drivertrain...

Rolled? Bloody hell, what a waste.

I mean one thats structurally fine, clean enough inside etc but a blown motor, or a blown gearbox (or just no motor and box altogether)?

Motors over here are easy enough to buy, or just build :ermm:

THese generally don't make it to auction, they get bought by dealers or fixed by the owners. Plenty of rattly 32/33s go through but generally the type of person who owns a 34 has the money to fix the car before selling it.

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

    • 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...