Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

i taught one of those newish r32 golfs a lesson roll on from about 70km/h to 110+++ km/h up a hill :) . Mines only making 200rwkw.

Yeah you would, they only run 14 second 1/4 miles. An R33 with 200rwkw will run low to mid 13s all day long.

Found this: http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm

Though for some odd reason it has every other car except skylines? But a GTS25t should do 0-100km in 6sec and a 1/4 in 14 1/2sec.

According to it, a GTS25t is as fast as a impreza WRX 2005 but not some of the other ones.

If you can drive a Skyline well they might do a mid 14. Most completely standard will do low 15's, high 14's.

Yeah seems to be the launch that determines it, and needs some practice. Either i bog down or light the rears up. Only got it right maybe twice.

Feels like abusing the car though and asking for mechanical dramas, so i dont make a habit of practicing...

Found this: http://www.ssmoparmuscle.com/speedcomp.htm

Though for some odd reason it has every other car except skylines? But a GTS25t should do 0-100km in 6sec and a 1/4 in 14 1/2sec.

According to it, a GTS25t is as fast as a impreza WRX 2005 but not some of the other ones.

It's a US compiled list obviously - The Infiniti G35 on there = the V35 Skyline (US release).

Not a lot of earlier Skylines ever imported (bar a few GTRs) to the US as they are RHD.

If you can drive a Skyline well they might do a mid 14. Most completely standard will do low 15's, high 14's.

On You tube there is a N/A with a simple exhaust mod and air intake that did a 14.6 1/4 mile... a stock turbo should be quicker than it.

On You tube there is a N/A with a simple exhaust mod and air intake that did a 14.6 1/4 mile... a stock turbo should be quicker than it.

Unfortunately one video on Youtube doesn't mean much. Most stock NA Skylines do 16+ second quarters and like I said most stock GTST's do high 14's low 15's. The driver in a manual Skyline plays a big role.

I have personally raced a fg xr6 twice and it flogged my r32 gtst one both occaisions in the

Wet I just couldn't get traction and in the dry it just ate me alive. But I had blow by.

And shitty chinese tyres. I had trouble pulling away from a liberty even.

Wat id like to know is on the aus300zx forum they say a r33 gtst is comparable to a n/a zed 32 ??? :D

Wat id like to know is on the aus300zx forum they say a r33 gtst is comparable to a n/a zed 32 ??? :D

Lol your kidding right?

An Aus spec NA 300ZX 5 speed when new was rated at high 15/low 16 second quarters.

Edited by PM-R33
Lol your kidding right?

An Aus spec NA 300ZX 5 speed when new was rated at high 15/low 16 second quarters.

Nah my mate is a really into zeds he owns three. I guess he's brain washed me too much lol.

Them aus300zx guys really are convinced I didn't think so either but then again I lost too

A n/a fg xr6 ute but that was in a clapped out rb20

I ran a 13.9 in my R33 4 door with 3" cat back and pod filter 9psi and shitty tyres 230hp , the launch plays a bit part in it if you can get it right with your power level then it takes off pretty quick... i managed to pull away from a R8 off the lights but i am making 188KW now though

"I have personally raced a fg xr6 twice and it flogged my r32 gtst one both occaisions in the

Wet I just couldn't get traction and in the dry it just ate me alive. But I had blow by. "

Ya, but a 2L gtst not as quick as a Gts25t.

"looking for boost"

Mint to pull away from an R8 with just exhaust mods and a little tune :D

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...