Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just sticking this up to see if anyone is interested.

1989 R31 Ti

230k on the clock but drives like new

Respray in Nissan 350z grey (perfect condition, two blemishes that I will show you)

Immaculate interior, in perfect condition

Choice of front bars (dvs motorsport one or stock)

Works VX 18x8 and 9 235 rubber (lots of dish)

All interior lights changed to LED

Some fancy sound system

Aftermarket steering wheel, pedals, gearbox boot etc

Drive line:

Standard Rb26dett, all stock intercooler pipes and plumb back BOV

Rb25det gearbox (smooth as butter), 6 puck clutch, one piece HD tailshaft, speedo is spot on

Sillo LSD

Hks race front pipe, 3 inch mandrel exhaust with cat etc (very quiet, I would say quieter than a stock gtr)

Currently has a Pinny manual rack (but comes with spare power steering rack, might put this back in)

LED knock light on dash

intank 044 fuel pump (direct power from battery)

Brakes:

R32 Gtr front brakes and rotors

Rear stock R31 with vented rotors

Suspension:

S13 front conversion (stock R31 lower arms), HSD remote canister camber adjustable shocks

Lowered and upgraded struts at the rear

Front strut brace

Overall car is in immaculate condition, 10 months rego, all modification are engineered, car is running 11psi and makes 200rwkw

front2.jpg

front3.jpg

front.jpg

bum.jpg

$12,000 firm... If you want a clean, fast engineered Gtr powered 31 in immaculate condition this is it.

This car looks fantastic and won't draw the attention of the cops

Anyone who offers to swap for something can eat a dick... unless it's an R34 Gtr

Car is located in Blue Mountains Sydney

For any questions give me a bell

Pete

0448 468 884

additional picks bellow

IMG_8426.jpg

IMG_8425.jpg

IMG_8424.jpg

IMG_8423.jpg

IMG_8422.jpg

IMG_8421.jpg

IMG_8420.jpg

IMG_8418.jpg

IMG_8417.jpg

IMG_8416.jpg

IMG_8415.jpg

IMG_8414.jpg

  • 1 month later...

Im guessing you could go eat that dick now .

lol yeah i saw that before i posted & decided against that part of it....might as well ask hey, he can always say no....

  • 1 month later...

you're a machine fatz. no wonder you are selling, this 31 is far too clean for you. love the paint mate. pretty cheap for a 26 powered car with nice paint and nice rims. should haul a55!

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

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...