Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

My point was mainly.. if its a major problem, it will show when driving it or inspecting it visually. And most inspections are only to do exactly the same as you could anyhow.

Other than physically opening up the gearbox, or other components of the engine (which of course no inspection is ever going to do), I don't see how those things are checked in any other way than simply driving it or checking for very obvious signs by the inspector either.

I don't think they even get it on the hoist to check the chasis condition in most instances, and the tests I have witnessed have mainly been visual and a very short road test. They seem to be very superficial in most instances.

If you were interstate you would at least want some piece of mind, but then again, without you supervising the test how do you know the depth the test has done?? I would never accept an inspection from somebody else without physically taking the car for a drive myself. They could have spent just 10 minutes looking at it, or the owner could have slipped them $500 to give a good report - you never know.

well ... I am going to have a car I am considering inspected tomorrow. The check I am getting is definatly a very detailed check, as they put the car on the hoist, take all the wheels off and check the brakes, suspension and other major components under the car for any damage, and note any parts that look 'newer' than others (ie. replacements), and also check for sprayed panels and replaced ones.

End of the day, I would want to get one done even if I flew up. I figure I'll get the check done (and since I am the one paying the dealer / seller doesnt get to see it AT ALL, that's the agreement between me and RACQ) then I make the decision to cough over extra $$ for a flight, then obviously drive it and use my own experience and tests (on top of the notes from the inspection) to make the final call.

Re the slipped them $500 ... hmm well I guess I would never know you are right. But I will be driving the car myself anyways when I fly up and I will take it for a good test.If he's available (which he may be) Muz will also be joining me for a test and lookover. Since he owns a R34 himself, it will definatly help I think :P

so ... does that sound sane or not?

nah.. sounds like a very comprehensive test.

The tests I have done in the past, by the RACV (RACQ up here), and others have been very superficial and a waste of money.. They have basically just been drive out and look type tests, nothing substantial like that.

Yea the problem with people like racq is that they aren't used to looking at imports etc all day long. They aren't really experts in knowing what to look for on a skyline for example. IMHO you are better off taking it to a workshop, who actually knows cars and knows what to look for and what not to worry about. racq will go over the car but may only point out things that are not going to ever make a difference! I know a guy who sent a relativley new range rover for an inspection and they claimed that the rotors were undersized when in fact they had never been changed....so yea i suppose they can be good but I think a waste of money that could be better spent paying a workshop to really look over your car. My 2c

EVO83 I understand that you think that RACQ would not see a lot of imports, but then again you might be suprised. They do get to look at quite a few.

The problems were not ... mechanical. The car was fine mechanically, and would probably run like a dream. The bodywork however (if you know what you are looking at) was on a totally different level though. PM me if you want to know more I guess as I'd rather not say more here.

I agree with spooks the buyer should definately have to pay otherwise the seller could be forking out heaps everytime theres another buyer! I also agree with EVO83, Darkcoupe i would seriously consider getting a workshop to check over the car, even if your talking about bodywork! RACQ do see imports but they more than likely dont know exactly what to look for, what they dont realise is that these are second hand cars, from japan. Get a workshop to look over the car before you make a decision racq are always going to point out even the stupidist of things becoz it covers there behind legally! A workshop will tell you if its something that is REALLY going to be a problem!

ah i see your point. In that case I agree with your decision. But yea i stand by my comments about gettin a workshop to look over it. I wish you the best with finding a car!

Matt

  • 2 weeks 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

    • 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.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
×
×
  • Create New...