Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Everyone,

Curious as to the availbility of a Bayside Blue R34 GTR Vspec II Nur.

Trying to gather how often they go through auction and what one would be expected to pay, landed and complied in AUS. Stock or mild modifications and high grade as preference.

Also if anybody knows how many of these were actually made?

If anybody has access to past auction history in japan to get a rough estimate on cost it would be great help.

Thanks.

You looking to upgrade or just want a twin to keep the other one happy? haha

Im guessing your privy to this site?

http://www.japaneseusedcars.com/auction/auctions_results.htm

you can go through past sales on there, but the records are only a few month old.

I had a quick scan through and the last nur sold through there was a pearl white mspec nur for a touch under 5mil.. Roughly 60k..

so would think a good example would be around 80k imported etc..

Hope that helps.

Cheers,

Anthony

^^^ ...which still makes Huy's pearl black VS2 Nur in WA look appealing :)

I'm aware and empathise that the money bracket is still very high for most people's pockets.

Heck, I waited for 3 yrs to be able to afford my black non-v-spec R34 GT-R

We must also be aware that production numbers of all R34 GTRs was very low compared to other GTRs.

And thus, Sum Insured values of several VS2 Nurs still sit just under $100K

Just a quick recap, mine imported from japan 2 years ago I paid just under 85k. Was a grade 4.5 only because the k's were over the limit of a grade 5 but still were low.

Mine was pretty much stock besides exhaust and mines rom.

Insurance companies are definitely still offering awesome agreed values. SS8 gohan can vouch for that. Mine stands at 95k now with my new policy about a month ago.

N1's are a six digit hit..well from what I've seen.

I'm guessing that buying a bayside blue Nur will be like buying the purple Z-tune. I'm sure they exist but they will be so sought after and rare that it will probably cost you over $100K. And with your attention to detail (a good attribute to have) you might be waiting a while.

Another colour perhaps?

going on the results the j-spec search pulled up, there's been two Blue Nur's sold (i don't know how far back the results look)

3.3mil for a 100K km R grade

a hefty 5.5mil for a 23K km 4.5 grade

  • 1 month later...

Grade 5 R32 GTR going through auction soon....

Might be one for the collectors. Id snap this one up if I had the money.

http://www.j-spec.co...NE-3055161.html

$18,700 AUD starting price... and 8000km wow. Genuine kms on a 1994 that's crazy. Wonder what it ends up selling for.

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...