Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have my custom blue 1992 R32 GTST (import) shell for sale after stripping most items off it. There is still plenty of good parts that will be left on the car detailed below.

PERFECT PROJECT CAR FOR THE TRACK OR STREET

The car is complied and engineered for an RB25DET

Car is sprayed in a custom velocity blue with a slight pearl through it

What the car DOES NOT come with :

-Engine and gearbox

-Loom and ECU

-19" Rims in pics (are still for sale)

-Electronics/Guages

-Front bar

What the car DOES come with

-Set of stock GTST rims (need new tyres)

-Full interior

-Brakes

-Diff

-Fuel lines/pump

-Tailshaft

-Full whiteline suspension kit

-Bilstein shocks

-Body kit minus front bar

JUST DROP IN YOUR ENGINE AND GEARBOX AND YOU HAVE A WELL BALANCED STREET MODDED SKYLINE THAT TURNS HEADS

Car had spent most of its days in the garage and is in pretty good condition for its age. The car is currently unregistered due to it not being driven but has been fully engineered so new owner will have minimal problems with the authorities.

Make: Nissan
Model: Skyline R32 GTST
Engine: Nil

Year: 1992
Km's: 128,000kms
Location: Blue Mountains, West of Sydney
Colour: Custom Velocity Blue (Has light pearl through paint)
Rego: Unregistered
Transmission: 5 speed manual
Price: $5000 ONO
Contact: PM or post in thread. 0429098883



*Suspension kit is a full Whiteline works package with swaybars, Bilstein shocks, lowered springs, alignment bushes etc.
*HICAS locking kit
*Diff is Modified and LSD
* Tinted windows
* GTR side skirts and rear pods
* All guards have been rolled to accommodate wider Offset wheels


I am sure there is more, but that is the major stuff and I will list anything more when I remember

There is a range of spares and stock parts that will go with the car and the new owner is quite welcome to take it all away.

Looking for around 5k due to all the good stuff still left on the car and the fact that it is good to go for a RB25 but I am negotiable so come take a look and make an offer.

post-23286-0-39518900-1372575142_thumb.jpg

post-23286-0-93853000-1372575211_thumb.jpg

post-23286-0-63482300-1372575471_thumb.jpg

post-23286-0-93739200-1372575493_thumb.jpg

post-23286-0-82138200-1372575498_thumb.jpg

post-23286-0-65678900-1372575512_thumb.jpg

post-23286-0-36669700-1372575526_thumb.jpg



  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

It's got more than 4 k worth of gear not including the shell and complied for an rb25 mate so how bout you shut your face and not post unless your interested

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...