Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey all iv had my skyline for about 8 months now gone to a few drifting events here and there Skid pan etc. Iv noticed nobody really drives the R32 or R33 as much as the Silvias last week i went to an event at eastern creek, me and another person were the only skyline owners out there compared to the 25-30 Silvia drifters.

Iv driven some Silvia's and i dont understand the hype, i see them blow something every time i go out there and its mainly on water, iv seen body panels go for considerably cheaper then the skyline, but motor wise, the SR20 seems to cost alot more then lets say the rb20, and they put out similar power. but that's just me. What you guys think?

Compare an S13 to an R32 for example:

Wheelbase: 2474 vs 2615mm

Weight: 1224 vs 1320kg

So it's a much lighter, and shorter (read flickable) platform, and that's in stock form.

Not to mention the McPherson strut of an S chassis is generally easier to extract big camber and lock from.

No HICAS to muck around with.

Huge aftermarket support.

Cheap.

Not to mention no boat anchor engine bolted to the front. An SR20 is lighter than an RB20, let alone an RB25.

In saying that, there are plenty of guys drifting R32/33/34's

  • Like 1

silvia built for drifting/daily/whatev

sky built for mountain run/daily

besides it's hella cheaper to drift on silvia

^I'm sure this was the exact design brief Nissan designers adhered to when designing both cars. :blink:

  • Like 2

In saying that I like the stability of the longer wheel base when sliding, makes it more predictable in a sense at higher speed. SR hmmm I'd much rather at the very least an RB25. There is a bloke locally here who has an R33 GTST and takes it sliding and he is one of very few that can link the big long sweeper and the entire back stretch at the drift days we have…. Mind you a 410rwkw fully built 26/30 does help lol He gets quite good angle from it

They don't they get both if they have enough money :)

The Silvia's handle a lot better without a massive lump of cast iron sticking out the front of the car. They are also a true coupe not being based off a sedan like the skyline

Rb sounds a million times better though

Compare an S13 to an R32 for example:

Wheelbase: 2474 vs 2615mm

Weight: 1224 vs 1320kg

So it's a much lighter, and shorter (read flickable) platform, and that's in stock form.

Not to mention the McPherson strut of an S chassis is generally easier to extract big camber and lock from.

No HICAS to muck around with.

Huge aftermarket support.

Cheap.

Not to mention no boat anchor engine bolted to the front. An SR20 is lighter than an RB20, let alone an RB25.

In saying that, there are plenty of guys drifting R32/33/34's

This!

  • Like 1

240's are cheaper and have a wider customer base too so if you break it its easy to fix. Skylines are way harder to get parts for and tend to have more issues. With great power comes an empty wallet

  • Like 1

Because it's more nimble and feels like a go-kart where as our cars feel like massive boats..

for example, a 200kW S15 vs a 200kW R33 and mod for mod suspension wise.. the S15 will be doing quicker times around Wakefield park.

HOWEVER we own R chassis for purely this reason:

m42.jpg

  • Like 1

Its more just the fact grabbing a stock skyline and a stock silvia and trying to drift both its very hard in the skyline compared to the silvia due to size, weight and lock. But on the other hand once you set up a skyline and silvia they will perform as well as each other along with the fact that the r33 gtst now is so cheap under 6k which gives you a strong engine gearbox package compared to the s chassis so all you have to worry about is setting up the dymanic side of the car which is why in victoria you are seeing alot of r33 drift cars over the past couple of years.

^lolwat, Skylines are easy as f*ck to get parts for, and they don't "have more issues" lol

+11ty

RB20 is more reliable then an SR20 or an RB25 and an RB25 gearbox is strong as all hell so reliability wise let's say that Skylines are pretty damn good ;)

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...