Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

evo_lee is actually right, the JZA80 (latest shape supra 1400's for manual and 1500 for the auto) is actually lighter than most GTR's I think its the same or a little more hevier than the 32Gtr, the older supra is the heavy one it weighs between 1500kilos for manual and 1600 kilos for the auto, most people get that wrong, I guess the fat looking supra is deceiving. When I had my R33 Gtr, with boost, exhaust and piggy back, I raced my mate in his RZ with similar mods, I shited all over him 1st and 2nd, he caught up as soon as I shifted to 3rd and past me, and I could not catch up. Well I guess I had the first 100 meters won, but supra had the rest.

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I have a friend with a stock tt supra (exhaust) and my stock 33 GTR beats it easy from standing starts all the way to top of third. Its closer from rolling starts although the gtr pulls away a bit.

not sure what it would be like if both had a few mods, although I couldnt imagine him catching me in 1/4mile run unless he had quite a bit more power than me.

A stock RZ will pass you sooner than later, stock for stock with limiter removed they also top out at 279km/h compared to a BCNR33 at 262km/h. A stock BNR32 top out at 248km/h, not bad for an old car but anything newer ie. CP+ Evo, Series 6+ FD, GTO, Aristo, B4 RSK, Z32 will pass it...even a R33 25GT turbo etc will eventually hunt it down.

*Source: Option magazine speed ring test back a few years now.

Being a circuit racer this is a simple question for me to answer, an equally modified GTR will easily lap a Supra in any race with a distance over ~20 minutes. If it's raining, it will take half as long. The GTR was designed and engineered to do exactly that, and it did it everywhere in the world, on almost every race track and against all opposition. It would be simply impossible for a Supra to duplicate that, they do not have the chassis or the drive train engineering to even get close.

For the drag racing guys, show me a Supra that can do 9's on Federal radials.:wave:

Since You CLEARLY Have Trouble Using The Search Button Slim - I Have Dug Up A Bunch Of Useless Old Supra Threads For You To Look At..

Num Nuts!!

edit ok, whilst that was fun digging up old threads.. it was a little too much heresy in here so they have gone back to whence they came.. but believe it or not, there are plenty of old threads on exactly the same topic..

why do you say they are on the wrong side?

why is there a wrong side for turbos? do you mean from a HEAT from exhaust point of view?

SK - do you have any experience in the 2jzgte and what is your impression of it?

I have my own opinion but you do have a shit load more experience in the technical side of things.

so can you see any downsides to the supra engine apart from the ceramic wheeled turbos?

do you see any weak points in them like you see in the SR20's rockers?

As for my option, I'd take the supra TT over both the GTST and GTR..

I just don't like the 4wd thing anymore..  been burnt once too many times..

and you can't compare a GTST to a supra TT.. there is no contest

NOTE: I still love GTR's but don't want to own one.

turbo's on the 'wrong side' from what i understand is that the supra was made for the american market where its LHD and the steering items are all on the opposite side of the engine bay to australia.

so with two turbo's and a steering column on the same side in oz/japan then it can get cramped for space and airflow. gets hot in there me would thinks.

what about that stupid supra interior? miles behind the gtr...

what about that chunky supra arse? "that's a HUGE bitch!"...

i'll take a gtr 7 days of the week thanks.

cheers,

Waz.

lol well it aint that i cant find the search button, but i aint interested in a websites opinions..........i want the opinins of men who know exactly what they are talking about and who have experience in the matter they r deliberating about.......

better than any website in my opinion, plus i think it is a good subject to look at.............i am sorry if i hurt ur feeling bro by asking people's opinions.

Plus i will admit it i did it abit for myself, becoz i am looknig to buy a car, i noticed in general Supras are cheaper than R34 Skylines.........so i was curious what other people thought about them whether they r even worth lookin at..........i mean i think Skyline drivers have the best taste and i figure the same thought would have crossed the minds of many guys o nthis forum of buying a Supra..............

lol well it aint that i cant find the search button, but i wanna know peeps opinions now, not months ago.........i want the opinins of men who know exactly what they are talking about and who have experience in the matter they r deliberating about.......

better than any website in my opinion, plus i think it is a good subject to look at.............i am sorry if i hurt ur feeling bro by asking people's opinions.

Plus i will admit it i did it abit for myself, becoz i am looknig to buy a car, i noticed in general Supras are cheaper than R34 Skylines.........so i was curious what other people thought about them whether they r even worth lookin at..........i mean i think Skyline drivers have the best taste and i figure the same thought would have crossed the minds of many guys o nthis forum of buying a Supra

I like supras, i like RX-7, i like EVOs and i like Skylines a bit more... i'd love a Ferrari, i want a Bugatti Veyron!!!!

You can compare speed times over the quarter mile any which way and a lot comes down to the driver, but you need to also consider as someone earlier (SK i think) that GT-R were designed to kick ass on circuits. i reckon that skylines are better on circuits, but take a look at how many GT-R's or GT-S's do sub 9 times, a lot of those cars (sub 9) are rotary's (heaps RX-7). correct me if i'm wrong but a GTS-t hold the fastest Skyline time over the 1/4?

I think there are "street" tyred Supras in the low 8s... if not almost quicker! Probably not Federals hahaha... but still. Supras have definately proved their worth on the track as well.... the 2JZ > RB26 for power making potential, that has been proven time and time again - in both stockish form, and with the works.

I remember reading about why some of the japs replaced the 2jz for the rb26.

it was said that when they were producing close to 1000hp, the 2jz had ALOT more torque than the rb26 at the same tune level, and the sheer amount of twisting force from the 2jz just kept smashing clutches, boxes, diffs, etc.. whereas the rb26 needed more revs to produce the same power and therefore the torque wasn't as harsh in the way that it came on and this didn't break so many parts.

as for why I wouldn't want another 4wd... COST.

everything costs more.

gearboxes are more expensive.

you have front CV's.

you have a transfer case.

you need a tougher clutch.

All of those cost alot more than a normal FR setup car.

Besides, I am not likely to go chasing drag or circuit times too frequently, and therefore a GTR would be wasted on me.

and my money would be wasted on it.

the other thing is the engine..

I personally prefer to be able to get torque all the time and not have to rev the thing out..

the RB26 is a beautiful thing and as mentioned was built with circuit racing in mind so it has the ability and NEED to rev.

the supra is happy to pull comfortably from 100km/h in 6th gear and about 2000rpm.

this is a lot more important to me than seeing the rev needle over 8000rpm.

Hey SliM,

I recently had to make this same decision. Buy a Supra MKIV TT or a Skyline R34 GT-T (actuall Sylvia S15 was another option). Everyone here seems to be concentrating only on power and speed. Although I LOVE these things, they are not all that matters when buying a street car.

I went with the R34 GT-T in the end, and I am not disappointed! I have actually driven both, and would recommend you do before buying to see what suits YOU best. But some of the points theat made me choose R34 were:

* I was looking for a "newer" car. Supras have a dated look, R34's look meaner. A 1996 TT MKIV costs more than a 1998 R34 GT-T and generally the MKIVs have done more kms. Try comparing the price of a 1998 MKIV TT to a 1998 R34 GT-T

* R34's are rarer on the streets

* If I was getting a MKIV I would want it to be Aerotop - but you can't get Aero top with TT because the chassis can't handle it.

* I hear that modifying a TT is much more hassel than a single T.

Having said all that, both are awesome cars, it was a close decision in the end for me - I still twist my neck when I see a MKIV on the road :rant:

Why is the GTR not in my choices? Because R32 and R33 GT-R's were too old for my selection criteria and R34's cost double the other cars so don't really fit into this comparison. Remember car old = car problems.

Hope this helps,

Jarred

Good reasoning :rant: A lot of people overlook the actual owning of the car., this is how I decided on a R33 GTS25t, sure there is faster - but its a joy to own for the price.

I wonder why the japs never went with the 1JZGTEs if the torque of the 2JZ was the issue!?

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...