Jump to content
SAU Community

The Next GT-R (October '04 update)


Recommended Posts

Thanks R32_GODZILLA :D

Just looking at the first pic I posted, it looks as though the wheelbase has been *shortened* just a bit (maybe 10 - 15mm) as the wheels look pushed forward in relation to the wheelarch... anybody else think so?

Thanks R32_GODZILLA :mad:

 

Just looking at the first pic I posted, it looks as though the wheelbase has been *shortened* just a bit (maybe 10 - 15mm) as the wheels look pushed forward in relation to the wheelarch... anybody else think so?

Agreed.

Styling is certainly subjective, but looking at the most recent three GTRs (being R32, R33, R34), they certainly have presence and agression in frontal styling.

This can never be said for the V35 platform - the front lights give it a startled look... which no matter how you change the front mouldings, guards etc will still look scared.

I give it the thumbsdown on styling - would that scare you out of your lane like an R32 or R34 if you saw that in your rear-view?

Having looked at he V35 Skylines for almost 2 years now, it starts to grow on you.

The current kits available don't make it look as sporty because it retains the centre bracket on the front bar, but still looks sporty.

If people think the V35 doesn't look agressive enough I'm sure someone or MASA will soon have a Z33 front conversion for the next GT-R ;)

But I highly doubt the face will look agressive.

However you have to remember the GT-R is not to be sold to every Tom, Dick and Harry. At a supercar price tag only the older generation will be able to afford this, and they like to blend style with power....thoughts of Aston Martin!

i will never stop crying if the GT-R looks like that, its just so depressing that a skyline, no sorry scrap that, a GTR will end up looking like that.

I really hope these exterior changes Rezz mentioned are a complete bloody overhaul to make it look tough so it strikes fear in fellow drivers (like the r32-34's did). And for goodness sakes dont you people feel we need round stove top tail lights. I mean that should be the first thing that comes to mind when designing a GTR or skyline.

All this fantastic technology ( great sounding engine package, 4wd system or whatever i remember reading) will be wasted imo on a car looking simiilar to V35. I know you get used to the v35 styling over time but it just doesnt capture and absrob you like previous models...

GTRSRULE: IMO is short for "In my opinion".

V8skylineMan: I think you're on the money there... the V35 shell is just that, a shell. The final production-ready GT-R will look alot different. In the new year we're gonna see some good pics released of what we can really expect.

looks as though the wheelbase has been *shortened* just a bit (maybe 10 - 15mm) as the wheels look pushed forward in relation to the wheelarch... anybody else think so?

Yep, a la Z32 300ZX.

If you fit tyres/wheels with a larger rolling diameter, the first place they hit is the rear of the sills, ie front of the rear guards. Not that im comparing the two, but i recall seeing that on John's (from UAS) Z32 racecar. He had cut away the rear of the sill because they were hitting the slicks.(or maybe they had worn away, i dont remember)

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...