Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey,

I am tossing up weather to, in the next couple of months, sell the skyline and upgrade to a twin turbo skyline, or do a couple of things to my skyline.

It's an R32 - 1993 model, what I was thinking was painting it yellow?? Any one got any pictures of a yellow R32?

Was also thinking maybe a cooler and some new wheels..

Would dark wheels look good on yellow, or maybe white??

Any suggestions would be appreciated.

Thanks

Scott

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6040-should-i/
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Diabolik1

That looks hot !!!!

there was a yerllow R32 in Hot 4's and it looked pretty good..too bad that particular one was NA, but it loooked awesome.

still.....id go for the big R

Goz

that one ur talking bout had an A-Pillar mounted boost gauge.................................. go figure

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6040-should-i/#findComment-91407
Share on other sites

mmmmm yellow....yuummmmy :( :( :P

as for your decision, well I think everyone will say to get the GTR cos it's what we'd all kill to own!! If you've got the money, then go for it! But it sounds to me like you're more keen on doing some stuff to your R32 :P i guess only you can decide which way to go.

oh, here's pic of one of those club spec rexes u guys are talking about:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6040-should-i/#findComment-91541
Share on other sites

Thanks for the suggestions and photo's... I'm still not to sure what I am going to do..

If I change the colour then i should probably get some new wheels, and a nice big cooler to finish the front, but it's all $$$..

Or I could just get my loan through the business and get the car I really want...

As for the club spec evo's..my brother sold his yellow one a couple of months ago...here's a pic..

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6040-should-i/#findComment-91629
Share on other sites

hey nvs

if you can get hold of an R32 GT-R then thats definately appealing, but check out what its going to cost to insure first because it may be scary. for example: for me to insure a $10,000 R1 motorbike, the cheapest i can get it is $3900 per year.

gotta say go the R over some yellow paint, wheels and a cooler, because an R is going to be a much bigger step up.

good luck with it mate.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/6040-should-i/#findComment-91868
Share on other sites

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...