Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

PRICE DROP to $17,890 Negotiable.

Hi All

Just testing the waters to see whether there is any interest in my car. Another car that i could possibly like has come up, but if nobody is interested in my car, i will just keep it and modify it more :crazy:

Its a White 1992 R32 GTS-t M-Spec

180,000km

Manual

Turbo

R33 Rims (Falken Azenis RT-215's on the Rear)

R32 GTR Aluminium Bonnet

GTR Grill

GTR Skirts

Rear Spoiler Removed

Paint in very good condition, well looked after using quality products

Good condition Interior

Lowered/Stiffened Suspension of Unknown Make

Front Strut Brace

Rear Strut Brace

Race Brakes RB74 Brake Pads on Front

Motul RBF600 Race Quality Brake Fluid

Very Heavy Clutch of Unknown Make

K&N Pod Filter

Flying Performance 3" Dump/Front Pipe

3" Highflow Cat

Kakimoto 3" Catback Exhaust

GTR Steering Wheel

Autometer Boost Guage

Concealed GReddy Turbo Timer

Genuine Skyline Floormats

Nismo Leather Gearknob

New Leather Gearstick Boot & Handbrake Boot

IMPAKT's NissanDataScan module

Probably a few things i've missed, but you get the point ;)

NEW PRICE: $17,890 Negotiable.

I know this is more than other R32's, but its also in alot better condition than alot of R32's, and i feel that its worth alot more than this! ;)

Can be contacted at [email protected] or on 0402 202 978, or by PM here.

I can attest to the condition of this car. Completely immaculate and always cared for. Also the owner is the softest driver I've ever met, my grandmother gives her car more than Jason so it's definately not been thrashed.

The car drives well, runs well, body and paint is superb!

I stuck with the stock rims due to the weight difference between them and most other 'larger' rims that most people seem to get (and also the price difference between 16" semi-slicks and 18" semi-slicks). The less weight (unsprung weight) the better the handling.

However, if you really are interested, i'm sure some "bling" 18's could be arranged

I guess thats a pretty fair response. but i think it wouldnt hurt for some wider wheels, maybe 16x10s for even greater handling

I've dropped the price to a more realistic figure, however, in my opinion its worth more than this.

Price Drop to $17,890

Any interest? I've got until probably Tuesday of next week to make up my mind if i want to keep it or sell it, as its booked to get $4k worth of suspension upgrades done to it. Now, i don't really want to put that on and then sell it, as its a bit pointless...

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...