Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just a small point. When the cars come up for auction in Japan, the odometer reading is registered on the website along with a couple of photos, and the condition level (1 - 4). Make sure you get the screen dump from your importing agent.

  • Replies 51
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Given this thread has just resurfaced, I thought I'd update it a bit..

Go look at drive.com.au ie http://www.drive.com.au/Search/SearchResul...A%7c&from=4

I'd say the bulk of the stageas on it are wound back, as many simply don't match the types of km's coming out of japan. Yes, there are cars with this many km's on them, but unless every one is coming to a few particular dealers in Australia, and they are not passing on the premium....

Of the adds that give kms -

Year Km's

2001 34k

2000 54k

1999 71k

1999 49k

1999 37k

1999 36k

1999 59k

1998 56k

1999 28k

1999 44k

1999 36k

1997 57k

1997 42k

1997 75k

1997 62k

1997 60k

1997 39k

1996 77k

1996 62k

1996 59k

There is no correlation between the age of the car and the km's! You can almost tell which dealer each car was at by the km's! Do they really think that anyone is going to believe that they have a 1997 car (almost 10 years old) that has done 39K? When I was looking for my stagea, it was very hard to find a 2001 car (in 2005) that had done less than 40k (genuine) - and boy were they at a price premium!

Ian

yeah again im unsure about the hole winding back of digital speedo's it could be something as simple as ressetting it to zero and driving around in it for awhile. im pretty sure when the ford BA's came out they were all programmed through the radio so that the speedo's could be zero'd after they had been moved from ford to seller and it was something as simple as pushing a botton 15 times. i have no proof of this but as they say "rumour has it"

Edited by loymclure
  • 2 weeks later...

I'd have to agree here. When I was looking to buy my Stag I found the same thing (but you always do now with imports yards anyway). One gleaming example was at a yard at Coorparoo here in bris. It was a '97 model with about 49,000ks if I remember correctly. The interior was very worn (seats, steering wheel, shifter etc) and not so much from neglect (but it was in pretty bad shape) but from use. And just the wear and tear you could see even with out going over the car too much you could tell it was no where near 49000 clicks. I was lucky when I got mine, got the origional manuals, log books, purchase reciepts etc etc all in the little vinyl Nissan Stagea case so I had a full history plus all reciepts from work carried out here in Australia. It was a priviate sale. The asking price for the car at the car yard was $19990.00 and I got mine for $19000 so I decided to drive over to the car yard and show the salesman. Probably didn't change his price as I looked months later and was still sitting there and then he shut down like most do eventualy.

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...