Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So I have seen 2 stagea's with R34 fronts on them here in Brisbane, a silver one and a yellow one.

Noob question, how involved is this?

I think it looks shit hot and wouldnt mind doing it, but atm $1 is out of my price range.

I know they are out there, but how much of a hassle is it? How legal is it, do you need a mod plate?

dsc071581qs.jpg

dsc071593zq.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/84373-stageas-with-r34-gtr-fronts/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 160
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I absolutely love them. There are a few that have crept into the country.

On that particular one above, I don't like the gab between the front of the bonnet and the grill. Not that that would stop me from owning one :D

Definately good. Seeing as you own a stagea, im asuming that you are contemplating this front end conversion. What you will find if you havent searched already is that sourcing that masa kit + postage is going to be a pain in the ass. Since its a prefrabricated kit there shouldnt be any hassles in terms of converting it. The lagalities of a 34 front end on a stagea i doubt will be legal but as there are many front end swaps done already ie sil80/onevia and the likes, i doubt you will have any problems with the authorities.

from memory the kit from masa is panels only and you will still need to source things such as the r34 gtr radiator support and headlights to take this into account when you start on this path

also i recall that someone in wa mentioned that here in wa it is illegal to fit plastic front guards as they dont meet adr's for crash requirements

i love the look of the front but i think cost and insurance would be a big factor for me also legality for insurance reasons

Hmmmmmm that is a lot of money just for that look, cant justify it for about 5 years I reckon, yes I will be whipped sometime soon ;).

But yeah cool thanks for the info, still looks damn nice dont it :P

Oh also was pointed ou tthe the rear guards would look better if they were flared, as from the perspective of the camera that took those photo's it looks like the rear is not as wide as the front, as the gtr panels really fflare out, but still, I like it!

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...