Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

You thought exactly as I did when I posted that same pic back a month or so on here. However as I was told ..."Sorry its not a skyline as its shot in the USA and they don't get Skylines, plus, the indicators on the side shot from the clip (on the bumper) are different....

Sorry to burst your bubble but someone popped mine to. Awesoem clip tho.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/899-matrix2-reloaded/#findComment-19295
Share on other sites

Heheheh...... well

Matrix is shot in Sydney, but the highway scene was shot on a highway built just for the movie. The highway has since been torn down, it was in California near an abandoned naval base.

Because the V35 Skylines are global models, available world-wide, and they are/will be availabe in the USA.

The different bumper-tail lights are due to the many different variations of the V35 series.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/899-matrix2-reloaded/#findComment-19317
Share on other sites

I think it blows up or something in the end.... cos it wasn't fast enough or something. So I think its best this way.

However if they intended the car to simply go so fast that it just loses the pursuing vehicles, the movie would probably lose out cos it would get kinda boring..... so its better this way I think. :)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/899-matrix2-reloaded/#findComment-19350
Share on other sites

soooo... did the japs copy yet another design from another car manufacturer or is it the other way round this time... because both look very similar to one another.

down the drags a few months ago and in the pit lane a rx7 s4 and a porsche (whatever the model is thats like the s4, 9xx? ) were next to one another and its good to see the japs have their own unique way of styling things

:lol: :lol:

Shaun

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/899-matrix2-reloaded/#findComment-19451
Share on other sites

that shot is friggin crazy! the agent actually flips his own car and starts shooting through his own windscreen while he is flipping in the air just to get a few shots at the cadillac cts!!! that is insane! of course the agent doesnt give a stuff what happens after that cos he just goes back in through another human body / entry point or whateva the popular term is for that sort of stuff.

yeah... ;)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/899-matrix2-reloaded/#findComment-19885
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

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


  • 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...