Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

S15 Or 34gtt? For Circuit Club Day?

I just had 30k ready to spend, looking for a car which intentionally run weekend circuit club day.

never had any SILIVA OR SKYLINE, or even any nissan.

so hard to choose due their price are very close.

any suggestion will be helpful, thanks! :P

remember not for drag, not for show off, and not for curising.

just for sharp time attack on circuit! B)

Edited by alexliu
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/93186-s15-or-34gtt-for-circuit-club-day/
Share on other sites

For Time attack, go for S15 due to weight as it's lighter than 34 GT-T.

Do a search for these cars in comparisons, as theres a thread about these somewhere.

If you want raw power, why don't you consider R32 GT-R? Just a tought

Cheers

Grant

Of those two, I would go an S15. But there are numerous cars outside the S15 and R34 GTT in that price range for circuit racing. Also consider modified earlier nissans (S13/S14, R32 GTR etc) as well as Series 6+ Mazda RX7, and even the 2JZGTE Toyota Supras (although that may be a bit heavy).

As everyone else has said, S15. Less weight, easy to extract power from, and a wealth of aftermarket parts.

But if you could score a Series 6 RX-7 in that price range, take the rotor.

Otherwise, there's always WRX's. You can set up the handling for tarmac and remove the stock understeer. They do a great job at the club level supersprints I marshall at.

i am thinking that would RB25DET is easier to mod for extra power than SR20DET due it has a six cilyder and bigger engine, right ??

another point is, decreasing GTT weight is much cheaper way to mod than increasing S15 power, is that right ?

by the way, WRX will not be included in consideration, because its very smart 4wd system will hide human error,and kill or stop my driving skill from growing! and by its 4wd nature, wrx is not born to suit high speed, right? i have heard that drive a little FR is always a good way to start practise, am i right?

Are you sure we're talking about the same WRX?

Any non-'05 STi model has a, by peer standards, retarded 4WD system.

"Symmetric AWD" is a marketingspeak euphamism for "we don't have the know-how to build a car with active torque splits like the Evolution or GT-R".

I find it so laughable that Subaru has made "symmetric AWD" a cornerstone of their marketing push for its performance and safety.....until their new top-of-the-line sports car's best handling modification is its asymmetric, adaptive, AWD setup. Notice how they don't have it as a slogan this year?

Anyway, WRX's run open diffs in the front, and the older ones run open rear diffs too (the STi's of old do run front and rear LSDs), so it also tends to spin the inside front wheel under power. Not particularly smart.

As for skills, it just requires a different technique to drive a 4WD quickly. They are easier to drive than a FR car, but that doesn't mean it makes it easy. If you've got no skill you'll still have no pace. I've cleaned up plenty of badly driven modified WRXs in my NA Z, and one of my friends has run down R32 GT-Rs in the wet in his Elantra.

Some driving craft is portable between drivetrain configurations, but others aren't. For example, 4WDers have a mantra: "when in doubt, power out" which works great if the nose pulls as well as the tail pushing...but try that in a RWD car and you'll spin.

WRX's are not geared for high speed, but you'll have to make mad power to hit redline in top gear on most Australian racetracks.

Oh, and if you're after the "ultimate" drivetrain for learning racing skills, then go grab a MR car. Preferably NA. The MR car's weight distribution and balance tends to be the best, and having instant throttle response and a linear power delivery is much better for learning than the variable ramp-up rates for a FI car when trying to balance on the throttle, that also lets you use excess power to hide your deficiencies in handling your car.

Edited by scathing
i am thinking that would RB25DET is easier to mod for extra power than SR20DET due it has a six cilyder and bigger engine, right ??

another point is, decreasing GTT weight is much cheaper way to mod than increasing S15 power, is that right ?

Depends on how far you want to go. If you're willing to strip out the interior then its quite cheap to drop weight. It costs nothing aside from time. But you can also do that to a S15, and drop the weight of that too.

As for making power, you can get an S15 from 125rwkW to 180rwkW with your standard bolt-ons (exhaust, FMIC, ECU and boost control). If you start going invasive and start doing internals, its always cheaper to modify a 4 pot than a 6 pot.

Don't forget that the non-R Skyline coupes are also set up from the factory as more of a GT car. GT's are cars that are sporty, but still have a modicum of comfort and luxury rather than being an out-and-out sports racer. That niche is filled by the Silvia, after all. A much cheaper but a lot more direct and focused sports car. As such, I'd bet on a Silvia's handling for track work over a Skyline GT's.

For track work, all else being equal (suspension setup, power / weight etc), you'd always take the lighter car. It should accelerate about the same, given the similar power to weight, and unless one car has a much better suspension setup the lower weight means it'll handle better as well as tax your brakes and tyres a lot less.

Dude run with the S15, You can get just as much power out of an SR as apposed to the RB and prob a bit more sharper also. My opinoin is if it's only gonna be a Track Car and not to be registered or complied, check with some importers to purchase a car that already has race mods and is ready to go, with no comliencing it makes it heaps affordable.

I'm on a couple of Silvia-oriented forums, and I've never heard of any amateur racer cracking an SR block while sprint racing due to heat issues.

I know that some of the GT-P guys had issues with their engines, but then they run them pretty damned hard for quite a length of time.

If he's only after a time attack (which isn't exactly endurance) then the lighter engine and car would still be a better choice.

Mind you he might also be able to get a second hand PRB for that kind of money, which will defecate all over a S15 or R34 on the track.

all goes to SILVIA , 12:0 for now.hehe.

now i have a very clear idea.

but one more worrying which is silvia's head room!

been sitting in my friend silvia, its headroom is really pain for me, as i am 186cm guy. then image put one more helmet on at circuit ???

can silvia seat be lowed ???

any experience and suggestions from you guys with 185cm plus height about the leg room???

and one more question, how about silvia brake and accelator setting??

are they easy to do "head and toe"? i have found out that it must be easier if that two padels are not too far apart each other.

thank you all !

you skyline guys are very kind, informative,and helpful~!

Well,I also own an S15 as well as my GTR.My S15 made 242rwkw last time on a dyno,a bit more now,with standard internals.I have fitted Cusco and Khazama rose jointed suspension arms everywhere and A048 tyres.I have reduced the weight a little.It is razor sharp,I imagine you would have to get over 320rwkw in an R34 to match the power to weight,but I doubt you could match the sharpness.

S15 gets my vote.

But I'd still get an R32 GTR for track only use.

I've driven a couple of different Nissans (Pulsar, Silvia, Z, Skylines), and all of them have had excellent pedal placement for heel-toeing. They all feel pretty similar, and its as if Nissan did their pedal placement just for people like us.

But yes, head room can be an issue for taller drivers in a Silvia. If you're going to set it up as a dedicated track car you'd replace the seats, which means replacing the seat rails. That might help a bit.

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

    • 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.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...