Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Nar, I don't want one.

Ula has one and I spank his R32 running lest boost then my max setting in my shitbox.

I want a Mark 4 Chaser. But I can't justify letting go of the shitbox after I've spent quite a bit on stronger internals. Well, not until I buy a bigger turbo and shove 2.0bar down it's throat.

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Do you want to get into a discussion about who has more money?

I bought my R over two years ago. I'm quite certain that back then it cost more than your 92 (cost my car is a 92 GTi-R) Skyline.

Am I getting thru to you Skyline owners? I didn't want a Skyline, I never wanted a Skyline. Thats why I bought a GTi-R.

Sheez...it's like you GTS-t owners think you're all god because you drive a skyline. Get over it...it's a GTS-t...not a GTR. If I wanted a GTR I would have bought one. Or saved a bit more and bought one.

Originally posted by INASNT

pity they r a sh*it load cheaper than a skyline and u cant go out and buy a new 1 like u can with a skyline! :rolleyes:

Skylines without the flared rear guards look like crap too.

The GTS-t in standard form isn't deserving of it's inherited looks of the GTR.

Get over it. You're car isn't exactly a ZZ II Tommykiara. It's like seeing another dressed up Lancer made to be an Evo. You GTS-t owner do the same. I don't have fake GTR badges on my car. Nor do I pretend it's anything like one. But putting on a GTR front bar, grill, side skirt, wing, key.

Originally posted by predator666

they're ugly as crap too.. but yep, they go hard if you like the buzz box feel

one other thing I brought my car 2.5 years ago and believe me back then they were not common the amount of stares I copped you'd think you were driving a Ferrari and it was standard with no body kit what so ever so you're wrong there...

and don't even go there comparing lines to commodores fool and don't bag us skyliners cause this ain't the place for that sort of behaviour you'd be on your own with your statements anyway, as people here are %99 skyline owners so why bother bro. I'm sure your car is very nice and I'm sure its quick too but who gives a shit!! :D

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

    • 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...