Sub Lover

I must admit I am leaning more towards one of the Silvias, it's a bit of a tough choice. On one hand one is more powerful but also more stock, on the other one is a bit less powerful but has some cosmetic addons like the bodykit which I find just as desirable. Gonna be a very tough choice!

Very good point there, thanks very much. Right now I've narrowed my choices down to three different cars. The completely stock unregistered turbo R32 skyline, an S13 Silvia CA18DET which has a bodykit, 17" mags plus other unkown extras, or a SR20DET Silvia which doesn't have a bodykit and only a few extras. Gonna be a hard choice!

Thanks very much for all the advice, it seems that I would be better off with turbo. A new contender has stepped up in the form of another 1991 Silvia CA18DET which I am also looking at (and this one is private sale and registered) with a few nice extras. Will let you all know how it goes, thanks very much.

Wow, you all have great points which I will have to consider. I will probably test drive both anyway. The turbo model is listed as a GTST. Something interesting, the N/A has only 94,000k on the clock, where as the turbo has done 147,000 which would indicate that it is not directly imported from Japan but has possibly been already owned somewhere in Australia before. I won't be able to find out the details later though until the caryard re-opens. I am over 21, not too sure of my exact rating, though I am fully licensced for over a year with no accident (which I was responsible for...) My only real concern about the financial stretching is the initial few months. The loan will be for $10,000, so if I get the N/A I'll have $1000 emergency cash. I plan to sell my car, which down here can sell for anywhere between $2000 - $3000, and I have plenty of work coming in so I should probably be able to put an extra $1000 away over the holidays (I'm at uni, which sure has made finding a loan a bit of a pain despite being left with $150-$200 per week left over AFTER all my expenses!). Looking at the K's done by the turbo, it's done over 50,000 more, which means it's either going to be in better condition due to local repairs, or REALLY bad condition (More likely due to it's price)! Originally I was looking at a S13 silvia CA18DE which is only $5500, however the gearbox is on the way out and the brakes are a bit worn, meaning that the engine is probably on its last legs as well, so I figure the cost of repairs I'm better off getting the Skyline IF it's in good condition. My logic is, if I was willing to settle for a N/A CA18, then surely a N/A Skyline will perform a bit better. Really, I'm not planning to race this thing, and my logic is that having a turbo is kinda like having a condom in your wallet, the reality is 99% of the time you won't be using it, and when you DO finally get to use it, it'll probably be to old to use anyway! Sorry bout that one, but yeah basically 99% of the time I wouldn't be able to LEGALLY take advantage of a turbo, and as long as it performs moderately better then my 1.8 pulsar, I'll be happy (Anyone who has owned a Pulsar Q can testify to their suprising zippyness). It's good to know that the Skyline will not be as reliable as the Pulsar even tho they are both the same age, although that said even my Pulsar wasn't that reliable or in good condition until I did over a grands worth of repairs, so I should probably keep that much in spare. In real dire emergency I also have a credit card, although using that is extremely undesirable whilst having a loan as well! The one thing I find interesting is that neither car has had any modifications done, even the wheels are stock, which makes me feel that they may not have been abused too much (although I could be wrong). I'm going to have to get a quote from Justacar I guess. Anyway, thank you very much for your advice. I'm going to have to keep meditating! If anyone has had experience in a N/A RB20 please let me know their performance tho in comparison to the Pulsar, the Silvia and the Turbo R32 (Lol, asking a lot I know, sorry ) Merry Christmas to all

I posted this message in another section of this forum, but figured I should repost here to get more responses... Hi everyone, I'm looking at buying myself a r32 skyline. I am buying through a import caryard and they currently have two models, essentially exctly the same (1990 r32 coupes) Both are the RB20DE's however one is a turbo. There is only $1.5k between the two, s I could possibly stretch my budget to afford the turbo however... I am worried about insuring a turbo, the n/a model can only get me 3rd party fire/theft but the turbo will probably make in uninsurable (for my budget anyway!) Also, due to the age of the cars, I am inclined to think the N/A engine will be in better condition due to less chance of it being thrashed and as turbo's naturally put more strain on the engine. However, I doubt I'd be able to turbo a N/A car for only 1.5k. However this car needs to last a while whilst I pay the loan for it off, and a N/A would definately be more reliable. Another thing is performance, I like the idea of a turbo, however even as a fully licensced driver I am worried that I will not be able to handle the power (and thats saying something since I've managed to push my 1.8L Pulsar to do some crazy things!) and that I would risk crashing the car or blowing the engine or something similar (All you L and P players out there wanting a turbo, believe me, DON'T, I could give you a long list of people I know who have had bad accidents because they got a car too powerful for them to handle, stick with a low power car for the first few years, you'll be a better driver for it) Anyway, getting back to it. Even a N/A 2 litre 6 cyl should be a marked increase on my current car so it should be enough to satisfy my need for power. Although I must admit the idea of the turbo appeals to me mostly coz I would then be able to drag off my brothers WRX, which the N/A would not be able to do . So for all those guys with experience in both, would I be best to stick with N/A and upgrade later and for now have a potentially more reliable engine or will the turbo version be likely to last as long and be worth the extra 1.5k? And will a N/A still have enough kick to satisfy me without being TOO powerful, or are the turbo's fairly easy to control? Thanks for letting me get that all out, sorry if any of this has been covered in past threads but I really need to get all this info all together in one place to make my final choice. Anywayz, Merry Christmas to all, happy new year! Hope to get a good response soon and with any luck will be joining you all in owning a skyline (assuming my loan gets approved of course ) Incidently, the prices of the cars are $8900 and $10500 respectively, neither are registered (So and RACT check is in the pipeplines, and yes, the T is for TASMANIA) Anywayz, thanks again

Uhm, thanks for the quick and short responses, from both sides of the coin, however I kinda need to know the detailed pro's and con's of both with the afforementioned concerns, thanks

Hi everyone. I'm looking at buying myself a r32 skyline. I am buying through a import caryard and they currently have two models, essentially exactly the same (1990 r32 coupes) Both are the RB20DE's however one is a turbo. There is only $1.5k between the two, so I could possibly stretch my budget to afford the turbo however... I am worried about insuring a turbo, the n/a model can only get me 3rd party fire/theft, but the turbo will probably make it uninsurable (for my budget anyway!) Also, due to the age of the cars, I am inclined to think the N/A engine will be in better condition due to less chance of it being thrashed and as turbo's naturally put more strain on the engine. However, I doubt I'd be able to turbo a N/A car for only 1.5k. However this car needs to last a while whislt I pay the loan for it off, and a N/A would definately be more reliable. Another thing is performance, I like the idea of a turbo, however even as a fully licensed driver I am worried that I will not be able to handle the power (and thats saying something since I've managed to push my 1.8L Pulsar to do some crazy things!) and that I would risk crashing the car or blowing the engine or something similar (All you L and P platers out there wanting a turbo, believe me, DON'T, I could give you a long list of people I know who have had bad accidents because they got a car too powerful for them to handle, stick with a low power car for the first few years, you'll be a better driver for it) Anyway, getting back to it. Even a N/A 2 litre 6 cyl should be a marked increase on my current car so it should be enough to satisfy my need for power. Although I must admit the idea of the turbo appeals to me mostly coz I would then be able to drag off my brothers WRX, which the N/A would not be able to do . So for all those guys with experience in both, would I be best to stick with N/A and upgrade later and for now have a potentially more reliable engine or will the turbo version be likely to last as long and be worth the extra 1.5k? And will a N/A still have enough kick to satisfy me without being TOO powerful, or are the turbo's fairly easy to control? Thanks for letting me get that all out, sorry if any of this has been covered in past threads but I really need to get all this info all together in one place to make my final choice. Anywayz, Merry christmas to all, happy new year! Hope to get a good response soon and with any luck will be joining you all in owning a skyline (assuming my loan gets approved of course ) Incidently, the prices of the cars are $8900 and $10500 respectively, neither are registered (So an RACT check is in the pipelines, and yes, the T is for TASMANIA) Anywayz, thanks again