Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Heya all,

I'm at the point in skyline ownership where I'm stuck between two schools of thought, and thought I would open it up for consideration.

I WAS planning to do the usual GTS-T mods: turbo, intake and exhaust, intercooler, fuel pump, boost controller, GTR front bar, hood and seats, and so on. But then I crunched the numbers, and it seems I would end up dropping around the $20,000 mark including the car itself.

Nowadays, that seems to be able to get you a GT-R without much hassle. And they're a hell-of-a-lot quicker than a stock GTS-T, but probably slower than a GTS-T with mods to bring it to a GTR's price-tag.

Then there's the maintenance cost. An RB20 is much easier to look after than an RB26. Let's face it, we've got 1 less turbo and 5 less throttle bodies. Also no 4WD to pack up and cost stacks of money to repair. Then again, a GTR purist can turn around and say "yeah, but at least once it's working, I've got it and you haven't".

Obviously, even with a GTR, you're going to want to modify it (probably spending around the $5000 - $10000 mark), and that would ALSO have to be money added to the GTS-T. At which point, you would have one insane GTS-T. But then again, it's still just a GTS-T... you see my dilemma.

As you can see, I've done some thinking on the topic, but thought that with all the GTR and GTS-T owners on this forum, you could all help shed light on this issue.

Thanks fellas,

Adrian.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/105343-to-modify-gts-t-or-save-up-for-gt-r/
Share on other sites

depends, which one do you want? if you can afford either get the one you want. and maintence? i believe all cars are they same if you treat them right... i bet you all havent spent 6 grand on car maintence in the last year (not including mods or engine rebuilds) well... i have and my cars non turbo sr20.... its just coz it was in shit condition when i bought it, it broke down every second week for a year.... and i still need to spend another 2 grand just to get it up to road worthy standard.... so instead im going to use that 2 grand and buy a newer car.... r33 s2 maybe

I don't see a dilemma at all. If you can afford a GT-R, buy a GT-R. Its a better sports car, and if you're going to modify a vehicle you always start with the best "base".

If you're worried about high maintenance and running costs, and the whole "sports car" thing isn't really your deal, buy a Corolla (or a Celica if you must have a car that looks like a sports car but without the "sports" compromises).

Edited by scathing
I don't see a dilemma at all. If you can afford a GT-R, buy a GT-R. Its a better sports car, and if you're going to modify a vehicle you always start with the best

"base".

If you're worried about high maintenance and running costs, and the whole "sports car" thing isn't really your deal, buy a Corolla (or a Celica if you must have a car that looks like a sports car but without the "sports" compromises).

amen to that comment...

dont think a 18k gtr is gonna be decent either, more like around 30k for a decent condition and running one.

ive been going through the same thorts lately too.. but ive decided to just sell my mosdly stock gtst, and get the gtr.. and maybe save up more money for the gtr, or spend it on mods on the way wile im waiting to sell it.... mite as well put the saved money to good use wile im waiting i figure

well, i went against the grain of everyone here has said, and modified my GTS-t... while it still wouldn't be QUITE as fast as a GTR in a straight line, (there would only be a bees dick in it)... i would eat a (stock) GTR in the handling department ;)

what you have to remember is, you can have a modified GTS-t for the same price as you can have a stock GTR... however, that GTR isn't going to have the new suspension, or the new brakes, or the new fuel pump or new turbo etc etc, and you're going to end up having to spend money on the GTR anyway if you want it to be anything above "Modified GTS-t" standard...

just some food for thought from the other side of the ballpark :P

Well yes and no, I've seen a few nice examples around for $20-24k, and that's not thrashed ones or 89 models mind you. If you're patient, a good one WILL come up at a nice price.

There's so many pro's and cons. Nothing wrong with GTSt's, I love them too, but the GTR is a whole new world...

Edited by d0p3y

I was in the same dilemma mate, do I mod my GTSt or save for a GTR, after much thought I wanted to put an Rb26DETT in my car but after chasing up prices etc on doing this conversion its just not worth it.

Yes I could have done pretty much the whole conversion at home as I have lots of friends in automotive trades and enginering trades welding etc). One company wanted around $8500 for an R33 halfcut. At the end of the day its still a GTSt with an RB26, yes no doubt it would fly but If i want the motor so much I think its a better prop to save and buy an R33 GTR, as I also wanted to paint my car midnight purple, hell, By the time Ive done all those mods including R34 GTR wheels it would have cost me a fortune.

So Ive decided to leave my car how it is, it is lightly modified, suspension wheels etc etc. And save for an R33 GTR in Midnight purple with Rb26Dett! As a bonus I get 4WD, pumped guards, brembos etc etc. And no matter what I do to it, its still always going to be a GTR.

So after my long winded post, keep it relatively stock and save for a GTR in my opinon. It might cost more but at the end of the day which would you rather have in the garage a modified GTSt or a genuine GTR??

do you want to keep your girlfriend? or live at home for a few more years???

I'm actually married, and am renting my own place, looking to buy a house in a year. So don't smart-ass me, boy.

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

    • Yeah, all the crude is used for fuels and petrochem feedstocks (pesticides, many other chemicals, etc etc). But increasingly over the last few decades, much of the petrochem synthessis has started with methane because NG has been cheaper than oil, cleaner and easier and more consistent to work with, etc etc etc. So it's really had to say what the fraction either way is. Suffice to say - the direct fuels fraction is not insigificant. Heavy transport uses excruciatingly large amounts. Diesel is wasted in jet heaters in North American garages and workshops, thrown down drill holes in quarries, pissed all over the wall to provide electricity to certain outback communities, etc etc. Obviously road transport, and our pet project, recreational consumption camouflaged as road transport, is a smaller fraction of the total liquid HC consumption again. If you're talking aboust Aussie cars' contribution to the absolute total CO2 production of the country, then of course our share of the cubic mile of coal that is used for power generation, metallurgy, etc adds up to a big chunk. Then there is the consumption of timber. Did you know that the production of silicon metal, for example, is done in Australia by using hardwood? And f**king lots and lots and lots of hardwood at that. Until recently, it was f**king jarrah! There are many such sneaky contributors to CO2 production in industry and farming. NG is used in massive quantities in Australia, for power gen, for running huge water pumps (like, 1-2MW sized caterpillar V16 engines running flat out pumping water) for places like mine sites and minerals/metals refineries. And there are just a huge number of those sort of things going on quietly in the background. So NG use is a big fraction of total CO2 production here. I mean, shit, I personally design burners that are used in furnaces here in Oz that use multiple MW of gas all day every day. The largest such that I've done (not here in Oz) was rated to 150MW. One. Single. Gas burner. In a cement clinker kiln. There are thousands of such things out there in the world. There are double digits of them just here in Oz. (OK< just barely double digits now that a lot of them have shut - and they are all <100MW). But it's all the same to me. People in the car world (like this forum's users) would like to think that you only have to create an industrial capability to replace the fuel that they will be using in 10 years time, and imagine that everyone else will be driving EVs. And while the latter part of that is largely true, the liquid HC fuel industry as a whole is so much more massive than the bit used for cars, that there will be no commercial pressure to produce "renewable" "synthetic" fuels just for cars, when 100x that much would still be being burnt straight from the well. You have to replace it all, or you're not doing what is required. And then you get back to my massive numbers. People don't handle massive numbers at all well. Once you get past about 7 or 8 zeros, it becomes meaningless for most people.
    • @GTSBoy out of the cubic mile of crude oil we burn each year, I wonder how much of that is actually used for providing petrol and diesel.   From memory the figure for cars in Australia, is that they only add up to about 2 to 3% of our CO2 production. Which means something else here is burning a shit tonne of stuff to make CO2, and we're not really straight up burning oil everywhere, so our CO2 production is coming from elsewhere too.   Also we should totally just run thermal energy from deep in the ground. That way we can start to cool the inside of the planet and reverse global warming (PS, this last paragraph is a total piss take)
    • As somebody who works in the energy sector and lives in a subzero climate, i'm convinced EV's will never be the bulk of our transport.  EV battery and vehicle companies over here have been going bankrupt on a weekly basis the last year. 
    • With all the rust on those R32s, how can it even support all the extra weight requirements. Probably end up handling as well as a 1990s Ford Falcon Taxi.
    • Yes...but look at the numbers. There is a tiny tiny fraction of the number of Joules available, compared to what is used/needed. Just because things are "possible" doesn't make them meaningful.
×
×
  • Create New...