Jump to content
SAU Community

R33 Gts4


Recommended Posts

Hey all,

I'm looking for a new car, and I love skyline's.

I've been looking around, and I've found a 1994 R33 GTS4 5-speed-manual for sale for $12,990. As far as I can tell, the GTS4 is a non-turbo 2.5L (RB25DE) All Wheel Drive. This exact car is a 2door Coupe, with 130,000 on the clock, plus a few mods (exhaust, pod from a 300zx, gtr front grill, stereo etc...).

I just want to ask if this sounds like a good deal. It seems like it is to me, but it is a non-turbo with 130,000kms.

Thanks all,

RoD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

expensive for a non turbo, prob better spending that amount on a R32 GTS4 or GTST which has a turbo,

or u can pick up an auto R33 series 2 GTST for that price, have a look at the for sale section

Link to comment
Share on other sites

expensive for a non turbo, prob better spending that amount on a R32 GTS4 or GTST which has a turbo,

or u can pick up an auto R33 series 2 GTST for that price, have a look at the for sale section

R33 GTST II for 13k?? where??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally I was looking at an R33 GTS-t, but I'm 19 and only have a part-time job (I have uni 4 days a week). A non-turbo costs half as much to insure as a turbo, plus I figure it should be lower maintainence, since there'll be less strain on the car.

One thing I really want to know is if it will still be in decent condition after 130,000kms? I've read that unmodified skylines (R32/R33/R34) are pretty reliable, but I can't find much info about the GTS4. I plan to get a full inspection done by the RAC anyway, but I would like some of your opinions, especially if anyone here has had a GTS4.

Thanks again

RoD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

depends on the car really, if its been really well looked after and serviced on time and it had the major 100,000km service done than you should be fine,

definately go for a test drive and get it properly checked out by a mechanic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all the advice so far. I got a couple more questions here.

How fuel efficient would the RB25DE be? I figure that since it's not turbo, it shouldn't be a massive fuel hog (not as bad as the RB25DET anyway).

Also, am I right in thinking that it needs/prefers to be run on Premium petrol, or is that only for Turbo models?

RoD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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
 Share



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Well, yeah, the RB26 is definitely that far off the mark. From a pure technology point of view it is closer to the engines of the 60s than it is to the engines of the last 10 years. There is absolutely nothing special about an RB26 that wasn't present in engines going all the way back to the 60s, except probably the four valve head. The bottom end is just bog standard Japanese stuff. The head is nothing special. Celicas in the 70s were the same thing, in 4cyl 2 valve form. The ITBs are nothing special when you consider that the same Celicas had twin Solexes on them, and so had throttle plates in the exact same place. There's no variable valve timing, no variable inlet manifold, which even other RBs had either before the 26 came out or shortly afterward. The ECU is pretty rude and crude. The only things it has going for it are that the physical structure was pretty bloody tough for a mass produced engine, the twin-turbos and ITBs made for a bit of uniqueness against the competition (and even Toyota were ahead on the twin turbs thing, weren't they?) and the electronic controls and measuring devices (ie, AFMs, CAS, etc) were good enough to make it run well. Oh, and it sounds better than almost anything else, ever. The VR38 is absolutely halfway between the RB generation and the current generation, so it definitely has a massive increase in the sophistication of the electronics, allowing for a lot more dynamic optimisation of mapping. Then there's things like metal treatments and other coatings on things, adoption of variable cam stuff, and a bunch of other little improvements that mean it has to be a better thing than the RB26. But I otherwise agree with you that it is approximately the same thing as a 26. But, skip forward another 10 years from that engine and then the things that I mentioned in previous post come out to play. High compression, massively sophisticated computers, direct injection, clever measuring sensors, etc etc. They are the real difference between trying to make big power with a 26 and trying to make big power with a S/B50/54 (or whatever the preferred BMW engine of the week is).
    • Is the RB26 actually that far off the mark? Honestly from where I'm sitting a VR38DETT is not actually that much more advanced than the RB26. Yes, there is a scavenge pump on the VR38, it's smarter in a number of ways but it's not actually jumping out to me as alien technology. Something like a B58 or V35A-FTS on the other hand has so many surprising little design features that add up to be something that just isn't comparable. 
    • https://www.carsales.com.au/cars/details/2021-nissan-skyline-400r-auto-rv37/SSE-AD-17857548/ Well there you go 
    • Chris won't reply. He doesn't visit the forum much anymore. You can try these guys https://www.facebook.com/autotainment/ They did mine many years ago
×
×
  • Create New...