R34 Gtt V Xr6t

[32GTRB]

i spent 1050 on the capa edit system and a custom tune done by c&v performance and i ran a 13.0 at wsid on a 22 degree night.

bang for buck i dont see anything that comes close. $660 later and its lowered and has a swaybar, and handles extremely well

[jazza08]

I dont think anyone has ever questioned the motor in the ford... loads of torque and a huge turbo (GT35/40 isnt it??).

I guess ive never been in a track set up xr6t where i have skylines and 200sx's etc and have been scared sh*tless by the handling abilites, my r32 handled better than my 34 and out-performed all the xr6t's (stock/lightly mod'd) but weighed less and had alot more suspenion work done to it than the xr6t's and my 34. Saying that i still believe my 34 is quiet abit infront of the xr6t in terms of handling.

Btw coming from an rb20 wit a bigger turbo to rb25, off-boost seems good to me in the r33/34 hahaha i don't disagree that you can drive the 4l ford happily off boost though!

Edited December 25, 2006 by jazza08

[a20089]

  jazza08 said:

Typhoon's seem to handle slightly better even though they are heavier? Although ive never sat in a Typhoon. Its simple logic that somethin that weighs more is goin to be harder to direct around corners than something that weighs less (ie why does the mx5 handle so well, balanced car that weighs fark all).

Yes Typhoon handles better due to better stock set up. It's not designed as a basic family car. Though you defeat your (though logical) argument about weight and handling. Why does a heavy GTR out handle a much lighter GTT?

For everyone I'd like to put this to rest. Ford guys want some competition at Wakefield race track near Canberra. The track is small and technical and should suit the lighter skyline considerably.

Register your interest in their forums

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.ph...d=1#post1155809

[jazza08]

Suspension set up, weight distribution, tyres and awd system makes the gtr a much better handling car.

Be good to get some skyline's with similar mods/driver ability out to test it all out against the xr6t's!

[RNGTR]

  R89C_Lemans_GTC said:

yes, but wait untill the fuel consumption gets to you, i know a friend, whos brother has one, and seriously consider trading an XR6T for WRX STi, because of this. in everyday situation, a skyline GTT would be better, its lighter and nimble, better for every weekender. It drinks roughly 17ltrs per 100km from what he told me.

Mine gets around 12.3 - 12.6 L per 100 ks.....

...and i dont need a weekender, I have the Evo.

[RNGTR]

  LatinR33 said:

I find it funny when people come on here create fake profiles just for the sake of nissan skyline bashing. It is a skyline forum after all so if you think fords are better then go and post in the ford forum. Im quite fortunate to own a 2005 Ford xr6t ute for work and a R33 skyline for other times. I love both cars they both have there benefits and draw backs. As a car enthusiast aslong as im happy with what I drive then its all that matters. This thread is turning into a penis measuring competition grow up!!

I really hope you dont mean me....... Ive been on here for 4 years & owned a 350rwkw GTR for over 6 years & have made many freinds here. . I dont think my ford is better, it suits my needs better. Im over spending heaps on my cars, I want a newish car that responds to mods well, the falcon does this.

As I said above, if I wanna go to the track i'll take the Evo.

[jazza08]

Pretty obvious you've got the right idea!

[dineth]

I really find these Skyline VS "insert make here" a good laugh. I mean really, how could you even begin to compare... different horses for different courses.

[Pax-Ottomanica]

  tridentt150v said:

Actually the turbo was reputed to be invented by a swiss person! Not german and not [as far as I could find] in Germany.

"The turbocharger is actually already an old hat. Alfred Büchi, a Swiss engineer from Winterthur, invented the turbocharger and registered his invention approx. 1905 to the patent.Büchi had noticed that conventional burning engines have an extremely bad degree of effectiveness. (while it was to convert a third of the energy brought in as fuel in movement max. the remains disappeared approximate ever with the half) about cooling and exhaust fumes unused "to the open".

That might be true, but Daimler-Chrysler was the first auto producer to actually implement a Turbo on their cars.

Edited December 25, 2006 by Janissary

[a20089]

  dineth said:

I really find these Skyline VS "insert make here" a good laugh. I mean really, how could you even begin to compare... different horses for different courses.

I find this comment ridiculous. Comparisons are human nature. The fact they are both family/sporty type cars, running 6cyl and turbo makes them very comparable. When people shop for a car they may look at both of these cars. Both cars compete on the roads equally. Whether they are equal or not is the point of comparison.

[dineth]

  a20089 said:

I find this comment ridiculous. Comparisons are human nature. The fact they are both family/sporty type cars, running 6cyl and turbo makes them very comparable. When people shop for a car they may look at both of these cars. Both cars compete on the roads equally. Whether they are equal or not is the point of comparison.

I dont have a problem with people comparing diff model cars, your right it is human nature, however there is sometimes the danger of the discussion turning into a 'boy racer' type discussion which is fueled by bias and non factual information. which tends to happen with a lot of these skyline vs other car comparisons. Do a search its been done to death and there is never a true answer to which is better, because it comes down to the indivudal, thus me saying 'different horses for different courses.' And a lot of people who comment in these sort of posts havnt even driven both cars (or any of them for that matter) so you can understand how i come to that conclusion. Not saying all the posts are like this, there are a fair few well informed and rational posts, however some of the comments are a laugh. as with any car make forum you cant seriously expect a 'fair' comparisson becuase some people think that their car is gods gift to man.

PS: i love my R33 Gts-t, and i wouldnt trade it for anything in that price range, but i also know that there are plenty of better, faster and newer cars. anyways thats my 2cents.

Edited December 26, 2006 by dineth

[jazza08]

Ok well the next 'vs' thread i will only comment if ive had or have the car (such as the fact i own a 34 gt-t and have driven an xr6t). I think thats probably not a bad idea though, don't comment unless you've owned or driven atleast one of the cars in question!

I think 'vs' threads are good if the owner wants some opinions before he/she goes to buy one of the cars in question though...

[Godzilla32]

I always kinda did like the idea of maybe oneday having a XR6-T as a family car along with the GTR for the weekender/track car.

Still... bog stock GTR = 13 flat 1/4 ...Can't complain there.

[Godzilla32]

  Jaeyon said:

i spent 1050 on the capa edit system and a custom tune done by c&v performance and i ran a 13.0 at wsid on a 22 degree night.

bang for buck i dont see anything that comes close. $660 later and its lowered and has a swaybar, and handles extremely well

Like i just said my car is 13.0 - 1/4 stock as a rock...and its 17 years old!

[2ezee]

  IanB said:

Lets get a 34 GTR into it then and compare it to the falcon...

i hate to say it as a skyline owner but my brothers xr6t has blitzd 33gtr and i have no doubt could blitz a 34gtr i actually work for ford aswell.....the amount of power them cars are producing with minimal effort is unbelievable

[zaffa]

I think the test was quite good and the drivers highlighted pro's and cons of both cars. After all neither of the test vehicles, as the drivers said are race cars. They performed quite in stock guise. At the end of the day one could see the skyline coming out on top due to tuning parts available and lower kerb weight.

[Modena]

  Janissary said:

That might be true, but Daimler-Chrysler was the first auto producer to actually implement a Turbo on their cars.

Wrong! SAAB was the first car maker to use turbos in commercial cars.

"Beginning in the 1970’s Saab pioneered the use of turbo chargers to give extra power, as needed, to their engines."

http://www.9motors.com/didyouknow.html

[FATAZZ]

Why would you want a car that looks like a cop car?

its so annoying having falcons and commodores following you

not knowing if its a cop or not.

im sure that turbo badge alone has sold plenty of xr6's

i believe ford put the turbo on it becuase turbos's are/were in demand at the time. because everyone was going out buying skylines,wrx's & 200's instead of buying australian made cars.ford needed to bring back their customers.

my 89model r32 came with a Cd player,ABS,climate control,4ws,the list goes on...

still today power windows is an extra in most commoders(not sure about ford).

if i get 160+rwkw from a 89" 2L with a turbo

i would EXPECT to get 300+rwkw from a 05" 4L with a turbo twice the size and ball bearing.

its not great,its EXPECTED

n yeh it sux knowing a mum in her xr6t family car can chop me silly,i choose not to race.

thats my whinge.

[Murry33]

big fkn deal i wouldn't get a xr6t just because it has a FORD badge on it, don't care what you say, i've have a few holden cars and a v8. i've got back to the skyline because of the complete package you get rather than JUST the power figures.

Besides for xr6t's look like shit compared to many nice skylines. they just look like every other ba falcon out there with a kit. plus i'm sure chicks would prefer skyline over a ford in many ways haha