Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There a nice car, i dunno how people can bag em!

there a comfy car, and have alot of balls, they only need a tweak and they can be very quick..

for reliabilty there awesome as long as you look after it. Its a personal choice, so pick what YOU want. Turbos have a big novelty Ls1's are just sheer grunt and balls.

i think its a personal thing and evryone has different taste, but id keep the skyline 4 sure

yeah def a personal thing....(probably gonna get flamed), but after the skyline it will be back to the 4 cylinder class for me again. Others have said, after driving a 6, you cant go back to a 4, and after driving an 8, you cant go back to a 6 - probably true. But the overall cost of living is getting higher every year, makes me wonder how I would be able to afford a fast car after the r33..... :thumbsup:

forgot to add: R33GOD - if everything works out in terms of running costs etc - then go for it.

about 2 months ago the same thought flashed across my head..

keep driving a modded 15+year old car and pour money into keeping it running

or

get a newer car with no mods, no cop hassles, newer, more luxurious etc. etc.

...its a logical move as you get older

that's why i got a V35 350GT.. its still a skyline, handles awesome, and, yes, its as powerful as my R32 GTSt.. its amazing to drive and surprisingly got quite a lot of balls for a NA V6.. drive one and you will put a deposit down i guarantee it :thumbsup:

post-2094-1183865457_thumb.jpg

post-2094-1183865466_thumb.jpg

post-2094-1183865545_thumb.jpg

Edited by WazR32GTSt

Do some research on VT II-VX piston slap damage. The first versions of LS1 had faults and needed to be rebuild, sometimes more han once. It was a bit of nuisance when they were under new car warranty but now they are no longer covered. It will come out of your pocket. Not all early LS1s had this fault but there were enough...

Ls1 does go hard, Ive driven a VX LS1 ute and it flew, stock.

Their priced around 25-30 grand now... more if you want a clean one. So I dont think you will lose much money if you want to sell it a year or two down the line.

I used to be into Holdens a while ago until I discovered imports.

i love my skyline, looks good, goes great but im thinkin of changing cause i spend too much money on it, and the clubby, less attention from the cops. i was going to buy a bmw but there just crap..and no guts lol
If you are into modding, you will not stop if you but the HSV. lol Go to ls1 forums and youll see lol

i work for holden and have for a while, i have driven basically all of them including most of the VE HSV range, for what it's worth i really dont rate them. Handling is nothing like a jap car and they are really not fuel efficent. i used to have a twin turbo supra and i have been in alot of GTR's and you cant beat these as a complete package. handle well are quick and better on fuel. It just depends what you want but i suggest you take them for a test drive before you make your decision, then you will know what i mean.

The clubsport is good in a straight line torquey down low but just not exciting to drive.

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

    • Nah. For something like boost control I wouldn't start my design with PID. I'd go with something that originates in the fuzzy logic world and use an emergency function or similar concept. PID can and does work, but at its fundamental level it is not suited to quick action. I'd be reasonably sure that the Profecs et al all transitioned to a fuzzy algorithm back in the 90s. Keep in mind also that where and when I have previously talked about using a Profec, I'm usually talking about only doing an open loop system anyway. All this talk of PID and other algorithms only comes into play when you're talking closed loop boost control, and in the context of what the OP needs and wants, we're probably actually in the realm of open loop anyway. Closed loop boost control has always bothered me, because if you sense the process value (ie the boost measurement that you want to control) in the plenum (after the throttle), then boost control to achieve a target is only desirable at WOT. When you are not WOT, you do not want the the boost to be as high as it can be (ie 100% of target). That's why you do not have the throttle at WO. You're attempting to not go as fast as you can. If the process variable is measured upstream of the throttle (ie in an RB26 plenum, or the cold side pipework in others) then yeah, sure, run the boost controller closed loop to hit a target boost there, and then the throttle does what it is supposed to do. Just for utter clarity.... an old Profec B Spec II (or whatever it is called, and I've got one, and I never look at it, so I can't remember!) and similar might have a MAP sensor, and it might show you the actual boost in the plenum (when the MAP sensor is connected to the plenum) but it does not use that value to decide what it is doing to control the boost, except to control the gating effect (where it stops holding the gate closed on the boost ramp). It's not closed loop at all. Once the gate is released, it's just the solenoid flailing away at whatever duty cycle was configured when it was set up. I'm sure that there are many people who do not understand the above points and wonder wtf is going on.  
    • This has clearly gone off on quite a tangent but the suggestion was "go standalone because you probably aren't going to stop at just exhaust + a mild tune and manual boost controller", not "buy a standalone purely for a boost controller". If the scope does in fact stop creeping at an EBC then sure, buy an EVC7 or Profec or whatever else people like to run and stop there. And I have yet to see any kind of aftermarket boost control that is more complicated than a PID controller with some accounting for edge cases. Control system theory is an incredibly vast field yet somehow we always end up back at some variant of a PID controller, maybe with some work done to linearize things. I have done quite a lot, but I don't care to indulge in those pissing matches, hence posting primary sources. I deal with people quite frequently that scream and shout about how their opinion matters more because they've shipped more x or y, it doesn't change the reality of the data they're trying to disagree with. Arguing that the source material is wrong is an entirely separate point and while my experience obviously doesn't matter here I've rarely seen factory service manuals be incorrect about something. It's not some random poorly documented internal software tool that is constantly being patched to barely work. It's also not that hard to just read the Japanese and double check translations either. Especially in automotive parts most of it is loanwords anyways.
    • If you are keeping the current calipers you need to keep the current disc as the spacing of the caliper determines the disc diameter. Have you trial fitted the GTS brakes fit on a GTSt hub or is this forward planning? There could be differences in caliper mount spacing, backing plate and even hub shape that could cause an issue.
    • Hi there I have a r33 gts with 4 stud small brakes, I'm going to convert to 5 stud but keep the small brakes, what size rotor would I need?
    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
×
×
  • Create New...