Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 153
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

R32s (both GTR, GTS-T and GTS4), 300zx, more S13 silvias, 180sx first came out with the CA18DET... few popular cars actually appeared that year.

Come 2005, if the rule remains the same that is, 1990 models will be even more popular. While a lot of the cars above came out in 89, they didn't really hit full production en'mass until about 1990.

Much larger range of 1990 vehicles to choose from (of all types) it seems from the various auction lists I have looked at.

Hey Guys.

Ok i know first hand whats happening with the 15yr rules. I have been on the phone for almost an hour, trying to work out how they intend on implementing this rule.

Now it is NOT a change in the rule just a change in the way its interpreted. It has always been a 15yr rule, not a 14yr and 11 months rule.

Now basically they want the importer to prove what year(easy) and now the month also(hard)

Now they have said either dereg papers from japan, Proof from the manufacturer or a date and corresponding VIN list.

Now i don't know anyone who can supply me with the list of numbers i need.

But basically its to stop the potential flood of 89 models in jan 2004.

Being an importer sure is fun atm, with raws now this what mroe can they throw at us????

Glenn

somertoncarimporters.com

Finding the VIN numbers will be the key to 15 year imports a friend who is a buyier in Japan for some of the big players has nearly finished his collection of VIN numbers on all cars upto 20 years old that come into this country.

I have been sent a link to a car in free storage over in Japan and the only thing in short supply is bricks.

I would ask for info on my car if I had one sitting in Japan.

http://www.adultmovies.bz/~mandy/Celsior/C...Celsior%202.jpg

Celsior.jpg

I just cant believe that people are whinging about this. If you had've asked any importer - and I'm not talking about someone who is only interested in extracting a service fee from you - about whether the 1989 stuff would be allowed in and you would have been told that there was no way in hell the government would let them come in. I havent bought a single '89 car to store because I knew it would happen.

Its the old adage - if something appears too good to be true then it is - 16k GT-Rs fall into that bracket...

Jash

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

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...