Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

ing if i well after pulling my battery out for a charge i notices its only 370 CCA battery,

it normally takes 3/4 seconds to start, i am wondering if i need a bigger battery

x0x0x

Is that 3/4's of a second to start or 3 - 4 seconds to start?

I run an 'AllRounder' from Battery World in Fyshwick. Cheaper and has more punch than the typical Yellow Tops. It takes around 1/2 a second to 3/4 of a second to crank the engine over. The CCA on it I think is around 600CCA with a higher AH rating than the yellow tops. AllRounder Battery

Is that 3/4's of a second to start or 3 - 4 seconds to start?

I run an 'AllRounder' from Battery World in Fyshwick. Cheaper and has more punch than the typical Yellow Tops. It takes around 1/2 a second to 3/4 of a second to crank the engine over. The CCA on it I think is around 600CCA with a higher AH rating than the yellow tops. AllRounder Battery

cheers mate,

i ment 3 to 4 seconds,

I see the slightly longer start as a good thing. It gives the engine a little extra time to build oil pressure before being under full load... not a biggy for a standard engine, but it all helps.

Whatever Optima Yellowtop is. It's a deep cycle battery, meaning the charge level can drop to pretty darn low levels (ie won't crank at all) and still be recharged to normal :D Might come in handy Alex!

Whatever Optima Yellowtop is. It's a deep cycle battery, meaning the charge level can drop to pretty darn low levels (ie won't crank at all) and still be recharged to normal ;) Might come in handy Alex!

Same goes for the AllRounder I posted about Ben.

I had the Yellow Top in the Subie.. Excellent battery, but not for the price.. I got the AllRounder for half the price and it has a longer deep cycle charge.

(P.S - I just realised I said Battery World, but it is suppose to be "The Battery Factory")

Edited by sfrizza

I had a 440cca battery and it took maybe 2 seconds to start the motor, once that battery started to die (Scott - remember us roll starting my car in Kingston on Anzac day ;)) I chucked in a Supercharger brand 660cca battery. The fellow at battery world said it's the same cold cranking amps as you get in a Landcruiser.

One tap of the key and she fires first time every time, it's a good feeling lol :)

I can't even tell what mine is.... It's blue with yellow bits on top. It died one day and the NRMA told me it was f*ked and I really had to get to work so the NRMA dude in the battery van came along and changed it for me.

*shrugs* it works ;)

I had a 440cca battery and it took maybe 2 seconds to start the motor, once that battery started to die (Scott - remember us roll starting my car in Kingston on Anzac day :)) I chucked in a Supercharger brand 660cca battery. The fellow at battery world said it's the same cold cranking amps as you get in a Landcruiser.

One tap of the key and she fires first time every time, it's a good feeling lol :)

Yes i do.

Since running a oil cooler, i am paranoid about building pressure, so ignore me. :P

660cca is uber, will do the job fo shiz

yeh but i have that on my Landcruiser just to power accessories and a winch, must be some serious stereo to need as much battery power as that. :D

Mostly hidden. Some nice quality speakers in the rear and front doors with some Xcellent tweaters.

Work done by AudioTech Tuggers.

Put them in the GTS-T and then moved em into the GTR.

Edited by Sinista32
holy crap what size subs are they? my 12 doesn't take up anywhere near that much space

Could be the angle of the Photo's and the fibreglass sub enclosures. I cant fit much in the boot :P

2 x 12.5" Bostons = Heaps of DOOF DOOF (bass).

I dont turn it up till on the open road or at SAU Christmas party's at the Cotter. Sometimes it annoys me to hear it from cars round populated areas like the malls or local shops (fully sic mate!). I just think what a wank. A nice Skyline will get noticed anyway.

Most of the sound is restricted to the inside due to soundproofing from firewall to boot.

i went with a big 600cca cheap bosch and it works great

but 1100cca? thats nuts. what do you need that for? starting on a cold morning while doing a bit of arc welding at the same time?

hehehe I don't do things by halves :P

Errr - 2 Battery's. 1 to crank and the other to keep the stereo cranked.

I used to do that, to set it up right (and legally) there's a lot of shit involved.

Mostly hidden. Some nice quality speakers in the rear and front doors with some Xcellent tweaters.

Work done by AudioTech Tuggers.

Put them in the GTS-T and then moved em into the GTR.

Ooooh nice...

This is why I need the power :( and you can see that even though they call them a 'twelve inch sub' they obviously don't fit in a 12 inch hole :)

img001080349234tq7.jpg

picture2390281841qg6.jpg

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, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...