Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey

Im a new member and just got a few questions. I've got a 2000 Magna VR-X manual that is my pride and joy but recently I've been thinking of getting something different and skyline R34's have taken my eye, however I have never been in one or driven one so was hoping you guys could tell me a bit about how they handle, 0-100, power figures, fuel econ, reliability, ruggedness (ie how will they take being driven hard).

Basically looking for something that handles as good as my VRX, is a bit quicker (VRX does lmid/low 7s) gets roughly same fuel econ (I get 550-600). Looking towards N/A as I'm 22 and don't wanna be killed off by insurance but at the same time if any of you guys around that age have GT-Ts what's your comp insurance like? Im with shannons right now and pay about $1000 for bought price of $9,800 with all mods listed.

Really appreciate your opinions and info on the cars.

Cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/265344-35l-v6-vs-r34-na/
Share on other sites

Hey

Im a new member and just got a few questions. I've got a 2000 Magna VR-X manual that is my pride and joy but recently I've been thinking of getting something different and skyline R34's have taken my eye, however I have never been in one or driven one so was hoping you guys could tell me a bit about how they handle, 0-100, power figures, fuel econ, reliability, ruggedness (ie how will they take being driven hard).

Basically looking for something that handles as good as my VRX, is a bit quicker (VRX does lmid/low 7s) gets roughly same fuel econ (I get 550-600). Looking towards N/A as I'm 22 and don't wanna be killed off by insurance but at the same time if any of you guys around that age have GT-Ts what's your comp insurance like? Im with shannons right now and pay about $1000 for bought price of $9,800 with all mods listed.

Really appreciate your opinions and info on the cars.

Cheers

Honestly, do the reseach yourself. Go to justcar.com and get an online quote. Google the NA R34 Specs and get the figures.

Some of these answers will take literally 10seconds to find. Then if you can't find some answers come back and ask.

550-600km? stay away from skylines.. :)
Honestly, do the reseach yourself. Go to justcar.com and get an online quote. Google the NA R34 Specs and get the figures.

Some of these answers will take literally 10seconds to find. Then if you can't find some answers come back and ask.

Couldnt have said it better myself.

End thread!

the r34 tank wont be much smaller if at all...

i wish i got even close to 550km on my 72lt tank :)

lucky to get 300 *cries*

lol yes but you do have a GTR, its not that exactly a car that competes against the Prius for greenest car.

lol finding an overpriced one wont be hard.

How do they handle? Comparing the 2 isnt even fair to the magna. Ones derived from a racecar, ones a family shopping kart. Im sure you can figure the rest out on that topic

Fuel econ? Ok, its pretty easy, if you drive like a dickhead all day with the revs high up in the RPM range and the motor loaded up all the time you'll use more petrol than shifting around 3500rpm with slight pedal pressure applied to keep up with traffic.

lol finding an overpriced one wont be hard.

How do they handle? Comparing the 2 isnt even fair to the magna. Ones derived from a racecar, ones a family shopping kart. Im sure you can figure the rest out on that topic

Fuel econ? Ok, its pretty easy, if you drive like a dickhead all day with the revs high up in the RPM range and the motor loaded up all the time you'll use more petrol than shifting around 3500rpm with slight pedal pressure applied to keep up with traffic.

Well yes that the same for anything from a XR8 to a Charade, but the difference being what they actually consume. For example with calm no 'dickhead' driving the vrx does a averaged 9.8lt/100km with 'dickhead' sprints every now and then it'll put up a average of 10.5lt/100km. Was trying to see if you guys could answer questions like that.

Google isn't much help unless you have a GTR and wikipedia only has power figures, no 0-100, no torque figures.

Edited by JarRah

Good to see another Skyline enthusiast but this topic has been covered to death with comparisons to many cars. I would try a search on the forums because there's a mountain of info relating to all the topics you're inquiring about on SAU. Also, the VRX and 34 and completely different cars so it would be like comparing apples to oranges. Cheers mate

Have a read in the NA section of this site for actual fuel econ figures used by members (not manufacturers claims). Personally if fuel economy is a purchasing decision in a car i would advise to not consider the skyline at all. Dont forget parts will cost more, generally labour costs more aswel, hardly any local support from manufacturer etc.

Also, if your magna changes fuel econ by 700ml per hundred (9.8 to 10.5), thats only about $1 at todays petrol prices. Remember thats 91octane. Lets say an R34 has the same increase for comparison sake (as you're trying to see how much more a skyline costs), well the difference would be about $1.20. Who actually gives a sh!t for $1.20 when they get to drive a skyline instead of a magna? (not being rude, just trying to help out).

On the flip side, are you getting that fuel consumption figure from the onboard computer? If so and its anything like my commodore (chances are that it is), that figure is actually false. The figure is based on when the battery was last out of the car or when the ECU/gauge was last reset. Its an average, so to make it go up by 700ml may mean the actual econ for that tank may be something like 18per/100 but the computer settles on 10.5 as it hasnt been reset in a year or two and is averaging the last 2 years of all driving. Know what i mean?

Sure you tried google? I just googled "r34+gtt+spec" and on the first page of results got this;

Model: R34 Nissan Skyline GTT

Model Year: 1998.5 to present...

Engine Name: RB25DET

Engine Cooling: Water cooled,

Engine Configuration: Inline 6 Cylinder,

Engine Camshafts: Double Overhead Cam 24 valve,

Engine Aspiration: Intercooled Turbo,

Engine Valve Technology: NEO Variable Valve Cam Timing Technology

Engine Bore × Stroke: 86mm × 71.7mm

Engine Displacement: 2498 cc

Engine Compression Ratio: 9:1

Engine Max Power 206kW (276 bhp) @ 6400rpm

Engine Max Torque 343Nm (253 ft-lb) @ 3200rpm

Fuel tank capacity: 65 litres

Fuel type: Unleaded premium (RON 98+)

Fuel consumption: 9.4 litres per 100 km

Transmission: Type 5 speed manual

Drive layout FR: Limited slip differential (as standard)

Steering system: HICAS 4-Wheel Steering

Steering type: Power Assisted Rack & Pinion

Front suspension: Independent suspension multiple link system

Rear suspension: Independent suspension multiple link system

Front brakes: Ventilated disk

Rear brakes: Ventilated disk

Front tyres: 225/45ZR17

Rear tyres: 225/45ZR17

Turning circle: 10.2 m

Dimensions: Exterior length 4580mm

Exterior width 1725mm

Exterior height 1340mm

Interior length 1780mm

Interior width 1400mm

Interior height 1105mm

Wheelbase 2665mm

Front track 1480mm

Rear track 1470mm

Ground clearance 140mm

Weight: 1410 kg

I highlighted the figures you're after to compare. Remember thats the turbo specs, so the fuel econ should be even better again

Using your figures and theirs for fuel econ only;

100k's in a magna costs you approx: $12

100k's in an r34 would cost you approx: $14

....depending on the slight variance in prices from area to area. The difference is due to needing higher octane petrol than the stuff your magna runs on

Moral of the story for people in the future: Do a search :)

Cheers heaps mate. Just needed figures like that cuase if I go head with this just want a week to week idea of what the car will cost me.

The on-board computers in magnas will only go for 20hours this beep at you till they're are reset so they usually get done once a week. They're fairly accurate on the freeway but around town they are useless throwing up huge figures

Based on this should only be a slight increase in all round costs so yea this could actually be feasible

Already given a link for full spec's with 0-100 and 0-400 times

Incase you were to lazy to read or click.

Nissan Skyline R34 GT-T Specs

Dimentions

Length 4580 mm

Width 1725 mm

Height 1340 mm

Wheelbase 2665 mm

Turning Circle 10.2 m

Chassis & Body

Curb Weight 1410 Kg

Body Type 4 door sedan or 2 door coupe

Layout Front engine / Rear wheel drive

Wheels 17 x 7.5

Tyres 225/45

Brakes Ventilated: 4 pot front, 2 pot rear, ABS optional

Steering Rack & Pinion speed sensitive (front) HICAS (rear)

Suspention F/R Independent multilink

Engine

Type RB25DET- Inline 6, Twincam, turbo intercoolered NEO

Displacement 2498

Compression Ratio 9.0.1

Power 206 KW @ 6400 RPM (140 to 150rwkw)

Torque 343NM @ 3200RPM

Bore x Stroke 86.0 x 71.7

Redline 7,000 RPM

Fuel Injection Nissan EGI (ECCS)

Fuel Tank Capacity 65 litres

Gearbox 5 Speed Manual

Performance

0-100 6.2

0-400m 14.3

+1 :)

hey mate ill just simply answer your questions

i have a r34 coupe na

fuel economy around 400ks to a full tank (driven till light on then fill up immediatley) although i only put in bp 98 im guessing 91 in the manga.

A i have driven a manual 3.5l 2001 model magna and two verada 97 and 99 and the magnas will absolutley kill a r34 in straight line.

although handling wise, the magna is like driving a crashed boat and the skyline is like driving a race car if you compare them. to put into other words, the magna family are probably the worst handling cars i have driven, and a stock r34 handles extremely well.

The rb25 is a very reliable motor i have only had good experiences with them.

power figures I believe are around the 100rwkw mark stock (the n/a section goes very much into detail about n/a power output)

All in all they are a great car, personally i cannot handle driving a magna as it feels like a chore where as a r34 is a drivers car.

insurance wise i pay approx 770 full comp, agreed value of 23k

hope this helps your hunt mate

Thanks mate.

I know what you mean about stock magna handling, my old 97 exec was like a boat and this was in part why it died so violently (rain + understeer = broken axles). but they can be modded to handle great, yea not a skyline great but still I take my vrx for quick runs through the south coast national park and it just has mountains of grip. It has to be pushed pretty hard to get understeer and never gets oevrsteer, lift off or otherwise.

Having driven a 2000 Magna, they are pretty much the opposite of a Skyline in terms of handling.

Oh and yeah fuel consumption is pretty shocking in Skylines. Mine uses around 18L/100 (modded and too rich a tune), regardless of thrashing or not, which was about the same as the 5 litre SS I had before it (and yeah those dash computers LIE unless you reset them every couple of months.)

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • But I think you missed mine.. there is also nothing about the 98 spec that supports your claim..  according to the fuel standards, it can be identical to 95, just very slightly higher octane number. But the ulp vs pulp fuel regulations go show 95 (or 98), is not just 91 with some additives. any claim of ‘refined by the better refineries’ or ‘higher quality fuel’ is just hearsay.  I have never seen anything to back up such claims other than ‘my mate used to work for a fuel station’, or ‘drove a fuel delivery truck’, or ‘my mechanic says’.. the actual energy densities do slightly vary between the 3 grades of fuel, but the difference is very minor. That said, I am very happy to be proven wrong if anyone has some hard evidence..
    • Hey guys I’m chasing a Rb20det complete or bare block need a good running engine as mine has low comp 
    • You're making my point for me. 95 is not "premium". It is a "slightly higher octane" version of the basic 91 product. The premium product that they want people to buy (for all the venal corporate reasons of making more profit, and all the possibly specious reasons of it being a "better" fuel with nicer additive packages) is the 98 octane stuff. 95 is the classic middle child. No-one wants it. No-one cares about it. It is just there, occupying a space in the product hierarchy.
    • 98 and 95 have to meet the same national fuel standards beside the actual RON.  91 has lower standards (which are quite poor really), so 95 is certainly not 91 with some octane booster. It would be an easier argument to claim 98 is just 95 with some octane boosters. Also RON doesn't specify 'quality' in any sense, only the octane number.  Anything different retailers decide or not decide to add to their 95 or 98 is arbitrary and not defined by the RON figure.
    • Anyone know alternatives to powerplus tungsten? Can't find an alternative online. 
×
×
  • Create New...