Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

R34 GTR - dependable if done right , will increase or stabilize in value over time more then likely.

EVO - Broken Balancer shafts, gearbox, clutch failures sucks fuel bad for 2.0

STI - Broken rear mounts for sway bars, tranny failures, clutches, sounds funny..lol

Commo HSV, too common , to big

Ford same

Lexus IS200, with 2J power, for classy ride

Supra RZ TT

Lotus Exige anyone ???? no space.. but a hoot to drive

R32 VW is decent

Honda S2000 with supercharger kit on it. wide body kit

Honda Type R

Acura Type R

FD RX7 TT

MR2 done up with widebody kit, etc.

993

DB9

more to choose from interstate after the bank crash the prices fell fast on some decent rides..

just keep the GTR..lol

MY07 or MY08 Liberty GT Spec B Sedan Manual

Not a big as a JZX, better on insurance than an EVO or STi, but with all the STi running gear (2.5T, 6 speed etc). Sure SLIGHTLY heavier, but still heap of fun:

And with a few simple external mods look even more sexual (plenty of JDM K2 gear on this one)

Nyomi_027.jpg

Just like constantly rebuilding RB26's because they spin bearings everytime you go above 3,000rpm lol

Hardly... if looked after and tuned right. No worries. I'd honestly keep the 34 Bec, it's already modified nicely now, just enjoy it!

Hardly... if looked after and tuned right. No worries. I'd honestly keep the 34 Bec, it's already modified nicely now, just enjoy it!

The man speaks the truth.

Your not going to find another car that can come close to the GTR.

Anything else, and your going backwards!

Hardly... if looked after and tuned right. No worries. I'd honestly keep the 34 Bec, it's already modified nicely now, just enjoy it!

I was being sarcastic, should have used italics lol.

Just the generalisation of 'rotors need rebuilds every weekend and every RB26 is the world WILL spin a bearing' it fucken shits me actually

I was being sarcastic, should have used italics lol.

Just the generalisation of 'rotors need rebuilds every weekend and every RB26 is the world WILL spin a bearing' it fucken shits me actually

Just like the generalisation that RB20's are slow, shit, and weak motors....

Just like the generalisation that RB20's are slow, shit, and weak motors....

true. dion had no problems keeping up with the convoy from loxton in spite of his busted turbo... was quite impressive

-D

Just like the generalisation that RB20's are slow, shit, and weak motors....

RB20's dont have that 'boost rush' but they are awesome motors for drifting.

Should my CA sh!t its dacks... I'll be craming in an RB20 without a doubt. At the price of them its a win win lol

RB20's dont have that 'boost rush' but they are awesome motors for drifting.

Should my CA sh!t its dacks... I'll be craming in an RB20 without a doubt. At the price of them its a win win lol

that's crazy, if your going to go 2 litre then you would have to go SR (that left a bad taste in my mouth) but if your going RB has to be 25 not 20.

Just remember the tight ass pays twice.

Edited by D_Stirls
that's crazy, if your going to go 2 litre then you would have to go SR (that left a bad taste in my mouth) but if your going RB has to be 25 not 20.

Just remember the tight ass pays twice.

My motto as well

Why do I want a 25?

I am not doing it to get out of doing it cheaply at all but I think the RB20 is fantastic for hovering around 7,000rpm for extended periods of time.

SR's are sh!t.

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

    • In this thing about this 100% renewal energy stuff I hear no one really talking about anything other than power and fuel really Power and fuel, whilst being a huge part of how we use the billion year old Dinosaur juices, are only 2, of the probably thousands of things that we need to use it for in the chemicals industries for making nearly everything we use nowadays I'm all for a clean planet, but if we want to continue to have all the day to day appliances and stuff that we rely on everyday we will still need fossil fuels Whilst I do love science, and how it can bring innovation, there's really a limit to how far it can go in relation to "going green" As for EV's, unless your charging of your own solar panels, it isn't helping the environment when you consider the the batteries, the mining processes required,  the manufacturing process required, and how long a batteries (read: the vehicle) lasts long term If I was supreme dictator of the world, I would ban the use of sugar for fizzy drinks and food additives and use that for ethanol manufacturing, petrol engines would be happier, and people would be alot healthier  Disclaimer: Whiskey manufacturing would still be required, so says the supreme dictator of the world Same same for all the vegetable oils that get pumped into all our food, use that for bio diesel Disclaimer: the supreme dictator would still require olive oil to dip his bread in This would take some of heat off the use of the use of fossil fuels which are required for everything we use, unless you want to go back to pre 1800 for heat and power, or the early 1900's for plastics and every thing else that has come from cracking ethylene  Would I be a fair and just dictator, nope, and I would probably be assassinated within my first few months, but would my cunning plan work, maybe, for a while, maybe not Meh, in the end in an over opinionated mildly educated arsehole typing out my vomit on my mobile phone, which wouldn't be possible without fossil fuels And if your into conspiracies, we only need the fossil fuels to last until a meteor hits, or thermonuclear annihilation, that would definitely fix our need for fossil fuels for manufacturing and power issues for quite some time  Meh, time for this boomer to cook his lunch on his electric stove and then maybe go for a drive in my petrol car, for fun    
    • It really helps that light duty vehicles have absolutely appalling average efficiency due to poor average load. Like 25% average brake thermal efficiency when peak is somewhere around 38% these days. So even a 60% BTE stationary natural gas plant + transmission and charging losses still doing much better with an EV than conventional ICE. And that's before we get into renewables or "low carbon nonrenewable" nuclear which makes it a no-brainer, basically. In commercial aircraft or heavy duty diesel pulling some ridiculous amount of weight across a continent the numbers are much more difficult to make work. I honestly think in 5-10 years we will still be seeing something like the Achates opposed piston diesels in most semi trucks running on a blend of renewable/biodiesel. Applications where the energy density of diesel is just too critical to compromise. CARB is running trials of those engines right now to evaluate in real world drayage ops, probably because they're noticing that the numbers just don't work for electrification unless our plan is to make glorified electric trains with high voltage wires running along every major highway and only a token amount of battery to make it 30 miles or something like that after detaching. Transport emissions is not insignificant especially in the US, but yes there's a lot of industrial processes that also need to be decarbonized. I agree the scale of the problem is pretty insane but EDF managed to generate ~360 TWh from their nuclear reactors last year and this is with decades of underinvestment after the initial big push in the 70s and 80s. I don't think the frame of reference should be solar-limited. France is not exactly a big country either. Maybe it doesn't work everywhere, but it doesn't have to either. We just can't live off of fracking forever and expect things to be ok.
    • Yeah, all the crude is used for fuels and petrochem feedstocks (pesticides, many other chemicals, etc etc). But increasingly over the last few decades, much of the petrochem synthessis has started with methane because NG has been cheaper than oil, cleaner and easier and more consistent to work with, etc etc etc. So it's really had to say what the fraction either way is. Suffice to say - the direct fuels fraction is not insigificant. Heavy transport uses excruciatingly large amounts. Diesel is wasted in jet heaters in North American garages and workshops, thrown down drill holes in quarries, pissed all over the wall to provide electricity to certain outback communities, etc etc. Obviously road transport, and our pet project, recreational consumption camouflaged as road transport, is a smaller fraction of the total liquid HC consumption again. If you're talking aboust Aussie cars' contribution to the absolute total CO2 production of the country, then of course our share of the cubic mile of coal that is used for power generation, metallurgy, etc adds up to a big chunk. Then there is the consumption of timber. Did you know that the production of silicon metal, for example, is done in Australia by using hardwood? And f**king lots and lots and lots of hardwood at that. Until recently, it was f**king jarrah! There are many such sneaky contributors to CO2 production in industry and farming. NG is used in massive quantities in Australia, for power gen, for running huge water pumps (like, 1-2MW sized caterpillar V16 engines running flat out pumping water) for places like mine sites and minerals/metals refineries. And there are just a huge number of those sort of things going on quietly in the background. So NG use is a big fraction of total CO2 production here. I mean, shit, I personally design burners that are used in furnaces here in Oz that use multiple MW of gas all day every day. The largest such that I've done (not here in Oz) was rated to 150MW. One. Single. Gas burner. In a cement clinker kiln. There are thousands of such things out there in the world. There are double digits of them just here in Oz. (OK< just barely double digits now that a lot of them have shut - and they are all <100MW). But it's all the same to me. People in the car world (like this forum's users) would like to think that you only have to create an industrial capability to replace the fuel that they will be using in 10 years time, and imagine that everyone else will be driving EVs. And while the latter part of that is largely true, the liquid HC fuel industry as a whole is so much more massive than the bit used for cars, that there will be no commercial pressure to produce "renewable" "synthetic" fuels just for cars, when 100x that much would still be being burnt straight from the well. You have to replace it all, or you're not doing what is required. And then you get back to my massive numbers. People don't handle massive numbers at all well. Once you get past about 7 or 8 zeros, it becomes meaningless for most people.
    • @GTSBoy out of the cubic mile of crude oil we burn each year, I wonder how much of that is actually used for providing petrol and diesel.   From memory the figure for cars in Australia, is that they only add up to about 2 to 3% of our CO2 production. Which means something else here is burning a shit tonne of stuff to make CO2, and we're not really straight up burning oil everywhere, so our CO2 production is coming from elsewhere too.   Also we should totally just run thermal energy from deep in the ground. That way we can start to cool the inside of the planet and reverse global warming (PS, this last paragraph is a total piss take)
    • As somebody who works in the energy sector and lives in a subzero climate, i'm convinced EV's will never be the bulk of our transport.  EV battery and vehicle companies over here have been going bankrupt on a weekly basis the last year. 
×
×
  • Create New...