Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

Time has come to venture in a new project and im hoping for an 11 sec street car (300rw/kw)

I really like the BF XR6 turbo (can easily achieve 320+rw/kw with bolt-on mods), however my heart has left me loyal to my Nissan roots and am tossing between an R34 GTT or S15 JDM. I will eventually go for a full engine rebuild however would like to know which will be the easiest to get to 300rw/kw.

Regards,

Sarkis

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/299887-r34-gtt-or-s15-jdm-aim-300rwkw/
Share on other sites

Hey guys,

The time is almost here where I want to venture a new project however need some advice. I'm looking at an 11sec daily driver and wondering which avenue to go down.

I have narrowed my options down to an R34 GTT or S15 JDM. I was also looking at a BF XR6T which can easily make 300+rw/kw with simple mods, however I prefer a coupe.

So here is what i have figured out so far:

R34 GTT

- Ugly in my opinion

- Nice options

- Good value for money

- Solid body

- Solid running gear

- RB25/30 + T51R will make crazy power

S15 JDM

- Nice exterior shape

- Nice interior

- Too common (every 3rd car is an S15)

- need to spend $$$ on engine to get high power with reliability

Please feel free to comment.

Cheers

Hey guys,

The time is almost here where I want to venture a new project however need some advice. I'm looking at an 11sec daily driver and wondering which avenue to go down.

I have narrowed my options down to an R34 GTT or S15 JDM. I was also looking at a BF XR6T which can easily make 300+rw/kw with simple mods, however I prefer a coupe.

So here is what i have figured out so far:

R34 GTT

- Ugly in my opinion

- Nice options

- Good value for money

- Solid body

- Solid running gear

- RB25/30 + T51R will make crazy power

S15 JDM

- Nice exterior shape

- Nice interior

- Too common (every 3rd car is an S15)

- need to spend $$ on engine to get high power with reliability

Please feel free to comment.

Cheers

well if you want power definitely go for the r34 gtt

as the rb25det is a very good engine from factory and i have seen some get around the 300 kw mark with a couple of simple mods and wont cost a fortune

(however i am new to this as well i am aiming to get around 300 kw on my 34 as well)

the silvia as you said is a nice slick looking car but in all honesty that car would take a mint to get up to 300 kw purely based on the fact that

you would need to upgrade the internals, gearbox, clutch etc ( not saying that the 34 wouldnt need these but its just lighter on ur back pocket and more reliable )

hope that helped and let me know what you end up doing :banana:

Edited by baller_4_lyf

if r34's are ugly to you how can u even consider it.... if looks dont worry you different story.... id go r34 make the power you want easier i would imagine but i dont have the experince of building mine to that spec.

Edited by rgr34

no brainer r34 if you want that power with less money and ease of getting it and with nice rims and bodykit the r34 looks great as with all the other skylines they all look prety plane stock standard unless its a gtr but can all be made to look nice.

UGLY? I think not! You have owned a R33, it can only get prettier from there :)

1260933916.jpg

wow granthem you got a hot looking 34 right there is it just me or is that not a stock front bar ... if so what is it ?

and also those eyelids set that thing off ... wicked

Edited by baller_4_lyf

you can have a 300rwkw s15 without spending a fortune, but reliability is your issue.. they have a shit gearbox, and 300kw calls for at least a gt 3076R with 20psi+... so lotsa money there... not gonna last long at that power level.

that said, i wouldn't trade my S14A (one of probably 5-6 S2 in my town) as a opposed to the r33 equivalent (100+ models in town). i just like her too much :cool:

I was in the same predicament (including looking at xr6 turbos) and put pretty much exact same post up but on boostcruising about 2 weeks ago. Anyway i have to agree the s15 overall is a sexier looking car but you can make the r34 look really tough instead depends on what style of look your going for.

I just recently bought a r34 2001 model and i am happy with it (picked it up today still gotta get photos and such to put on the site and introduce myself) although in all honesty wasn't all that set on buying one just when i checked this car out and negotiated a bit i was able to get a deal that i liked very much.

With the interior i'd probably lean to the r34 being slightly better quality but i liked the look of the s15's interior better. When it comes down to the power debate the r34 is definitely gonna be the better option. I guess what really sold me in the end on the 34 is the gearbox is guaranteed to be strong (hell heaps of S series owners that want to put out big power put in a RB25 box or z32 box) and that the motor is much smoother and refined than the sr20 since it is a I6.

Thanks for all the replies... I have decided to go with an R34 GTT.

Highflow turbo + 555cc injectors + Walbro F/P + FMIC + Exhaust + PFC & Tune = 250-280rw/kw

After doing some shopping I have sourced an immaculate 1999 white GTT with 45,000kms, factory Nismo kit and sunroof for $22,000 however i have seen some R34's in decent condition selling as low as $18k.

How much have you paid for your R34?

Any recommendations on importers in Syd?

Regards,

Sarkis

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 everyone always seems to refer to them as S13 wheels however they came on R32 Skyline, A31 Cefiro, C33 Laurel etc., and also came polished diamond cut or painted depending on the model. Congrats on your GTS purchase! I'd personally leave it NA.
    • 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)
×
×
  • Create New...