Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

GTR arrived back from Willall yesterday morning. I didnt have 2 days to spare right now so I had it trucked back.

Initial thoughts on the new power..... "scary fast"...the thing builds revs like a bike.

Having all wheel drive, 100% grip and 622hp the at the wheels is insane.

Anyway...I though I would try and sneak a run at WSID tonight even though I had been booted 12 months ago for running under 11.00

Went through with no issues. First run the launch didnt feel clean so I jumped on the brakes after half track for a 12.5 @ 60mph

Second run launch felt better but was still off the pace (should be doing mid 1.6s) with a 1.78 60 foot but I stayed on it for a 10.62 @ 134.81mph...bye bye Charlie for me...again.

Very happy with the MPH...means she is making good power, the crap 60 foot did my ET no favors.

Bring on the Snowy Mountains 1000...and litre bike hunting :-)

And thanks to Martin @ Willall for all of the work and the perfect tune in a very short time frame :cheers:

gtr1111.jpg

gtr1112.jpg

Car looks great Kev and its good to see you are having some fun with it! Any other plans for it or happy with how it is for a while?

Cale

Thanks Mate...that will be it for a while. I have a few things on my plate right now that consume money even faster than an R35.

Edited by Speedah

Hey Kev, nice progressive power, all the way to the top.

1000NM on tap all the way to 7000 rpm.Good job by Martin.

Mid 130’s is a good trap speed, 106 at ½ track is very good.

Drop 60’ by a few 10th’s will drop the time to low 10, but good 60” is hit and miss at wsid, unless well prepped. What rpm launch?

I love the 335 rubber; Good move, as I think the stock 285 rubber would struggle.

I'm only driving my car 1 day in every 7-10 days, but when i do I call it GTR therapy!

Brian

Hey Kev, nice progressive power, all the way to the top. 1000NM on tap all the way to 7000 rpm.Good job by Martin. Mid 130’s is a good trap speed, 106 at ½ track is very good. Drop 60’ by a few 10th’s will drop the time to low 10, but good 60” is hit and miss at wsid, unless well prepped. What rpm launch? I love the 335 rubber; Good move, as I think the stock 285 rubber would struggle. I'm only driving my car 1 day in every 7-10 days, but when i do I call it GTR therapy! Brian

I launched at 4000rpm

Willalls 2012 R35 did a 10.30 with the same MPH as me....but he did a 1.59 60

What pisses me off is playing with the launch control on the street I see 0-100km/h in 2.9 sec on my vbox. On the 10.6 run I did 3.4 secs 0-100

I will post the in car video tomorrow

great times Kev, i think theres another tenth or 2 in it though on the strip

im heading to heathcote soon, and plan to use the vbox to monitor my run, if i get a good 0-100 ill stay on it, if not just roll through the traps

Yes, if your 0-100 is above 3.1 get off it after half track.

See you at Cooma

Hey Kev, looks good for Time Attack street class next year. Now that it looks like some of our wrx's will not be allowed to race because of the wider fenders, your power level is a step from Marek's, and could be very competitive, although it is getting tougher. Time to break 1:40 at EC.

Son David will volunteer to drive if you don't want to drive (lol). He's pestering me to upgrade my R35, so he can drive it!

Brian

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 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.
    • Yup but for me its the HR ! Cut my teeth on the old holden 6s in the day ! And here's me thinking in the day it was also the 300ZX and the Mitsubishi GT3000 ! All, as well had good lines, but always seemed to need finishing off, style wise.
    • A 180SX has a much better look than a FD. The roofline is far superior being a fastback. It's popups look better. In a world where we all subconsciously add a little bit of low, and wheels of our preference, it's just more handsome than the FD is. The FD just looks 'bubbly' in comparison. It can come down to preference, sure. But "The FD is the BEST looking (on appearances alone) 90's JDM car without question?" Nah. Plenty of questions lol. I could think of 8 cars I think look fundamentally better, and probably a handful of ones that look about on par with a FD. (like say a SW20 MR2) I feel people like/overrate the FD because of it's mythicality/rarity, its rotary and it's unpredictable nature. It probably drives great, you can stuff a ton of tyre under there, has a unique sound, light as hell. I feel that people reading this thinking "YOU CANT RATE A 180 ABOVE A FD BECAUSE A 180 IS A CHEAP DRIFT BUCKET" prove the point about bias as to what the car represents, moreso than how it actually looks.. I feel the 80's boxy/squared off look is becoming better looking due to time, and 90's melted soap bar aesthetics have not aged well. (yet?) And this thread is purely about looks :p
×
×
  • Create New...