Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

gerald79 - unless its had an engine transplant to a shittier engine, its not a 1993. Can you please update your thread to have the correct details.

It has been check by importers that it is a nissan silvia 1993, the engine was there as this is not the first nissan silvia S13 to have this engine in OZ. They come in different series as well. I also just got a imported book about this issue and it has stated in the book that they do have nissan silvia S13 with this type of engine in them when they will made.

Not trying to be rude but it is not a wrong year and anyone who wants to buy it can also have it check by an importer.

My mate is the one selling his car and i find that it is very cruel to say that the car suxs and all that. If you are interested than reply if not leave yr comments to yrself. You wouldnt want someone to say the same thing that you said when you are selling yr car out right. We are all mature ppl so i hope that we all could understand how my mate feel.

It isnt his fault that it was imported in this way as there are a lot of other nissan silvia S13 with that same engine and it is also not a wrong year. They even have a japanese imported book that carify this issue. It is stated that they are also other series of NIssan Silvia S13.

Tks for understanding and if you want the name of the japanese book ragthering this issue, feel free to PM me and i would give you the title so you would be able to know more about it as i just got to know more about it since my mate wanted to sell his car.

Cheers...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/38418-1993-silvia-s13/#findComment-782579
Share on other sites

Hi Gerald,

I think you may have misconstrued what Dave is trying to say.

He, in no way was saying the car sux, only that if it was a 93 silvia it should have a sr20 engine. From my understanding post 91/92 silvias have sr20's and all others have ca18's, which appears to be the engine in this silvia.

So Gerald you are right to say that there are other silvia's that have this engine.

IMO it is well priced.

Cheers.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/38418-1993-silvia-s13/#findComment-782633
Share on other sites

Hi Gerald,

I think you may have misconstrued what Dave is trying to say.

He, in no way was saying the car sux, only that if it was a 93 silvia it should have a sr20 engine. From my understanding post 91/92 silvias have sr20's and all others have ca18's, which appears to be the engine in this silvia.

So Gerald you are right to say that there are other silvia's that have this engine.

IMO it is well priced.  

Cheers.

i wasnt saying dave. i was just trying to tell others not to throw comments on it. Sorry for the misunderstanding. In the japanese import book they do state that in 1993 there are still cars with the ca18's engine.

Anyway the car has been sold.

cheers...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/38418-1993-silvia-s13/#findComment-783168
Share on other sites

shanet - i will close this thread now.... but becuase the compliance plate says its a 1993 doesnt mean jack.. i have seen skylines with NIZMO R33 on their plates... its just what the compliance company originally registered for complaince as.... I suggest you get the VIN code checked to be 100% sure.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/38418-1993-silvia-s13/#findComment-785177
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Big single, and seqy. #sorted
    • The R32 suffers from an instrument binnacle that is uncomfortably close to the design of a VN Commodore's. But beyond that, the layout of the rest of everything, and the materials (ie the vinyl coverings on dash, armrest, etc) are acceptable, and the patterns on the fabrics are not as blergh as those in the R33. And R33 seats are....quite unattractive. I know it's only small details there, but I reckon the R33 got worse than the 32. But the big blergh is the overall shape of the dash on the R33. It's just has that whole Maxima/Pulsar sort of look to it. Nothing special at all. Generic Nissan sedan. Whereas, at least the R32 dash/binnacle was different. Less a wide expanse of boringly curved plastic. More a "cockpit" sort of look, even if nowhere near to the degree that the A90 Supras got. R34 seats look good on their own, until you realise that they are indistinguishable from the shape and fabric on 70 other Japanese cars. And the foam bolsters on them suffer even worse than the earlier cars. Other than that I don't really have an opinion the rest of the R34 interior. I took the bits of the R34 I wanted (brakes and engine) and added them to the best external appearance Skyline in the modern era (the 32). So nyerr!
    • Can I be your first customer? I would like hard lines done for the fuel system, 8AN up and 8AN back and the underside wire wheeled and coated (brush or sprayed) with that black tar shit.
    • Speak for yourself, I love the R33 interior. 32 is blergh. I like the 34 interior too. Then you start getting much newer in most cars and they all turn back to blergh. 馃槢
    • 500-600hp into a RB is already 'sinking endless amounts of money' into an engine. Especially a 30 year old engine. Unfortunately this is the RB Game. Considering stock power (or at least stock components) will do ~360whp on 98 by simply turning up the boost on the stock gear on a RB26, that would be where I'd say the cutoff point for "sinking endless amounts of money into the engine" Cause to even do this reliably you'd probably need to replace all the bits anyway cause they're old, starting your sinking journey anyway. I reckon the least painful way is rebuilding the engine to make 50hp over stock lol. The 'plan your ownership around a rebuild' was a common saying 15 years ago.
  • Create New...