skylines

[Anonymous]

we need people from out of US to join this forum. are there any skyline forums on the web

[Logan]

i actually have never heard of one

[avus///M3]

at automotiveforums.com theres a skyline forum and i've seen people with them in their sig

[Anonymous]

i hate skylines.... :evil:

[Anonymous]

On 2002-03-24 00:24, gixer wrote:
i hate skylines.... :evil:


Whaaat?? What the hell is wrong with you??

Must be the old 2JZ v. RB rivalry.

[turbogirl]

thats a forum just for skylines.. they got some nice member rides on there also

http://www.gtr.co.uk/

[brabus151]

skylines are sooo phat...i wish i could afford one>>>
C:My DocumentsArnabPictures & ImagesNissanSkyline BLK.jpg

[turbogirl]

yeah me too... thats definetly my dream car

[Max'dLude83]

me also, I will own one before I die.

[El Jefe]

i will post pictures of lots of skylines i see once i get my digital camera fixed.

[Boostaholic]

MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[CRXTZ]

wats wrong wit you gixer, skylines are gods. Too bad america's gonna badge it infiniti and jack tha price up here... :sad: oh well
Peace

[Anonymous]

On 2002-03-24 00:24, gixer wrote:
i hate skylines.... :evil:


your not the Only one.

[wrx4ever]

How can you hate the god of all cars. :???:

[PanzerM]

Skylines are not the gods of all cars, they are the Japanese equivalent of the US's Mustang. In the Far East, they are quite comman, ask El Jefe about that.

I rather have a JDM ITR, CTR or a Supra than a Skyline.

[PanzerM]

and what's the price of getting a skyline here in the states?

If it's near to 70k to get one imported I would rather buy a new BMW M5 sedan

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: PanzerM on 2002-03-26 01:56 ]</font>

[Krnbk2]

On 2002-03-26 01:55, PanzerM wrote:
and what's the price of getting a skyline here in the states?

If it's near to 70k to get one imported I would rather buy a new BMW M5 sedan

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: PanzerM on 2002-03-26 01:56 ]</font>



Last time i checked it was 90-100k for a r34 GT-R from motorex

[El Jefe]

On 2002-03-26 01:54, PanzerM wrote:
Skylines are not the gods of all cars, they are the Japanese equivalent of the US's Mustang. In the Far East, they are quite comman, ask El Jefe about that.

I rather have a JDM ITR, CTR or a Supra than a Skyline.

finally, an american whose not head over heels about the skyline.

You are quite right. The skyline is the japanese muscle car - sure its fast but no faster than a camaro ss. The only reason why they are worshipped is because you guys dont have them. Seriously they are nice, but not THAT nice.

I too would prefer a supra over the skyline :grin:

[redVTEC92]

Heresy!!!

Skylines rock!!! I prefer them to Supras any day! :grin:

[fiasco88]

I think I'll drive a Supra, then drive a Skyline then decide which I like better.

[2nsane]

personally i would rather have both!! :razz:

[PanzerM]

I'm only half American, and also half german which is the half which guides my automotive thinking more I believe.

[El Jefe]

On 2002-03-26 04:43, PanzerM wrote:
I'm only half American, and also half german which is the half which guides my automotive thinking more I believe.

is october your favourite month? :wink:

[Anonymous]

I'd take the Skyline over any of the cars mentioned so far. ~350bhp by simply changing some ECU settings is pretty impressive and it's handling capabilities are unmatched by almost any car within its price range. Plus I love Nissans so..

[Anonymous]

I would take a skyline mainly because they are great cars but also because NIssan is just such a great car company. Supras are nice but people over here have SUpras and so ur right its the greed factor that makes us want one

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: redsoxfan85 on 2002-03-26 09:28 ]</font>

[crack3rjack]

us not having skylines in the us definatly makes them more wanted here, but even if they were here, they would still kisk ass, i mean how can you not love a car that can handle 1000+ hp awd and a 50 50 weight dist? they might not be the god off all cars, but they definatly kick ass

[FPGreenTalonTSI]

On 2002-03-26 10:09, crack3rjack wrote:
us not having skylines in the us definatly makes them more wanted here, but even if they were here, they would still kisk ass, i mean how can you not love a car that can handle 1000+ hp awd and a 50 50 weight dist? they might not be the god off all cars, but they definatly kick ass


Please turn off your copy of Gran Turismo 3, despite popular belief, the majority of 1000hp skylines are company cars with over $100,000 dumped into them. Their handling is matched, by alot of cars,and better in some ex. (the Z06). Matter of fact, a NSX dumped on one in all performance tests in Sport Compact. Road and track/Car and Driver have tested an R33 and R34, C/D ran a 14.0 in a R33 and the R34 ran 13.7. Its not 50/50 either, its 57/43. What some of you PS2 clowns dont get is that on OUR fuel, they cant put up the same numbers, in Japan 100+ octane can be found at every pump.

To the guy who said making 350hp is as simple as changin their ECU's NO, its not that easy. They actually dyno around 250whp, which is only slightly higher then their listed 280 @ the crank. Import tuner spent $3,000 just getting one to make 300whp, hardly expensive but not as easy as some people want to make it seem.

I like Skylines, but too many people with no clue about them spread missinformation. Full interior skylines actually run the same time's as Full interior Supras, go figure.

Go to freshalloy.com if you want a skyline forum, the motorex guys post there. I have a video site of skylines, 200mph WRX's, Supras, EVOS etc. maybe I should post it.

[El Jefe]

On 2002-03-26 10:34, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:

On 2002-03-26 10:09, crack3rjack wrote:
us not having skylines in the us definatly makes them more wanted here, but even if they were here, they would still kisk ass, i mean how can you not love a car that can handle 1000+ hp awd and a 50 50 weight dist? they might not be the god off all cars, but they definatly kick ass


Please turn off your copy of Gran Turismo 3, despite popular belief, the majority of 1000hp skylines are company cars with over $100,000 dumped into them. Their handling is matched, by alot of cars,and better in some ex. (the Z06). Matter of fact, a NSX dumped on one in all performance tests in Sport Compact. Road and track/Car and Driver have tested an R33 and R34, C/D ran a 14.0 in a R33 and the R34 ran 13.7. Its not 50/50 either, its 57/43. What some of you PS2 clowns dont get is that on OUR fuel, they cant put up the same numbers, in Japan 100+ octane can be found at every pump.

To the guy who said making 350hp is as simple as changin their ECU's NO, its not that easy. They actually dyno around 250whp, which is only slightly higher then their listed 280 @ the crank. Import tuner spent $3,000 just getting one to make 300whp, hardly expensive but not as easy as some people want to make it seem.

I like Skylines, but too many people with no clue about them spread missinformation. Full interior skylines actually run the same time's as Full interior Supras, go figure.

Go to freshalloy.com if you want a skyline forum, the motorex guys post there. I have a video site of skylines, 200mph WRX's, Supras, EVOS etc. maybe I should post it.

ive seen a few stock r34's run low 13's, my "friend's" (i dont really like him)r33 ran a very high 12 with only custom exhaust.

other than that, your information is very solid.

[Anonymous]

About the ECU thing.. I'm pretty sure it's true since I've read it on numerous occasions. I'll ask motorex about it.

[Anonymous]

i hate the fact that skylines have a tiny engine...2.6 liters..come on...that's .3 litres bigger than an h23.... :lol: now is it easier to make a 1000hp supra or skyline?...

[FPGreenTalonTSI]

On 2002-03-26 16:58, gixer wrote:
i hate the fact that skylines have a tiny engine...2.6 liters..come on...that's .3 litres bigger than an h23.... :lol: now is it easier to make a 1000hp supra or skyline?...


2.6 Inline 6 is alot different then a 2.3 inline 4, its far from "tiny".

The main reason its 2.6 is because they can rev to levels other motors can only dream of, I've heard of 800hp Rb26detts with 11,000rpm redlines.

As far as which is easier to make 1000hp with, even though 1000hp on either car is far from being "easy" the supra has the advantage right off the bat by having slightly larger displacement. The skyline offsets that advantage by reving alittle higher. Skyline's with stock internals can take about 800hp before finally calling it quits, the supras can handle 1000 without having to upgrade. So if you're not going to build up the motor, the supra is the "easier" one to go with. There were I believe 5 private owned 1000hp Supras at the Tx2k2 supra meet over this weekend.

When you want more then 1000hp it becomes a case of whose wallet is bigger rather then which motor can do it easier.




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: FPGreenTalonTSI on 2002-03-26 17:48 ]</font>

[Anonymous]

On 2002-03-26 17:46, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:

On 2002-03-26 16:58, gixer wrote:
i hate the fact that skylines have a tiny engine...2.6 liters..come on...that's .3 litres bigger than an h23.... :lol: now is it easier to make a 1000hp supra or skyline?...


2.6 Inline 6 is alot different then a 2.3 inline 4, its far from "tiny".

The main reason its 2.6 is because they can rev to levels other motors can only dream of, I've heard of 800hp Rb26detts with 11,000rpm redlines.

As far as which is easier to make 1000hp with, even though 1000hp on either car is far from being "easy" the supra has the advantage right off the bat by having slightly larger displacement. The skyline offsets that advantage by reving alittle higher. Skyline's with stock internals can take about 800hp before finally calling it quits, the supras can handle 1000 without having to upgrade. So if you're not going to build up the motor, the supra is the "easier" one to go with. There were I believe 5 private owned 1000hp Supras at the Tx2k2 supra meet over this weekend.

When you want more then 1000hp it becomes a case of whose wallet is bigger rather then which motor can do it easier.




<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: FPGreenTalonTSI on 2002-03-26 17:48 ]</font>




um...no shit!... :lol: ... im comparing liters...liters determine torque, and if those skylines wanted to rev high...they would probably make a 2.6li 4 banger...

[BltByKrmn]

Ill take a jspec RX7 over both of them

[FPGreenTalonTSI]

um...no shit!... :lol: ... im comparing liters...liters determine torque, and if those skylines wanted to rev high...they would probably make a 2.6li 4 banger...


Liters arent the only detiriming factor in how much torque a car can make, if that was the case then Turbo preludes would make more torque then Eclipses (2.0L), which doesnt happen.

And no, a 2.6 I-4 will always make less torque then a 2.6L I-6, and it wont rev as high as the 6 cylinder. Case in point, the Starion had a 2.6L 4 banger that couldnt rev to save its life. You'll sacrifice revs in a 4 cylinder to have 2.6L, but have torque, with the 6 cylinder you dont have to sacrifice either. The skyline makes ample torque and like I said, can rev to where most engines dream of.

11,000RPM....ever heard a skyline wail at full throttle? Its like a banshee.

[BltByKrmn]

Have you ever heard an RX7 at 14,000 RPMS? Now THAT is a sound :eek:

[Anonymous]

On 2002-03-26 10:34, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:

On 2002-03-26 10:09, crack3rjack wrote:
us not having skylines in the us definatly makes them more wanted here, but even if they were here, they would still kisk ass, i mean how can you not love a car that can handle 1000+ hp awd and a 50 50 weight dist? they might not be the god off all cars, but they definatly kick ass


Please turn off your copy of Gran Turismo 3, despite popular belief, the majority of 1000hp skylines are company cars with over $100,000 dumped into them. Their handling is matched, by alot of cars,and better in some ex. (the Z06). Matter of fact, a NSX dumped on one in all performance tests in Sport Compact. Road and track/Car and Driver have tested an R33 and R34, C/D ran a 14.0 in a R33 and the R34 ran 13.7. Its not 50/50 either, its 57/43. What some of you PS2 clowns dont get is that on OUR fuel, they cant put up the same numbers, in Japan 100+ octane can be found at every pump.

To the guy who said making 350hp is as simple as changin their ECU's NO, its not that easy. They actually dyno around 250whp, which is only slightly higher then their listed 280 @ the crank. Import tuner spent $3,000 just getting one to make 300whp, hardly expensive but not as easy as some people want to make it seem.

I like Skylines, but too many people with no clue about them spread missinformation. Full interior skylines actually run the same time's as Full interior Supras, go figure.

Go to freshalloy.com if you want a skyline forum, the motorex guys post there. I have a video site of skylines, 200mph WRX's, Supras, EVOS etc. maybe I should post it.




DSMers Know what the Fuck they are talking about :grin:

[Anonymous]

On 2002-03-26 18:02, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:



um...no shit!... :lol: ... im comparing liters...liters determine torque, and if those skylines wanted to rev high...they would probably make a 2.6li 4 banger...


Liters arent the only detiriming factor in how much torque a car can make, if that was the case then Turbo preludes would make more torque then Eclipses (2.0L), which doesnt happen.

And no, a 2.6 I-4 will always make less torque then a 2.6L I-6, and it wont rev as high as the 6 cylinder. Case in point, the Starion had a 2.6L 4 banger that couldnt rev to save its life. You'll sacrifice revs in a 4 cylinder to have 2.6L, but have torque, with the 6 cylinder you dont have to sacrifice either. The skyline makes ample torque and like I said, can rev to where most engines dream of.

11,000RPM....ever heard a skyline wail at full throttle? Its like a banshee.






omg...this is almost like the import vs.domestic argument... i don't give a shit about skylines...i hate it's puny six-cylinder.... a 2.2li turbo prelude will always have more torque than a 2.0 eclipse if both done up the exact same way... :roll:

[JDM Civic]

On 2002-03-26 04:43, PanzerM wrote:
I'm only half American, and also half german which is the half which guides my automotive thinking more I believe.


what the hell are you driving a civic for then? If your car engineered towards German get an old M. Those are sick. Thinking of getting one of those next...

got to love what bltbykrnm has to say, youve have 2 people talking between a skylines engine and litres and he tosses in RX7 comments in totally unrelated. :grin: this guy is hilarious

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: JDM Civic on 2002-03-27 18:13 ]</font>

[turbogirl]

screw all you people!!!! :smile:

im gonna get me a lan evo.. and while im at it gonna get the top secret supra :smile:

dont know how ill pull that one off

then ill get a peugeout 206 hook that shit up.. and ill be set :smile:

my dreams of course

[Hybrid Hatch]

On 2002-03-26 18:38, BltByKrmn wrote:
Have you ever heard an RX7 at 14,000 RPMS? Now THAT is a sound :eek:



drooling thinking about it....

[Boostaholic]

ha ever hear a F1 car at 17000 rpms? beat that

[Anonymous]

yea that sounds mad nice. Remember in Gone in 60 Seconds where theyre listening to the cars on the tape, ha ha.

[Anonymous]

On 2002-03-28 07:41, Boostaholic wrote:
ha ever hear a F1 car at 17000 rpms? beat that



i have...mmmm... now that's an engine...

[FPGreenTalonTSI]

On 2002-03-27 18:02, gixer wrote:

On 2002-03-26 18:02, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:



um...no shit!... :lol: ... im comparing liters...liters determine torque, and if those skylines wanted to rev high...they would probably make a 2.6li 4 banger...


Liters arent the only detiriming factor in how much torque a car can make, if that was the case then Turbo preludes would make more torque then Eclipses (2.0L), which doesnt happen.

And no, a 2.6 I-4 will always make less torque then a 2.6L I-6, and it wont rev as high as the 6 cylinder. Case in point, the Starion had a 2.6L 4 banger that couldnt rev to save its life. You'll sacrifice revs in a 4 cylinder to have 2.6L, but have torque, with the 6 cylinder you dont have to sacrifice either. The skyline makes ample torque and like I said, can rev to where most engines dream of.

11,000RPM....ever heard a skyline wail at full throttle? Its like a banshee.






omg...this is almost like the import vs.domestic argument... i don't give a shit about skylines...i hate it's puny six-cylinder.... a 2.2li turbo prelude will always have more torque than a 2.0 eclipse if both done up the exact same way... :roll:


Yeah, that explains why Stephs 700whp civ is putting 500lbs to the ground, meanwhile Brent Rau's 700whp DSM is throwing out 600+lbs of torque...RUNNING THE SAME TURBO

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: FPGreenTalonTSI on 2002-03-28 12:39 ]</font>

[Anonymous]

On 2002-03-28 12:37, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:

On 2002-03-27 18:02, gixer wrote:

On 2002-03-26 18:02, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:



um...no shit!... :lol: ... im comparing liters...liters determine torque, and if those skylines wanted to rev high...they would probably make a 2.6li 4 banger...


Liters arent the only detiriming factor in how much torque a car can make, if that was the case then Turbo preludes would make more torque then Eclipses (2.0L), which doesnt happen.

And no, a 2.6 I-4 will always make less torque then a 2.6L I-6, and it wont rev as high as the 6 cylinder. Case in point, the Starion had a 2.6L 4 banger that couldnt rev to save its life. You'll sacrifice revs in a 4 cylinder to have 2.6L, but have torque, with the 6 cylinder you dont have to sacrifice either. The skyline makes ample torque and like I said, can rev to where most engines dream of.

11,000RPM....ever heard a skyline wail at full throttle? Its like a banshee.






omg...this is almost like the import vs.domestic argument... i don't give a shit about skylines...i hate it's puny six-cylinder.... a 2.2li turbo prelude will always have more torque than a 2.0 eclipse if both done up the exact same way... :roll:


Yeah, that explains why Stephs 700whp civ is putting 500lbs to the ground, meanwhile Brent Rau's 700whp DSM is throwing out 600+lbs of torque...RUNNING THE SAME TURBO

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: FPGreenTalonTSI on 2002-03-28 12:39 ]</font>



listen..i said if both cars are built up the exact same way... EXACT... which would have more torque?... the 2.2 or the 2.0?... the reason why papadakis doesn't have much torque is because it's tuned that way..fwd.. now if you bore that 2.0liter engine out...will it have more torque?... this is common sense man...

[Anonymous]

On 2002-03-28 12:37, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:

On 2002-03-27 18:02, gixer wrote:

On 2002-03-26 18:02, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:



um...no shit!... :lol: ... im comparing liters...liters determine torque, and if those skylines wanted to rev high...they would probably make a 2.6li 4 banger...


Liters arent the only detiriming factor in how much torque a car can make, if that was the case then Turbo preludes would make more torque then Eclipses (2.0L), which doesnt happen.

And no, a 2.6 I-4 will always make less torque then a 2.6L I-6, and it wont rev as high as the 6 cylinder. Case in point, the Starion had a 2.6L 4 banger that couldnt rev to save its life. You'll sacrifice revs in a 4 cylinder to have 2.6L, but have torque, with the 6 cylinder you dont have to sacrifice either. The skyline makes ample torque and like I said, can rev to where most engines dream of.

11,000RPM....ever heard a skyline wail at full throttle? Its like a banshee.






omg...this is almost like the import vs.domestic argument... i don't give a shit about skylines...i hate it's puny six-cylinder.... a 2.2li turbo prelude will always have more torque than a 2.0 eclipse if both done up the exact same way... :roll:


Yeah, that explains why Stephs 700whp civ is putting 500lbs to the ground, meanwhile Brent Rau's 700whp DSM is throwing out 600+lbs of torque...RUNNING THE SAME TURBO

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: FPGreenTalonTSI on 2002-03-28 12:39 ]</font>



listen..i said if both cars are built up the exact same way... EXACT... which would have more torque?... the 2.2 or the 2.0?... the reason why papadakis doesn't have much torque is because it's tuned that way..fwd.. now if you bore that 2.0liter engine out...will it have more torque?... this is common sense man...

[turbogirl]

hey talon guy
whats your deal??? why are you always arguing

[fataLLightning]

i like the skyline, dont love it though, dont like to look though. and with liebermans r34 blackbird the featured car in tf&amp;f 2 all kinds of assholes will be attracted to it, fuck that. MY dream car is an sc300 converted to a big single and stick. http://www.motorsportwarehouse.com/soarer/mineral1.jpg

[El Jefe]

On 2002-03-29 01:41, fataLLightning wrote:
i like the skyline, dont love it though, dont like to look though. and with liebermans r34 blackbird the featured car in tf&amp;f 2 all kinds of assholes will be attracted to it, fuck that. MY dream car is an sc300 converted to a big single and stick. http://www.motorsportwarehouse.com/soarer/mineral1.jpg


do you guys get the sc400? with the quad cam 4.0 v8? or the twin turbo soarer?

[El Jefe]

the sc400 comes with leather and tv, and the twin turbo is 2.5l same as the ones used in the old tt supras

[FPGreenTalonTSI]

On 2002-03-28 12:45, gixer wrote:

On 2002-03-28 12:37, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:

On 2002-03-27 18:02, gixer wrote:

On 2002-03-26 18:02, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:



um...no shit!... :lol: ... im comparing liters...liters determine torque, and if those skylines wanted to rev high...they would probably make a 2.6li 4 banger...


Liters arent the only detiriming factor in how much torque a car can make, if that was the case then Turbo preludes would make more torque then Eclipses (2.0L), which doesnt happen.

And no, a 2.6 I-4 will always make less torque then a 2.6L I-6, and it wont rev as high as the 6 cylinder. Case in point, the Starion had a 2.6L 4 banger that couldnt rev to save its life. You'll sacrifice revs in a 4 cylinder to have 2.6L, but have torque, with the 6 cylinder you dont have to sacrifice either. The skyline makes ample torque and like I said, can rev to where most engines dream of.

11,000RPM....ever heard a skyline wail at full throttle? Its like a banshee.






omg...this is almost like the import vs.domestic argument... i don't give a shit about skylines...i hate it's puny six-cylinder.... a 2.2li turbo prelude will always have more torque than a 2.0 eclipse if both done up the exact same way... :roll:


Yeah, that explains why Stephs 700whp civ is putting 500lbs to the ground, meanwhile Brent Rau's 700whp DSM is throwing out 600+lbs of torque...RUNNING THE SAME TURBO

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: FPGreenTalonTSI on 2002-03-28 12:39 ]</font>



listen..i said if both cars are built up the exact same way... EXACT... which would have more torque?... the 2.2 or the 2.0?... the reason why papadakis doesn't have much torque is because it's tuned that way..fwd.. now if you bore that 2.0liter engine out...will it have more torque?... this is common sense man...






*Sigh* They had as close to the same setup as you can get, they ran the same turbo yet Rau's car made alot more torque. Step has a 2.3, AND he still makes Less torque. Anyone who knows anything knows DSM's make more torque then hondas regardless of liters, how many DSM's have you seen dyno?.

TurboGirl, why do you care?


El Jefe, we have the non turbo 2jz-ge in the Sc300's and the V-8 in the SC400. Alot of people are taking the 2jz-gte and transplating it into their SC300's, I'd assume the 1jz-gte swap would be easier, but its hard to find here. You from AUS?

[El Jefe]

yup :wink:

[FPGreenTalonTSI]

On 2002-03-29 08:58, El Jefe wrote:
yup :wink:



Ahhh, I knew it, you guys know your cars.

[El Jefe]

On 2002-03-29 09:36, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:

On 2002-03-29 08:58, El Jefe wrote:
yup :wink:



Ahhh, I knew it, you guys know your cars.

rotaries are huge down here but there arnt as many fast imports down here compared to our domestics. we probably know cars as much as you guys do. We dont get any DSM cars down here which is a shame. When I first watched fast and the furious, i was so confused as to what the green car was at the start (took me a while to figure it out to be an eclipse :grin: )

I think in particular, you guys know your hondas more than anyone else on this planet, perhaps even more than the japanese!

[fataLLightning]

actually i dont think 1j's were ever in supras. the mkIII was the 7m-gte/ the 1j i believe is more or less a 2.5L version of the 2jz-gte.

[Anonymous]

On 2002-03-29 08:55, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:

On 2002-03-28 12:45, gixer wrote:

On 2002-03-28 12:37, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:

On 2002-03-27 18:02, gixer wrote:

On 2002-03-26 18:02, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:



um...no shit!... :lol: ... im comparing liters...liters determine torque, and if those skylines wanted to rev high...they would probably make a 2.6li 4 banger...


Liters arent the only detiriming factor in how much torque a car can make, if that was the case then Turbo preludes would make more torque then Eclipses (2.0L), which doesnt happen.

And no, a 2.6 I-4 will always make less torque then a 2.6L I-6, and it wont rev as high as the 6 cylinder. Case in point, the Starion had a 2.6L 4 banger that couldnt rev to save its life. You'll sacrifice revs in a 4 cylinder to have 2.6L, but have torque, with the 6 cylinder you dont have to sacrifice either. The skyline makes ample torque and like I said, can rev to where most engines dream of.

11,000RPM....ever heard a skyline wail at full throttle? Its like a banshee.






omg...this is almost like the import vs.domestic argument... i don't give a shit about skylines...i hate it's puny six-cylinder.... a 2.2li turbo prelude will always have more torque than a 2.0 eclipse if both done up the exact same way... :roll:


Yeah, that explains why Stephs 700whp civ is putting 500lbs to the ground, meanwhile Brent Rau's 700whp DSM is throwing out 600+lbs of torque...RUNNING THE SAME TURBO

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: FPGreenTalonTSI on 2002-03-28 12:39 ]</font>



listen..i said if both cars are built up the exact same way... EXACT... which would have more torque?... the 2.2 or the 2.0?... the reason why papadakis doesn't have much torque is because it's tuned that way..fwd.. now if you bore that 2.0liter engine out...will it have more torque?... this is common sense man...






*Sigh* They had as close to the same setup as you can get, they ran the same turbo yet Rau's car made alot more torque. Step has a 2.3, AND he still makes Less torque. Anyone who knows anything knows DSM's make more torque then hondas regardless of liters, how many DSM's have you seen dyno?.

TurboGirl, why do you care?


El Jefe, we have the non turbo 2jz-ge in the Sc300's and the V-8 in the SC400. Alot of people are taking the 2jz-gte and transplating it into their SC300's, I'd assume the 1jz-gte swap would be easier, but its hard to find here. You from AUS?



i can't argue w/ someone who's gonna be biased towards their car.... why don't u try to bore that 2.0liter engine of your out to 2.2 and see if it makes more torque... btw... steph's engine is an h22 vtec...therefore..if it wasn't vtec..it'd make more torque...

[FPGreenTalonTSI]

On 2002-03-30 00:38, fataLLightning wrote:
actually i dont think 1j's were ever in supras. the mkIII was the 7m-gte/ the 1j i believe is more or less a 2.5L version of the 2jz-gte.



The Japanese market Mk3 Supras had the option of having the 1jz-gte. It was a pretty nice engine, but it didnt hold up to the same kind of power the 2jz-gte can, it does spin higher though.

[FPGreenTalonTSI]

On 2002-03-30 01:26, gixer wrote:
i can't argue w/ someone who's gonna be biased towards their car.... why don't u try to bore that 2.0liter engine of your out to 2.2 and see if it makes more torque... btw... steph's engine is an h22 vtec...therefore..if it wasn't vtec..it'd make more torque...



And I cant argue with someone who doesnt know what they're talking about. Steph runs a H23A1 in the coupe, and he runs a T-88, the same turbo as Rau.

Why should DSM's bore our motors out, when @ 2.0 liters we're making more torque already?. Its not bias, its just stating the facts.

Rx-7's are 1.3 liters, you gonna tell me Hondas make more torque then them?.

[v8rcul8r]

For one thing, the rx-7 is a completely different engine design.
:roll: This is almost as bad as import vs. domestic . . .
:evil: :evil: :evil: STOP IT!

[FPGreenTalonTSI]

On 2002-03-30 17:04, v8rcul8r wrote:
For one thing, the rx-7 is a completely different engine design.



And thats what I was getting at.....since he's basing everything on LITERS.

[v8rcul8r]

Ah. Point taken. :grin:

[Anonymous]

anyone want this thing locked.........

[jonl]

On 2002-03-28 04:45, turbogirl wrote:
screw all you people!!!! :smile:

im gonna get me a lan evo.. and while im at it gonna get the top secret supra :smile:

dont know how ill pull that one off

then ill get a peugeout 206 hook that shit up.. and ill be set :smile:

my dreams of course



The people from Peugot just called -- they don't want you associating yourself with their company name.. Thanks..

[Anonymous]

alright enough, if u want to talk about skylines ok but now people are just getting at each other. lock....

pm me if u wanted reopened

[Anonymous]

can someone tell me why this was closed? :???: there was good car discussion on this thread

[Anonymous]

On 2002-03-30 08:58, FPGreenTalonTSI wrote:

On 2002-03-30 01:26, gixer wrote:
i can't argue w/ someone who's gonna be biased towards their car.... why don't u try to bore that 2.0liter engine of your out to 2.2 and see if it makes more torque... btw... steph's engine is an h22 vtec...therefore..if it wasn't vtec..it'd make more torque...



And I cant argue with someone who doesnt know what they're talking about. Steph runs a H23A1 in the coupe, and he runs a T-88, the same turbo as Rau.

Why should DSM's bore our motors out, when @ 2.0 liters we're making more torque already?. Its not bias, its just stating the facts.

Rx-7's are 1.3 liters, you gonna tell me Hondas make more torque then them?.



look here...displacement is one of the key elements for torque...steph's car does NOT have the same setup as your dsm friends.. a bunch of factors determine torque...valve springs, rod length etc... now if you had two engines...configured the exact same way..(not only turbo size)...the bigger displacement engine will ALWAYS make more torque...look up the facts before u start saying i don't know what im talking about... :roll:

[v8rcul8r]

Whoops . . .

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: v8rcul8r on 2002-03-31 16:10 ]</font>