Which is a better car?

Post by **christlovesyou** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

Which is a better car: the Nissan Skyline or the Toyota Supra?

Which has more standard non-turbo horsepower?

Which would make a better race car?

Thankyou for your response!

Post by **yeswepromise** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

i am gonna vote for a skyline gtr model over a supra.

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

'better' is all a matter of opinion, personally i wouldnt hesitate to pick the R34GT-R over the SupraRZ, the non-turbo supra however, has 22ohp 3.o liter straight6, and the non turbo skyline has the rb2o, and therefore can't really be compared, now when comparing turbo to turbo, the power output is similar, the skyline is a little bit heavier, however more technologically advanced, so all in all, depending on what type of racing is happening, the skyline will make a 'better' race car

Website · Post by **nolaws4evr** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

I cant beleive you asked this question on a nissan/infiniti forum and expected to get any other answer besides the skyline. But Im goin to have to say the skyline too b/c it has awd and aws plus its a technologically more advanced vehicle.

Post by **Altiman94** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

I wouldn't say one is better than the other. It's all about personal preference. Any turbo vehicle will make a good race car IMO

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

i dont think 'any' turbo car would make a good race car, im assuming you're talking about cars that come with turbo's from the factory, but even still, i dont think id' trust a srt-4 to run the kind of boost it does all the track, like it would if it was a track whore

Post by **theronin** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

they say that a Nissan Skyline is just like a Toyota Supra.... except the Skyline has traction!

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

they ar every similar, yet very different, 2.6 liter straight 6 vs a 3.o liter straight 6, the supra is RWD and the skyline of course AWD, both have underrated power from the factory and basically unlimited potential, and *if u were in japan, they would cost fairly close to the same amount, basically if u dont HAVE to have 4wd, or you're just a toyota guy, get the supra, and if you're like me, you'd get hte skyline

Website · Post by **nolaws4evr** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

:withstup

Post by **Wreckless** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

From all the reasearch that I've done, and being a Supra owner myself, The only thing that the MK4 TT supra has on any GT-R is that the 2JZ-GTE in a stock form will make more power with bolt-ons than a stock RB26. The RB26's have HG issues around 600 hp from what I've read, and there's 2JZ-GTE's putting down 900+ rwhp on stock internals, headgasket, etc.

In a built form, however, the RB26DETT is vastly superior to the 2JZ-GTE. The 2JZ-GTEs exhaust side of the head is very poorly designed compared to the RB26, and Rev's are a major limiting factor in making huge power, as there's built RB's on the streets of Aus. and Japan that rev to 11k regularly, whereas the 2JZ can barely squeak past 9k in built form.

I also feel personally that the Supra has a styling edge on the Skyline GTR, but the rarity of the Skyline in the US makes the mystique take over. Supras are actually much less common than GT-R's if you go by the production numbers.

The AWD part of the equation is self-explanitory. the GT-R's ATTESA system rocks the crap out of a typical RWD platform.

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

very true statements, however i disagree about styling, but thats all opinion. In stock form the .4 liters of the 2JZ does give it a big edge, but id take the RB anyday, just my opinion

Post by **pstickne** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

How about dropping a 2JZ-GTE into a GT-R? Ehh :-)

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

ive seen it done, ive also seen an rb in a supra, some guys are just toyota fans, and some nissan fans, they're both great motors, probably the two best engineered japanese blocks of their time

Post by **Sami** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

Wreckless wrote:The RB26's have HG issues around 600 hp from what I've read,

Well, metal headgasket is one of the first upgrades on a RB26DETT...

Wreckless wrote:and there's 2JZ-GTE's putting down 900+ rwhp on stock internals, headgasket, etc.

Couple things you have to remember though, there is one word out there for those, and we all know what it is. Don't expect these cars to run at those powerlevels anywhere else than a brief moment at a dyno. These engines also don't last very long.

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

sure they last a long time, as long as they're tuned to where they dont max out their possible power all the time, and u constantly replace parts

Post by **Sami** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

nlzmo400r wrote:sure they last a long time, as long as they're tuned to where they dont max out their possible power all the time, and u constantly replace parts

That's not what I've heard, locally and on the net. Granted a 900whp Supra is running on race gas so on the street it is considerably lower, but even then they tend to not last. That's why some of them have that dyno queen reputation.

Post by **trpower7** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

Supras have the same problems any other car would at that boost level. With forged insides, some O-ringing and a MHG, they are more reliable than a lot of other engines due to a very strong iron block. That's why they can produce something stupid like 900hp. Of course I'm talking about MKIV Supras, the 2JZ-GTE. On the other hand, BHG is a STUPENDOUS problem on MKIII Supras, the 7M-GTE engine. I know, I blew up two. I still believe with ARP hardware, O-Ringing and an MHG a 7M-GTE could withstand quite a bit of boost, but at the age they are now you'll be better off rebuilding the whole thing. I think a 7M-GTE MKIII Supra makes a great sleeper, I know my old one was crazy fast when it ran...........

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

ill take a 477hp porsche GT2 that i can drive to work everyday over a 9oohp dyno queen that'll probably throw a rod right through the damn roof when i run him (causing him to lose

) im a big fan of streetability, so ill take a fast 'street' car anyday

Post by **TopStreet240** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

nlzmo400r wrote:ill take a 477hp porsche GT2 that i can drive to work everyday over a 9oohp dyno queen that'll probably throw a rod right through the damn roof when i run him (causing him to lose ) im a big fan of streetability, so ill take a fast 'street' car anyday

Im sorry but I dont think you understand just how streetable these cars are. Most skylines in Japan if modified to race on the streets put down around 1000hp and are daily driven. That is why these cars are the kings of the import world, they are not dyno queens, they walk the walk and talk the talk. These cars will run in the high revs on the freeways racing at speeds of over 180mph. I dont think you understand just how good these cars are.

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

TopStreet240 wrote:Im sorry but I dont think you understand just how streetable these cars are. Most skylines in Japan if modified to race on the streets put down around 1000hp and are daily driven. That is why these cars are the kings of the import world, they are not dyno queens, they walk the walk and talk the talk. These cars will run in the high revs on the freeways racing at speeds of over 180mph. I dont think you understand just how good these cars are.

o trust me, i know how good they are, you're talking to no novice here

, i personally love shopped tuned street cars (like the mr2 powered top secret Supra!). However, i dont care what car you have, if its putting down 1ooohp on a 6cyl motor, its not going to be easily daily driven (unless of course you crank that boost from 22psi to 1opsi ), stuff is just bound to break at that kind of power, thats all im saying

Post by **Altiman94** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

Nizmo has a point, but I don't really see the point of arguing. My N/A stock 240sx has proved to be a piece and unreliable. I just needed a full engine rebuild.

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

yes, most cars today are fairly reliable, but after so many miles, you almost have to expect things to start giving out on you. The only thing replaced on my old 24o was a clutch, and timing chain (both 'preventative' maintenence) before i sold the car with 2ook on it

Post by **GTR-33** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

nlzmo400r wrote:'better' is all a matter of opinion, personally i wouldnt hesitate to pick the R34GT-R over the SupraRZ, the non-turbo supra however, has 22ohp 3.o liter straight6, and the non turbo skyline has the rb2o, and therefore can't really be compared, now when comparing turbo to turbo, the power output is similar, the skyline is a little bit heavier, however more technologically advanced, so all in all, depending on what type of racing is happening, the skyline will make a 'better' race car

There are more trim levels to the Skyline than NA and Turbo. . The R33 and R34 used a RB25DE in the NA versions too. The RWD GTS and GTS-Ts (R33-250BHP RB25DET R34-280BHP NEO RB25DET) were the models that competed with the NA Supra. Either car are great race cars in stock trim, but at the highest level neither car is equipeted with some of the major factory items. The JGTC Supras use a Beams 3S-GTE due to it's light weight. To lose weight the GTR drop the ATTESA-ETS and become 100% RWD.

Post by **pstickne** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

I just love the idea of 4wd cars... what's the point of having all that power if you can't utilize it efficiently (granted you lose more in the drivetrain)?

Now, just to cut the mass...

(I'm talking DOT-approved rubber here :-)

Post by **GTR-33** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

pstickne wrote:I just love the idea of 4wd cars... what's the point of having all that power if you can't utilize it efficiently (granted you lose more in the drivetrain)?

The word 'efficiency' and the acronym '4WD' or 'AWD' do not go together very well. Most AWD systems can have up to a 35% loss in power. The GTR has one up due to it's variable torque split thanks to ATTESA-ETS. ALL in all though, I still love AWD cars the best. Nothing beats the look on the other guys face when you launch a 1.4 60ft time....Unless he is in a JZA80, or anything with lots of topend power in a FR/FF/MR config. You got him off the line, but he won't stay behind you too long...

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

GTR-33 wrote:There are more trim levels to the Skyline than NA and Turbo. . The R33 and R34 used a RB25DE in the NA versions too. The RWD GTS and GTS-Ts (R33-250BHP RB25DET R34-280BHP NEO RB25DET) were the models that competed with the NA Supra. Either car are great race cars in stock trim, but at the highest level neither car is equipeted with some of the major factory items. The JGTC Supras use a Beams 3S-GTE due to it's light weight. To lose weight the GTR drop the ATTESA-ETS and become 100% RWD.

i knew about the 3sgte motor in the supras, but im pretty sure the qwd is kept in the JGTC for the sklines

Post by **Sami** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

nlzmo400r wrote:i knew about the 3sgte motor in the supras, but im pretty sure the qwd is kept in the JGTC for the sklines

They are RWD. If they would run AWD they would be penalized in forms of additional weight.

Post by **nlzmo400r** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

yea, i suppose it would be somewhat cheating, but that takes away from the potential from the stock car. Its almost like giving the GTR a handicap

Post by **GTR-33** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

They got rid of the ATTESA in JGTC due to the weight of the system, and due to the fact that is was a variable torque split. If they wanted to keep the overly heavy AWD system, they would also need a fixed torque split. They really did ditch it in favor of the reduction in weight though, just as Toyota ditched the 2JZ. Its all about power to weight. Lowering the overall weight of the car will increase its overall driving charateristics. Changing it to RWD dose pose a problem to a stock body GTR, but the JGTC GTR N1 cars have every panel they could make out of carbon fiber made. The hood, fenders, bumpers, doors, hatch, ect. It like saying the C5R is close to a C5 or a M3GTR is anything close to an M3... The GTR would not 'whoop ***' if it had the ATTESA system in it. In the hands of a great driver, the ATTESA system would be a handicap IMO.

Post by **Sami** » Wed Aug 13, 2003 9:09 am

GTR-33 wrote:They got rid of the ATTESA in JGTC due to the weight of the system

Yes and no, they got rid of it because of the rules of JGTC. If you want to run AWD, that would mean you would have to run a heavier car (the minimum weight of the car would be more). Running AWD was, and still is, penalized by the rules.

Which is a better car?

Which is a better car?

Nissan Forums

Infiniti Forums

Datsun Forums

Technical Forums

Classifieds / Marketplace

Nissan Motorsports

General Forums