# Are there any STANDARD R32 and R33 GT-Rs out there?



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

...and would potentially be interested in having their cars featured in an upcoming EVO magazine story?

Venue is potentially N Yorks moors next Wed/Thurs (19th/20th March).

Please email me at david.y(AT)auto-journals.com if you're interested as my PM box here is constantly full.


----------



## simplysideways (Apr 17, 2007)

I can't help but to save yourself a lot of questions , are you looking for completely standard cars ?


----------



## Mookistar (Feb 5, 2004)

Speak to RSVFour for the 32.


----------



## ANDY H (Mar 17, 2005)

Rsvfour ( brian) the man for this! Bone stock r32 gtr.


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Thanks guys, yes as standard as it is possible to get in the UK. 
Thanks for the tip about Mr RSVFour, I shall PM him forthwith.

There is an outside chance they might not be able to get the Nissan heritage fleet R34, so if anybody here has a completely standard R34, they may be in with a shout of getting in too.


----------



## Trev (Nov 1, 2003)

If Brian can't then maybe I could help?

Only mods you can see are induction kit, rear spoiler lip and exhaust.


----------



## W80 YAU (Feb 2, 2014)

I've just bought an R32 that is almost bone stock bar some small subtle mechanical mods.
It still has stock engine, suspension, brakes and wheels.

http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/244602-wills-r32-gtr.html

Only issue is im still awaiting collection :/ but hopefully it maybe ready at weekend or somepoint next week.


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Trev said:


> If Brian can't then maybe I could help?
> 
> Only mods you can see are induction kit, rear spoiler lip and exhaust.


Hi Trev, thanks for the offer. What power and suspension are you running?

Will, I think that might be too ambitious!

Any more standard R33s out there? I've had one email, but he's missing his front splitter.


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

Yes completely 100% stock 32GTR 65K miles , new oem 32GTR suspension untouched original engine and even has the original exhaust and splitter ( and it is the rarest colour )

email sent to david


----------



## W80 YAU (Feb 2, 2014)

Yeh i thought it might have been a small push for being completely stock XD.

Not to worry then


----------



## Trev (Nov 1, 2003)

David.Yu said:


> Hi Trev, thanks for the offer. What power and suspension are you running?
> 
> Will, I think that might be too ambitious!
> 
> Any more standard R33s out there? I've had one email, but he's missing his front splitter.


Stage 1 power, standard suspension.


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

RSVFOUR said:


> Yes completely 100% stock 32GTR 65K miles , new oem 32GTR suspension untouched original engine and even has the original exhaust and splitter ( and it is the rarest colour )
> 
> email sent to david


Many thanks for that Brian. 
We would love to have your car and I'm just chasing final details through with the ed.

I've had one email about an R33 GT-R (thanks, Harry), are there no others?
So many lovely modded ones, but nobody with a standard one?

I have to say of course, I completely understand, my brand V-Spec didn't stay stock long in 1997 :chuckle: , but there must be some purists out there?


----------



## Cris (Sep 17, 2007)

David, I've never understood why magazines feel the need to always test standard cars (and of course advise us to buy standard cars in buying guides...).

Assuming that this isn't a period piece surely it can be accepted that a reasonable example of what actually exists with some choice mods say stage 1?

I mention this because it's very common in magazines to see references to buying cars with the PPP kit, or X50 upgrades or whatever. Given that R32-34 were designed to be restricted (to meet the agreed power limits) and I assume that Nissan wouldn't have helpfully marked which boost hose to shorten if they didn't expect people to derestrict them...


----------



## Trev (Nov 1, 2003)

So you don't need my car then?


----------



## C7 JFW (Jun 25, 2006)

Only this morning I was catching up on Evo.. I shall genuinely look forward to an R32/33/34 comparison.


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Trev said:


> So you don't need my car then?


Hi Trev, many thanks for offering, but on this occasion, we're going with Brian's. :thumbsup:

As for standard cars, I thought that would have been obvious, it's a comparison of the different generations of GT-R as they came from the factory.

Once one of them is up on power or has uprated suspension or brakes it skews the comparison completely.


----------



## Trev (Nov 1, 2003)

David.Yu said:


> Hi Trev, many thanks for offering, but on this occasion, we're going with Brian's.


No worries, you won't be disappointed!


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Many thanks for all your help guys, we are going to go with Harry's R33 so are now all sorted! 

:bowdown1:

It should make for a great article; a sort of sequel to the group test I wrote many years ago.


----------



## alpeag (Dec 1, 2006)

I'm looking forward to the article and images already!!


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

So got back from the two day jaunt to wales for the evo mag article.

Met harry and his black 33 . 

Overall the car did 850 km in one and a half days including a fair bit of "spirited testing" over the mountains

The car never missed a beat including the 250 mile drive home in the pouring rain . 

Id forgotten how nice it was to drive even long distances . I was particually impressed with the motor especially as the oil pressure gauge was "stuck " on 4 the whole way home at a steady 3000 rpm

As to the days shoot - the roads were unbeleivable . Ive been asked not to post any pics as the GTR article will be out in EVO in about 5 weeks time.
The two testers were really impressive (understatement) the speeds they managed in poring rain were quite something. I went out with Mauro in my car and I now realise the car is MUCH quicker than me.

As to the tests they seem to like the 32 so hopefully it will get a good write up. 

And just for the record Im even more attached to the car than I was before the trip.


----------



## markM3 (Jan 7, 2008)

Look forward to reading the article Brian.


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Glad you could make it Brian and thanks for bringing your car.

Dickie Meaden is an amazing driver and an even better writer. I'm sure the article will be well worth waiting for.

When I wrote the prequel to this many years ago (sans R35 obviously), I concluded by saying the R32 was my favourite, so it will be interesting to see what Dickie says this time.


----------



## KM BlackGTR (Mar 17, 2009)

Looking forward to this feature. Shame a tastefully modded 1 of each 
Couldn't have been added to the test.


----------



## Trev (Nov 1, 2003)

Can't wait!


----------



## Cris (Sep 17, 2007)

David.Yu said:


> Hi Trev, many thanks for offering, but on this occasion, we're going with Brian's. :thumbsup:
> 
> As for standard cars, I thought that would have been obvious, it's a comparison of the different generations of GT-R as they came from the factory.
> 
> Once one of them is up on power or has uprated suspension or brakes it skews the comparison completely.


It's a period piece then. Fair enough. Thanks for clearing that up. 

I often see these reviews and they comment that GTRs aren't as quick as they were expecting. I always think its a pity that the cars weren't officially imported in derestricted form. 

I'm looking forward to the article. I greatly enjoyed Dickie Meaden's article on the Calsonic car. Can I ask who the other writer is, Catchpole perhaps? 

I did enjoy your original article David. I hope that evo carry on doing these kind of articles.


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

I spoke to dickie at lenght after he had road tested my car which was in the very very wet !!!. 
He genuinily seemed to like the car . Thats as in the 32 and mine.
Hopefully he will come to the same conclusion as me ,david y and ct17 etc.
only time will tell

As for the other test cars 
I did get to drive the 34 and as far as I could see it was completely standard but a v spec . It didnt seem much quicker than mine to me but the breakes were a lot better ( no surprise there ) asnd it was more stable.
Harrys 33 was standard as far as the engine goes but had a larger nismo exhaust and was lowered (IMHO anyway) not that this is a problem in any way of course other than the splitter making it difficult to get into some of the car parks.
The 35 was , well............ a 35 

The other driver was a guy called Mauro who could definately drive as well !

So , assuminmg the other writer was there it will be either mauro or will the editor as dean the photograher was the only other guy there .

I suspect Mauro as he drove all the carts as well as dickie.

it will be interesting to see which cars make the front cover................


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

I look forward to reading the article Brian.


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

KM BlackGTR said:


> Looking forward to this feature. Shame a tastefully modded 1 of each
> Couldn't have been added to the test.


why ?

If you mod them they wont be even a remote comparison unless you find one of each with the same mods and then who is to say what level is it should be.


----------



## KM BlackGTR (Mar 17, 2009)

Why ? Because nearly all the 32 & 33s out there that most of us own are modified.
Would have been interesting for me at least to see how they fared.
Cars like yours are extremely rare & fair play to you for keeping it that way.


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

RSVFOUR said:


> I spoke to dickie at lenght after he had road tested my car which was in the very very wet !!!.
> He genuinily seemed to like the car . Thats as in the 32 and mine.
> Hopefully he will come to the same conclusion as me ,david y and ct17 etc.
> only time will tell
> ...


The R34 was Nissan's own heritage fleet car, so yes, it is completely standard.

Not sure there needs to be another writer, it will probably just be Dickie who writes the piece.

And I'm sorry, but if I was honestly comparing all 4, the R35 would win hands down. It is in a completely different league to the previous 3 when comparing stock to stock with today's reference points.

Most ahead of its time though, would be the R32 without a doubt.


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

In a straight comparison the 35 would win yes and hands down.

But if it didnt there aould be somethng very wrong.

I would put it this way

I like the 33
I like the 34 and the 35 a lot
But i love the 32


----------



## Mookistar (Feb 5, 2004)

Let's just hope an unbiased review gives the 33 some of the credit it deserves. Jethro loved mine back in the 15k test.


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

David.Yu said:


> *And I'm sorry, but if I was honestly comparing all 4, the R35 would win hands down. It is in a completely different league to the previous 3 when comparing stock to stock with today's reference points.*


Ok then, an Older modified GT-R v's a Newer stock car!!!!:chuckle:

With you being the ex-Owner of a modded R33 and you currently have an R35 GT-R David, How does a 500bhp R33 straight six compare when its up against a bog standard V6 R35? Is it still such a crushing defeat when the older cars power is upped to matching the newer cars performance statistics. 

What about the fun factor and ultimate driver involvement...does the older cars three pedals and transmission make it harder but more enjoyable and rewarding to drive evocatively than the Playstation Generations R35's easily accessible ground covering grunt?

Also, We know you love your current cars 700bhp+ state of tune but how does it fair against a similar powered R32/R33/R34?? Again, Is it still such an easy victory for the newer R35?

And how much is actually too much? Finally I'd like to see something like Matty's extreme BCNR33 GT-R against a similarly monsterously tuned R35 and find out how these both now feel when driven on public roads! You know, Has their high power outputs diluted the ingredients that make all GT-R's such fun confidence inspiring all weather weapons.

_Is there any chance that all or any of these questions above could be answered either by yourself here now or in some future pages of Evo magazine please Mr Yu?_:bowdown1:


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

I asked the tester exactly this on the evo shoot . His answer was what i posted

The 35 would win hands down . 

His exact words were as long as you kept it like a road car i doubt you could make a 32/33/34 as quick as a 35


----------



## infamous_t (Jul 9, 2007)

RSVFOUR said:


> His exact words were as long as you kept it like a road car i doubt you could make a 32/33/34 as quick as a 35


Dems fighting words! :chuckle:


----------



## enshiu (Aug 20, 2010)

I own both of them a r32 and r35 and to say it clearly the r32 wins it on fun and r35 on nearly everything........


----------



## GT-R David (Mar 13, 2013)

Maybe this vid will answer some of your questions:
Skyline GTR Battle R32 GTR VS R33 GTR VS R34 GTR VS R35 GTR - YouTube

It's one of my favorite Best Motoring Tsukuba battles, standart R35 vs modified R32, R33, R34


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

As someone that has a sensibly tuned R32 and is currently on their third R35...

I agree with most of the above.
The R35 is just so capable in stock form that you need a nicely set up and tuned R32/33/34 to match it and (key part here) you need to know how to use it.

It's an old cliche, but the R35 is easier to drive very quickly.
That's not taking anything away from it really, it's an impressive car and is fun.

I could get in my R35 and within the day be doing 55-54 second laps of Brands Hatch and that was on road tyres.
By comparison with an R32 running track day tyres my best lap on the first day out was 58 seconds, that was running 450bhp so about the same power per tonne as the R35.
It requires more confidence and a better insight into the car to go quickly and I'm still working on that.

But I will say that although the R35 is fun, the R32 for me is simply more fun because you really do have to be on top of it.
For me personally I do like having all the extra work to do changing gear and balancing the car, which the R35 can help you with, which leaves you free with more time to concentrate on lines, braking points etc...

The R35 is simply a much more advanced car with newer technology, and it's very impressive. As you'd expect as it was designed about 18-20 years later.

But honestly if I had to choose between one of mine... I'd keep the R32 because for me a GT-R isn't a daily means of transport.
Yes I'd be going slower, but I'd also be enjoying myself more.
More speed doesn't always equal more fun, although people seem to think it does.


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

This thread and the Evo article are about the evolution of the GTR using cars in stock trim with normal road tyres driven on the road.

It wasnt a track test using tuned cars with racing tyres which is completely different thing. Everyone knows how fast modified GTRs can be , maybe finding out how fast they were stock migh be more impressive ( i hope)

So whilst some may want to change the topic at least this article will mean GTRs should be headlining evo mag very soon .

A stock 32 is still a pretty quick car and mega fun to drive but if i was only allowed one RB powered car I confess it wouldnt be stock but one with a similar spec to CTs

Fortunately no such rule exists.


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

GT-R David said:


> *Maybe this vid will answer some of your questions:*


I've seen that awesome video before, Hence why I asked about a high power R32/R33/R34 v's a stock R35 GT-R David. Clearly in the right hands the newer Nissan ain't gonna always win!:chuckle:




CT17 said:


> *But honestly if I had to choose between one of mine... I'd keep the R32 because for me a GT-R isn't a daily means of transport.*


My R33 is my everyday vehicle and I've been surprised just how practical and usable its been since I've owned it. Dare I say it but its even been more safe and sure footed in some of the bad weather we've experienced this past year....




CT17 said:


> *More speed doesn't always equal more fun, although people seem to think it does.*


I met a fellow BCNR33 Owner last year at Cheddar Gorge. His car was pristine and had a Spec I thought I'd just die for _(i.e. capable of over 1000bhp but running only 840bhp/860bhp-ish for normal road use)_. In every way this GT-R was way better than mine but on a spirited drive where I was constantly high in the revs in both second and third gears before going hard on the brakes and repeating the process, This Monster Skyline never made it out of second gear on the same stretch of tarmac. 

This then got me thinking, How much is too much?! Yes it was obviously superior in every way to my own GT-R but was it more fun.




RSVFOUR said:


> *This thread and the Evo article are about the evolution of the GTR using cars in stock trim with normal road tyres driven on the road.*


Ok...But what exactly is/was stock RSVFOUR? My 1996 road car should be 1520kgs but comes in at a portly 1655kgs with a full tank of Super Unleaded. Does a carbon bonnet, spoiler and set of aftermarket wheels really add that much extra weight? It was also supposed to be totally standard when it came from Japan but looking through the Service History it originally made 344.5bhp on the rollers. So IMHO, The Official Japanese figures are just not to be trusted....

When Dirk Schoysman originally lapped the Nürburgring in 7m 59sec, No one at Nissan would volunteer precisely just how much it weighed or the horse power that car made. Power outputs of 400bhp to 450bhp have been suggested by those who know the Ring!

All Nissan would confirm is that this R33 GT-R was a battered old test mule worth nothing to anyone. It had a racing seat, a roll cage and it was _"Set-up"_ exactly to Dirk's liking. This record came after three solid days of testing whilst this Banzai lap necessitated cutting every corner and bouncing off every curb.

When Dirk was asked to repeat the time in 1997 for Top Gear Magazine in *P35 XWL* which was a Silver 1998 Model vehicle with approximately 350bhp, the best time He managed was 8m 37.10sec which is way off the record He had set previously. 

Is any Skyline GT-R actually standard??




RSVFOUR said:


> *It wasnt a track test using tuned cars with racing tyres which is completely different thing. Everyone knows how fast modified GTRs can be , maybe finding out how fast they were stock might be more impressive ( i hope)*


To the best of my knowledge, Car Magazines usually stay away from using older modified models put directly into competition with their newer family siblings. I guess its a taboo just in case the older version highlights some possible flaws on the new product they are trying to flog to the general public?



RSVFOUR said:


> *So whilst some may want to change the topic at least this article will mean GTRs should be headlining evo mag very soon *


Being a long time Evo subscriber, I don't want to change the article in question RSVFOUR as I'm looking forward to adding this magazine to my growing collection of GT-R mag features. What I would like to see in future is something that was..._"Shall we say"_...a bit more fair regarding a vehicles performance figures.

Sadly, There is now way on Earth a newer 500bhp car is going to be beaten by the older 276bhp version _(I think everyone knows that...You may as well compare Oranges to Apples)_ but if these power outputs were a little bit closer and some modern tech was used to bring the old beastie up to speed, then this would be _(for me at least)_ a far more interesting magazine road test article!

JM2PW!


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Although we're not doing a comparo like you suggested, I think all Skyline/GT-R fans are going to be really pleased with this issue.

We're still working on some stuff and it's just reminding me about why I've loved the marque since the R32 came out in 1989.


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

David.Yu said:


> *Although we're not doing a comparo like you suggested, I think all Skyline/GT-R fans are going to be really pleased with this issue.*



Ok, That's fair enough but would it be possible to have something like this happen in future please David? 

Evo themselves have opened the door for a more fair direct comparison _(Last Months Issue 194)_ when *V16 SKY* which is a standard old R34 GT-R lapped the Anglesey Circuit in 44.6sec....exactly the same time as the mighty *VE13 ZGR* new R35 GT-R!!!

If the R34's bhp was upped to be more on a par with the R35's, maybe the BNR34 wouldn't have struggled so much at keeping a Lamborghini Aventador at bay on the public roads....

JM2PW!


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

Whilst the R35 is fast and refined, it is a boring car to drive on track. It is with out doubt refined road car and a very fast one at that. On track enjoyment having driven a friends one few years ago I did not find it exciting at all. It was very much brake accelerate and turn and the car handled just as you wanted it.

Now with a R32/33/34 it is somewhat exciting in from the sound of the straight six, the gear changes braking turning accelerating it is a driver car and it reacts to you inputs and you get rewarded for it which puts a smile on your face.

A car must give you that excitement in the same way a young lady can in the bedroom, if the she just says here you do what you want it becomes boring! :chuckle:

If given 50k what car would I buy? a tuned R34 or a stage 4 R35? I would got for a tuned R34 every time!


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

Isn't it strange that CT17 would pick His R32 over an R35 and FRRACER would pick a Tuned R34 over an R35! Curious indeed.

What intrigues me even more now is that CT17 managed a 58sec lap time in his 450bhp R32 and 55/54sec in the R35. Just three seconds off difference for a twenty year age gap is pretty awesome in my book fella!!!:smokin:

_Maybe Our older Skyline's are not as inferior to GT-R's as car journalist's and ye old interweb lets us think they are...._


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

The phrase the R35 drives itself is not that far from the truth, an average driver can go fast in it - the limits of the car are very high and before you reach the cars limit most drivers would hit their personal limits.

To get the most out of an R32/33/34 you have to almost make them dance around a track it is very raw in comparison and it is what makes driving them a pleasure.


----------



## CT17 (Mar 25, 2011)

K66 SKY said:


> What intrigues me even more now is that CT17 managed a 58sec lap time in his 450bhp R32 and 55/54sec in the R35. Just three seconds off difference for a twenty year age gap is pretty awesome in my book fella!!!:smokin:


I did mention that the R32 is on sticky track rubber and the R35 was on road going MPSS.
Still working on my R32 track time though.
And being tuned to 50% more power doesn't really make it a fair comparison anyway.


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

CT17 said:


> *I did mention that the R32 is on sticky track rubber and the R35 was on road going MPSS.*


Yes, You did say that CT17. 



CT17 said:


> *And being tuned to 50% more power doesn't really make it a fair comparison anyway. *


Why not?? It certainly helps to level the playing field a bit!

JM2PW!


----------



## Mookistar (Feb 5, 2004)

I find this thread a bit desperate. The Old Skylines are great but the R35 is clearly a better car. Fun doesn't come into it because you might as well buy an atom if that's the argument and laps times are all good and well but the R35 does it with its eyes closed. A Skyline with twice the standard power will be a right handful and noisy and old fashioned to boot. 


All IMHO of course.


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

Little bit flawed with regards to the R32 having only 400bhp and smaller narrow wheels and tyres.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHsLjYMEX4c


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

Mookistar said:


> * A Skyline with twice the standard power will be a right handful and noisy and old fashioned to boot.
> 
> 
> All IMHO of course.*


Well not quite exactly double the standard power, Mine has apparently got 520bhp going by the paper work supplied in its History and I've no reason to doubt it. Its not a handful to drive, even in the wet. BMW M cars are more ar$e out skittish than my GT-R! Its not especially noisy when compared with other Skylines and I wouldn't call it old fashioned just because its got a clutch pedal and manual gearbox Mook!:chuckle:

HTH!


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

K66 SKY said:


> Well not quite exactly double the standard power, Mine has apparently got 520bhp going by the paper work supplied in its History and I've no reason to doubt it. Its not a handful to drive, even in the wet. BMW M cars are more ar$e out skittish than my GT-R! Its not especially noisy when compared with other Skylines and I wouldn't call it old fashioned just because its got a clutch pedal and manual gearbox Mook!:chuckle:
> 
> HTH!


To suggest that any 500+ bhp skyline isnt a handful in the wet is simply bizzaire 

The trouble is some people are taking this topic personally . 

It isnt a sleight on anyones pride and joy.to say that a car that outperforms everything in its price range today by a street and has technology that didnt exist 20 or so years ago actually handles better than theIr older GTR.


----------



## Mookistar (Feb 5, 2004)

RSVFOUR said:


> To suggest that any 500+ bhp skyline isnt a handful in the wet is simply bizzaire
> 
> The trouble is some people are taking this topic personally .
> 
> It isnt a sleight on anyones pride and joy.to say that a car that outperforms everything in its price range today by a street and has technology that didnt exist 20 or so years ago actually handles better than theIr older GTR.


THIS ^^^:clap::clap::clap:


----------



## markM3 (Jan 7, 2008)

I would love to see a modified R32/33/34 article and we all know a HEAVILY modified skyline GTR can match or beat a 35, even mildly tuned one - see the Mines R34 beating a few in the BM vid on youtube, but the Skyline have to be heavily modified to stand a chance and rightly so. If the latest 911 turbo struggled against a standard 1989 model we would all be laughing at Porsche!

Gansan of Best Motoring drove a (standard?) R33 Vspec round the Nurburgring in 8.01. A standard(?) '89 R32 did it in 8.22. A standard R35 now does it in 7.17!! That is probably similar to the Falken R34 race car, and just think how special that was!!

In the modified R32/33/34/35 youtube battle, the R32 ran increased boost for the race, hence why he got too much wheelspin off the line. GTSS with 1.3 bar would be nearer 500bhp than 400bhp.

Sam (Git-R) has beaten the time Steve Sutcliffe set in a 2013 R35 rounds Brands Indy, but his car ran Nismo arms, AP front brakes, chassis stiffening, rock hard top of the range Teins, ARBs, uprated diff, over 500bhp along with countless laps of Brands in a car he knows well and maybe the circuit suited the lighter R32.....can't see his R32GTR doing a 7.17 lap at the Nurburgring though, but would love to see an EVO article trying this! 

I've driven a stage 1 R35 and it was awesomely cappable, but still prefered my old R32! 

Rambling over!

Cheers,


----------



## PS30-SB (Jun 13, 2003)

David.Yu said:


> As for standard cars, I thought that would have been obvious, it's a comparison of the different generations of GT-R as they came from the factory.


Missing two generations and three distinct models though, eh?

Don't worry, I understand why. I just hope the origin and the _weight_ ( of responsibility as much as anything else ) of that 'GT-R' emblem - which was _revived_ for the BNR32 - is conveyed in the article. 

Usually it gets glossed over or damned with faint praise in articles which concentrate on the later generation cars, but when the PGC10 debuted in February 1969 it - like the BNR32 that followed it 20 years later - was something of a mini technological marvel for a saloon car that the general public could walk into a showroom and actually _buy_. On World terms, let alone - and _especially_ - for Japan.


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

PS30-SB said:


> Missing two generations and three distinct models though, eh?
> 
> Don't worry, I understand why. I just hope the origin and the _weight_ ( of responsibility as much as anything else ) of that 'GT-R' emblem - which was _revived_ for the BNR32 - is conveyed in the article.
> 
> Usually it gets glossed over or damned with faint praise in articles which concentrate on the later generation cars, but when the PGC10 debuted in February 1969 it - like the BNR32 that followed it 20 years later - was something of a mini technological marvel for a saloon car that the general public could walk into a showroom and actually _buy_. On World terms, let alone - and _especially_ - for Japan.


The guys at evo are massive fans of the earlier Skyline GT-Rs too, but by any terms, they are definitely in the "classic car" category now, whereas the R32 is still considered fairly modern (and the R33 and R34 were developments of that).

And as you say, the chances of getting to drive a standard, but perfect, Hakosuka and Kenmeri in the UK was considered next to impossible.
But editor Nick Trott did tweet recently that a Hakosuka GT-R would be the only car he would trade his 911 in for. I pointed out he'd have to add an awful lot of cash to that trade... :chuckle:


----------



## PS30-SB (Jun 13, 2003)

David.Yu said:


> The guys at evo are massive fans of the earlier Skyline GT-Rs too, but by any terms, they are definitely in the "classic car" category now, whereas the R32 is still considered fairly modern (and the R33 and R34 were developments of that).


At 25 years old, I'd say the BNR32 is edging towards 'classic car' status too. It's already firmly in the ranks of the 'neo classic', for sure.

For context, the gap in years between the PGC10 and the BNR32 was pretty much the same as the gap between the BNR32 and the R35. For me, the three 'Great Leaps Forward' were the PGC10, the BNR32 and the R35. 



David.Yu said:


> And as you say, the chances of getting to drive a standard, but perfect, Hakosuka and Kenmeri in the UK was considered next to impossible.


Understood. But Mohammed has to _go to the mountain_, as the mountain isn't going to come to _him_. These are Japanese cars. Do it properly. Go to Japan!

At the very least, I hope the PGC10, KPGC10 and KPGC110 get a mention? It might be nice if a hat was tipped to the PS30 and PS30-SB too ( as the great _missing link_ of S20-powered cul-de-sacs ).

My main point is that most of the key players in the creation of the BNR32 - the designers, stylists, engineers, the planners, the test and development drivers and even the bean counters - were also part of the teams that created the PGC10, KPGC10 and KPGC110. Too many people seem to be ready to believe that the BNR32 came out of nowhere, but it was the product of a school of excellence that had already created some minor marvels.

Whenever I see mention of the BNR32 in the English language press, or on the internet, it never seems to put the car _in that context_. 



David.Yu said:


> But editor Nick Trott did tweet recently that a Hakosuka GT-R would be the only car he would trade his 911 in for.


Has he ever driven one?


----------



## V1H (Aug 30, 2001)

The test i would like to see is a std r32 gtr, possibly a V spec though that does have better brakes and attesa, against a Porsche 959. Both on modern rubber, and the gtr delimited to a safe limit for the turbos but everything else stock. It would be interesting to see how close a std gtr without the 280bhp handicap, gets to a 959, a car that apparently Niissan look at when designing the 4wd system. I know it won't compare in terms of rarity, desirability and the characteristics will be different because of their respective layout but on the road will the 959 be a 'better' car?.

It would also be nice to have performance figures for the gtr with stage1/350ish bhp, 400+ would be nicer but that would be at the limit for the standard turbos & injectors, guessing you wouldn't run 959 figures now but there should be figures in the archives.

EVO/David, any chance of this please? was really interest in the Top Gear episode with the F40 & the 959 lap time but they copped out i guess.


----------



## Cris (Sep 17, 2007)

Mookistar said:


> I find this thread a bit desperate. The Old Skylines are great but the R35 is clearly a better car. ...


With respect that's entirely subjective.

An R35 is faster, more powerful etc but that deson't necessarily make it better because it depends on your judgement of better.

For some yes it is the better car. For others perhaps not.

I remember reading an article about a Miura where the journalist commented that the hire diesel (Megane perhaps) was quicker down the road than the Miura. Clearly no suggestion was made that the Miura was better. However ask my Missus and she'd probably say that the Megane was the better car.


----------



## Cris (Sep 17, 2007)

PS30-SB said:


> ...
> 
> For context, the gap in years between the PGC10 and the BNR32 was pretty much the same as the gap between the BNR32 and the R35. For me, the three 'Great Leaps Forward' were the PGC10, the BNR32 and the R35.
> 
> ...


I think that this is perhaps the perfect idea of an interesting article. With respect to the other cars these three models provide the big changes with the inbetweeners being developments of the platforms.

I always wondered about the Prince connection. Has the Prince factory always been where the exciting cars have been built. Are the teams/culture of Prince an island within Nissan still or has all trace faded.

Anyway enough of my musings. Let's argue about lap times, tyre choices and boost levels. Would be a discussion about GTRs without them!


----------



## GTR Cook (Apr 22, 2008)

The article/test i would like to see would not be a battle between the 32,33 or 34, but between the 33/34 and its equivalent rivals. The 32 and 35 were/are streets ahead of there competition and rightly so.

Theres a video on youtube thats shows how the "gentlemans agreement" held back the Japanese cars against the likes of Porsche that had close to 500bhp when the 34 was sold with 317 bhp. Would be interested to see how the 33 and 34 would have got on if they were allowed to have similar power from the factory, especially as most are probably in the 4-500 bhp category anyway!

Probably wouldn't be for the masses but would interest me.


----------



## markM3 (Jan 7, 2008)

V1H, I have a Car & Driver article from 1992ish where they test an R32 running they reckon 350bhp. Think the 0 - 100 time was 11.2 seconds from memory.

Cheers,

Mark


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

You are also forgetting the R31 GTS-R which would have also played a big role in the development of the R32 also the knowledge gained on track. The R32 was a major step up from its predecessor the R31.



PS30-SB said:


> At 25 years old, I'd say the BNR32 is edging towards 'classic car' status too. It's already firmly in the ranks of the 'neo classic', for sure.
> 
> For context, the gap in years between the PGC10 and the BNR32 was pretty much the same as the gap between the BNR32 and the R35. For me, the three 'Great Leaps Forward' were the PGC10, the BNR32 and the R35.
> 
> ...


----------



## Cris (Sep 17, 2007)

GTR Cook said:


> The article/test i would like to see would not be a battle between the 32,33 or 34, but between the 33/34 and its equivalent rivals. The 32 and 35 were/are streets ahead of there competition and rightly so.
> 
> Theres a video on youtube thats shows how the "gentlemans agreement" held back the Japanese cars against the likes of Porsche that had close to 500bhp when the 34 was sold with 317 bhp. Would be interested to see how the 33 and 34 would have got on if they were allowed to have similar power from the factory, especially as most are probably in the 4-500 bhp category anyway!
> 
> Probably wouldn't be for the masses but would interest me.


If it helps a derestricted R32/33 would have a bit less than 400bhp. Not sure about R34s but with their better turbos I'd guess 420bhp. I'm sure an R34 meister will confirm/deny.

On that basis it does make the R32 exceptional with the lead being erroded. I'm pretty sure than a 996 Turbo would have about the same as a destricted R34 though it is a bigger heavier car.


----------



## GTR Cook (Apr 22, 2008)

Cris said:


> If it helps a derestricted R32/33 would have a bit less than 400bhp. Not sure about R34s but with their better turbos I'd guess 420bhp. I'm sure an R34 meister will confirm/deny.
> 
> On that basis it does make the R32 exceptional with the lead being erroded. I'm pretty sure than a 996 Turbo would have about the same as a destricted R34 though it is a bigger heavier car.


My 34 ran 420 on the standard turbo's so your spot on :bowdown1:

Thats the comparison that interests me, how much other manufacturers were able to progress from when the 32 spanked them, when the 33 and 34 were held back.


----------



## PS30-SB (Jun 13, 2003)

FRRACER said:


> You are also forgetting the R31 GTS-R which would have also played a big role in the development of the R32 also the knowledge gained on track. The R32 was a major step up from its predecessor the R31.


I'm not forgetting _anything_. The GTS-R didn't get the hallowed 'GT-R' emblem that it aspired to because it wasn't thought to be enough of a complete package to warrant it. That probably says more about the esteem and _weight_ that the 'GT-R' emblem carried for the team at Murayama than how good the GTS-R was. Personally I _love_ the GTS-R, but you have to admit that it was never going to dominate the race series that it was homologated to race in. Unlike the BNR32 ( or indeed the PGC10 and KPGC10 ). 

The truth is that there was a direct line of evolution between the S20-engined cars, then the FJ-engined cars ( R30-series Skylines and S110-series Silvia / 240RS ) and - eventually - the RB-engined cars. The FJ is the 'missing link' in the engine story, as is the hiccup caused by the 'Oil Shock' ( one of the main reasons why they went back to four-bangers ) but there's a whole load of racing and rallying activity - including assaults on the prestige races such as the Daytona 24hrs and Le Mans 24hrs - which helped to create not only the expertise, but also the environment and the _zeitgeist_ in which the BNR32 was created.


----------



## moleman (Jun 3, 2002)

K66 SKY said:


> When Dirk Schoysman originally lapped the Nürburgring in 7m 59sec, No one at Nissan would volunteer precisely just how much it weighed or the horse power that car made. Power outputs of 400bhp to 450bhp have been suggested by those who know the Ring!
> 
> All Nissan would confirm is that this R33 GT-R was a battered old test mule worth nothing to anyone. It had a racing seat, a roll cage and it was _"Set-up"_ exactly to Dirk's liking. This record came after three solid days of testing whilst this Banzai lap necessitated cutting every corner and bouncing off every curb.



...What Dirk said -


> "ALL parts were standard (including tyres). But a few items were programmed to my liking: the 4wheel steering and especially the 4WD (ETS). So the balance of the car was excellent (no understeer and superb traction). My engine had a bit more boost too (I never had any figure, the difference was not substantial but of course, there were a few seconds in that). Further, it was an aggressive lap, cutting corners a lot etc. (not my usual style).


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

RSVFOUR said:


> *To suggest that any 500+ bhp skyline isnt a handful in the wet is simply bizzaire *





Mookistar said:


> *HIS ^^^:clap::clap::clap:*


Ok...For these two people above, Maybe I should clarify a little....



Compared to some of the other 500bhp+ cars I've driven or experienced like my friend Chris' old 5.7L Supercharged V8 HSV Commodore _(pictured above)_ for instance which was an absolute tail happy traction knightmare in the dry....so much so you'd never think about using it in the wet, My Skyline GT-R is an absolute pussy-cat when used in direct _"bhp v's bhp"_ vehicle comparison!

When driven sensibly, My GT-R's not been dangerous to be used daily on the commute to Work, Can easily be used for other mundane tasks like Shopping or visiting Family and it doesn't bite or act up sat in bumper to bumper Traffic either. Its just a Car and can be used as one quite easily without maiming Children or killing Pensioners in the process.

Now Mook/RSVFOUR, If I was trying to say the same tame things about something like the old Carlton TS6000 pictured below....























Then I could fully understand why you two Guys were trying to mock me for being full of shit or just plain unrealistic. 

So...This 90's Supercar _(a.k.a. My Skyline)_ this past year has been as easy to live with and use daily as a bloody Nissan Mirca is, Which is not something I can say the same for other fast, rare or modified cars I've either owned, experienced or driven in the past two decades chaps!

I do HTH!:wavey:


----------



## Mookistar (Feb 5, 2004)

I just think it's a dumb argument. Like comparing Vinyl to CD's are using "warmth" as the basis of your argument.


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

Mookistar said:


> *I just think it's a dumb argument. Like comparing Vinyl to CD's are using "warmth" as the basis of your argument.*


That's your opinion Mook and you are quite entitled to have it. I don't share your view here because Evo magazine started this whole discussion when they asked on the forum for standard GT-R's not long after printing this from Jethro Bovingdon in their April edition magazine...



The Old R34 should have had its ar$e kicked to kingdom come if you had your way Mook but that didn't happen. That's why some of us would like to see a higher powered Skyline used in a similar comparison for a change!

JM2PW!


----------



## markM3 (Jan 7, 2008)

The old, caparatively softly sprung r32/33/34 are probably a lot nicer to drive than the stiffer GTR35 with it's wider tyres in very wet conditions.

Let's not argue too much, as without a direct comparison on circuit it's all conjecture.

I shall be down at Brands on the 7th with a mix of differently modded 32s & 33s along with a 600bhp 35..........albeit I'm not the best driver!


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

markM3 said:


> The old, caparatively softly sprung r32/33/34 are probably a lot nicer to drive than the stiffer GTR35 with it's wider tyres in very wet conditions.
> 
> Let's not argue too much, as without a direct comparison on circuit it's all conjecture.
> 
> I shall be down at Brands on the 7th with a mix of differently modded 32s & 33s along with a 600bhp 35..........albeit I'm not the best driver!


Looks like the 7th will be an epic day, why not put Kourosh in your car and hammer a few R35's to shame :chuckle:


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

K66 SKY said:


> That's your opinion Mook and you are quite entitled to have it. I don't share your view here because Evo magazine started this whole discussion when they asked on the forum for standard GT-R's not long after printing this from Jethro Bovingdon in their April edition magazine...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In anycase you cannot compare std R32/R33/R34 to a GTR because they came out of the factory in a detuned form. To make it more equal on footing with the GTR you would need a power hike to atleast 580bhp, bigger brakes all around 6 port and 4 pots, uprated suspension etc. The GTR comes with more power, better brakes, better suspension as standard as Nissan really took the car out of a box to another level. You can compare an R34 Z tune to a GTR and that would be a more fair test.


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

FRRACER said:


> *You can compare an R34 Z tune to a GTR and that would be a more fair test.*


Agreed & that sounds more like it!:thumbsup:


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

While looking for a Z tune vs GTR I found this 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP7zj8NgU9g


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

And these GTR's don't seem any quicker than the R34's above.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=au2v9TNnqHc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sSXf4XWZ_M


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

FRRACER said:


> *While looking for a Z tune vs GTR I found this
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dP7zj8NgU9g*


A good find there FRRACER!

Its the car magazine articles _(I've collected a few over the years)_ about cars built just like those above that sparked my interest in the Skyline GT-R. As good as the standard BCNR33 was, It was the features in CCC and Redline of vehicles like Nick Paddy's 580bhp awesome machine with its then high tech wizardry that really sparked my lust, imagination and helped to develop my soft spot for the Skyline models!

Other articles like this one below....



were _*SO*_ evocative to me that I knew that if I was ever lucky enough to be looking to buy a GT-R, It would have to be as close to this magic manageable 500bhp as possible. The sheer sophistication of how our old cars handle their increased performance is impressive whilst still being fun by flattering out our existing driving skills and deceptively safe when compared to similar old tech high powered cars with _"edge-of-your-seat"_ capabilities.

So if GT-R's like this above existed and were frequently tested against other benchmarks during 1997-1999 to get headline features.....Why not bring them out of the shadows again and go head to head with the current Nissan flag ship?


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

you are completely missing the point. 

EVO decided their GTR article was going to be about standard cars , 
No one on this forum asked for or suggested the topic. The fact that you would have preferred it to be on a different topic is perfectly understandable especially as your car isnt stock but it is their mag so they choose the topics.

So if you have a problem write to Evo 

So having decided on the format they posted on here looking for standard cars and obviously I was pleased to offer my car as it was what they asked for. 

Maybe the article will show just how good the GTR was before modding cos the modded route has been done to death


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

RSVFOUR said:


> *you are completely missing the point.
> 
> EVO decided their GTR article was going to be about standard cars ,*


Now who's the one taking this open discussion too personally RSVFOUR??

I welcome another GT-R mag feature but I'm at the opposite end of the spectrum who feel that the standard car stuffs been yet again done to death also. Without going mad searching for proof, here are a few examples :-

*Car Dec 1996* - Lotus Elise v's Impreza Turbo v's MGF v's Honda NSX v's Peugeot 106 GTi v's Caterham Superlight v's Peugeot 306 GTi v's Lamborgihini Diablo SV v's Toyota Supra v's M-B E36 AMG v's Jaguar XK8 v's Primera SRi v's Porsche 911 v's R33 GT-R V-Spec v's BMW M3 v's BMW 328i v's Citroen Xantia v's Alfa Romeo GTV v's BMW 318ti Compact v's TVR Cerbera = _Skyline finishes a miserable 14th._

*Auto Express Oct 1997* - R33 GT-R V-Spec v's Maserati Ghibli Cup v's Honda NSX - _Skyline comes 1st._

*Top Gear Oct 1997* - R33 GT-R V-Spec v's M3 Evo v's Corvette v's 911 Carrera v's NSX 3.2 v's Ferrari 355 GTS v's Schnitzer CLSII = _Schnitzer CLSII wins - Skyline is 4th as Dirk cannot match his 7m 59sec lap time._

*Auto Express Dec 1997* - Porsche 911 v's Maserati Ghibli Cup v's TVR Cerbera v's Jaguar XK8 v's R33 GT-R V-Spec v's Honda NSX = _Skyline in 2nd behind the winning Porsche 911._

*Car Magazine Jan 1998* - R33 GT-R v's Porsche 911 v's Honda NSX = _Porsche wins the test purely on passion - Skyline is 2nd._

*Performance Car Feb 1998* - Audi quattro 20v v's Escort Cosworth v's Delta Intergale v's R33 GT-R V-Spec v's Impreza = _Skyline is 4th due to £50k price tag._

*Top Gear July 1998* - Lotus Esprit V8 GT v's R33 GT-R V-Spec = _Lotus wins thanks to its lower weight (1340kgs v's 1540kgs) and higher bhp ([email protected] v's [email protected])._

*Top Gear Feb 1999* - Lancer Evo 5 v's R33 GT-R V-Spec v's Impreza 22B = _Skyline finishes last - 22B is the winner._

*Top Gear Oct 1999* - E39 BMW M5 v's Lancer Evo 6 v's R34 GT-R v's Porscher 911 GT3 = _Skyline is 1st._

*Car July 2000* - Audi RS4 v's R34 GT-R V-Spec = _Audi wins due to practicality._

Yes magazines like Car & Car Conversions, Fast Car, Redline, Banzai, Japanese Performance and dare I even say Max Power have featured mega powered Skylines on their own for well over a decade now but none of these motoring magazines seem to feature modified cars going against anything else. Is it so bad to ask David Yu who has a better opportunity than me to speak to Nick Trott asking to consider this kind of test feature for a possible future issue?




RSVFOUR said:


> *So if you have a problem write to Evo*


Have done so many times in the past and will do it again matey!:thumbsup:




RSVFOUR said:


> *Maybe the article will show just how good the GTR was before modding cos the modded route has been done to death*


We already know how good they were standard. Its why I personally wanted a fettled version over a stock item. I'll agree that the modded theme with just one ultimate Skyline GT-R pictured on its own has been done to death RSVFOUR, That's why I'd instead like to read for once about a modified motor going toe-to-toe with a new stock GT-R to find out how it fairs when power outputs are evenly matched. 

JM2PW!


----------



## Mookistar (Feb 5, 2004)

Screw EVO. Why not arrange something yourself via the GTROC. They have racers amongst thier ranks. They would be qualified to do a proper test. EVO won't be interested as it's not what thier target audience would really care about. 

The GTROC could do it tho.


----------



## moleman (Jun 3, 2002)

Mookistar said:


> They have racers amongst thier ranks. They would be qualified to do a proper test.


Nah. The best qualified person to conduct such a test would be Colin Hoad.


----------



## markM3 (Jan 7, 2008)

Maybe a gtr how fast at Bedford could be arranged. How much would it be to hire a circuit?


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

moleman said:


> Nah. The best qualified person to conduct such a test would be Colin Hoad.


Interesting? Why Colin over someone like Johnny Cocker? Being a driver coach does not necessarily mean that they are quick. You need a driver who can push the car and get every last tenth out of it on track. I have seen driver coaches who may be good on theory and teaching but when they have raced they lack that pace compared to their rivals.


----------



## moleman (Jun 3, 2002)

Colin is far more than a "driver coach" (sic). Amongst many other professional achievements, he worked for Nissan, was involved in chassis development of the 350Z, has probably driven more GT-Rs of the last four generations than most, if not all on here, and is probably far better placed to access chassis dynamics than most people who don't hold a super licence.

If you just want...


FRRACER said:


> quick


...set up a drag race.


Watched Johnny do some awesome driving for Drayson at Brands about 5 years ago. Been a fan ever since.


----------



## K66 SKY (Jan 25, 2005)

Mookistar said:


> *Screw EVO. Why not arrange something yourself via the GTROC. *


I didn't know such a thing would be possible? The only reason I'm an Evo mag fan and mention them here is because they don't only concentrate their articles on one thing only Mook. I do like the way that they write about our cars on road abilities against rivals and about its Track performance also! Hence why they called the Feature I'm referring to as the _*"Ultiamte 4x4 Test"*_....

What really did piss me off though is when they _(as usual)_ complained that the standard R34 GT-R felt asthmatic, harsh and slow on the Public roads but it then went on to match an R35 around Anglesey. Those at Evo already know what a 276bhp RB26DETT feels like because they've written reports about stock R32's/R33's & R34's at least four or maybe five times now in their previous 195 issues! I'm sure the _*"FEEL"*_ of these unmolested vehicles ain't gonna change that much in almost two decades of road testing??

So instead of those at Evo Towers wasting the Readers time by stating the bleeding obvious when moaning about Our Japanese Supercars that aren't anymore powerful than a 3.0L E36 BMW M3 when its in the original Factory state of Tune, Why not spice things up and test a modified R32/R33/R34 with at least 500bhp available instead to make things a bit more equal to cars like the Ferrari FF/Porche 911 Turbo/Lamborghini Aventador LP700-4/Audi R8 V10 Plus/Nissan GT-R/Mercedes-Benz A45 AMG and Audi RS Q3 that were used in their test so perhaps these newer motors wouldn't look so superior to our old Skyline's anymore?!

I welcome any Magazine who still writes fresh articles about Our older GT-R's but fear this latest attempt by Evo will be just a little bit _"samey"_ as the regurgitated factual stuff they've printed in their hallowed pages once before....:bawling:


----------



## Dshrugs (Apr 15, 2014)

Ive got a standard r33 with a 40th anniversary body kit. only changes are minor things in the interior.


----------



## Trev (Nov 1, 2003)

Dshrugs said:


> Ive got a standard r33 with a 40th anniversary body kit. only changes are minor things in the interior.


Way too late to the party pal!


----------



## David.Yu (Jun 28, 2001)

Just checking everybody knows this issue has been out in the shops for over a week now. :wavey:

Many thanks again to Brian and Harry for taking the time to take part.


----------



## FRRACER (Jun 23, 2013)

I had a quick skim of it in WHSmiths good issue with lots of info on historic skylines and race spec ones!


----------



## SPEED MERCHANT (Jun 5, 2006)

Sneaky old photo of my car in the feature too


----------



## RSVFOUR (May 1, 2006)

And one of the gold top secret 33


----------



## Initialdan (Mar 26, 2014)

Sat and read all 24 pages yesterday! Really good read, and lots of love for the R32


----------

