That's what I've got myself after selling my GT...

[RomanTaylor]

...S13 Hatch with SR20DET! I love it. Nothing like FWD 1ZZ.
Running 7psi low / 11psi high boost at the moment.

http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs659.snc4/59974_1609298519157_1437034884_1634800_7625019_n.j pg
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash2/hs347.ash2/62747_1609298679161_1437034884_1634802_3525843_n.j pg
Those got to go soon.. I kinda like it but function > form.
http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs707.snc4/62747_1609298719162_1437034884_1634803_350034_n.jp g

T28, tune, LSD, Different Exhaust, oil cooler (debating still), wheels, and tint are coming soon.. so do many tires and multiple sets of wheels, I think I am starting to get into drifting scene slowly. :gap:

Rainy days no longer make me depressed :)

[Carbonized_GT]

Not bad.

Sileighty that bitch.

[Zero]

Sileighty conversion looks good, but I like s15 headlights on the fastback. :drool:

http://www.autospecsltd.com/Cars_For_Sale/GN_92S15front180sx/01s15fronted180sxfront.jpg


Your 240sx is clean. I'm a fan of them.

[Carbonized_GT]

The S15 front conversion can still be considered a 'sileighty'. :wiggle:

[Zero]

'sileighty'When I hear that, I think of an s13 front end conversion. :shrugs:

[Carbonized_GT]

I equally like the s13 & s15 front so i tried to cover all bases with just 'sileighty'.

[Zero]

s15 headlights are one of the sexiest designs I have seen. :drool:

[RomanTaylor]

Thanks.

I am not fan of Sil80 looks. I actually want to rock pop-ups for some time! But if I decide to keep this car for long enough, S13.5 is what I want to do (S15 front end).

Here is my opinion on this:
S13 Coupe looks best with skyline front
S13 Hatch looks best with S15 front
S14 Looks best with Kouki front

Eventually my plan is to turn it into a dedicated track car.. E46 M3 or E39 M5 is my dream daily :rolleyes:

[marc]

not my cup of tea but I guess its an upgrade from a Celica GT.

[GSBoek]

I need to edumacate myself on the whole sileighty, kouki jargon.

[marc]

I need to edumacate myself on the whole sileighty, kouki jargon.

not worth the space it would take up in your brain.

[GSBoek]

:chuckles:

[RomanTaylor]

Do any of you know if I can ride a scooter (>50cc) without drivers license in Oregon? :D

[Motor]

http://chzgifs.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/chuck.gif

[GSBoek]

Do any of you know if I can ride a scooter (>50cc) without drivers license in Oregon? :gap: You can. If it's against the law or not is another matter. :chuckles:

[RomanTaylor]

not my cup of tea but I guess its an upgrade from a Celica GT.

Just wondering, what's your opinion on S13 240SX vs 944, Marc?
Stock vs stock (2.4 vs 2.5 n/a engines)

They seem to be very similar cars in many ways. I find Nissans and Mazdas easiest to work on. I'd say 944 is a good bit harder to work on then S13's, however 944 does have much better interior hands down.

From what I understand (basing on your signatures :)) - you're into Porsches, so I just wanted to hear your input on this.

[Carbonized_GT]

Oh god this should be good....
:eatpop:

[SilverCelly37]

Oh god this should be good....
:eatpop:

x2

[marc]

Just wondering, what's your opinion on S13 240SX vs 944, Marc?
Stock vs stock (2.4 vs 2.5 n/a engines)

They seem to be very similar cars in many ways. I find Nissans and Mazdas easiest to work on. I'd say 944 is a good bit harder to work on then S13's, however 944 does have much better interior hands down.

From what I understand (basing on your signatures :)) - you're into Porsches, so I just wanted to hear your input on this.

You're asking me to compare a Japanese rustbucket to the single greatest handling car of the 1980s (and still one of the best handling cars available to date)?

Well, my friend used to have an S13, and I currently own a 944S, have owned a 944 Turbo (951), and have driven lots of 944s.

First, lets look at classing for autocross - classing is done by comparing how fast the cars actually are, and then putting them in the appropriate class.

The 944 is in E stock, the 240SX is in G-Stock, so the tards at the SCCA say that the 944 is faster than the 240SX in stock form.

But what if we mod them for the street (street touring class)? The 944 is in STR, the 240SX is in simple ST. So, again, the SCCA says the 944 is a faster car.

How about prepped as a street legal race car (street prepared class)? The SCCA puts the 944 in CSP, they place the 240SX in DSP. Once more, its faster.

I can't find any lap times for the 240SX, so I can't compare it on a more open track, but I will say that I race at Watkins Glen, and the 944s have no problem keeping up with brand new, modern 911s and everything in between. The 944 Turbos are downright monsters, but we're not getting into that in this discussion as you wanted to keep it to the NA cars.

As far as top speed is concerned, the bottom of the barrel 944 will hit 141.36 mph, or 228 km/h. The 240SX is limited to 115 mph. Top speed with the limiter removed is still roughly 120 mph.

How about the engine? The Porsche engine is built in house by Porsche and features balance shafts to ensure incredibly smooth running. In fact, it is still lauded today as one of the smoothest 4 cylinders ever made. The 240SX's engine comes from a truck.

Finally, lets look at the chassis. The 944 is constructed of fully galvanized steel that will not rust, ever. It has a transaxle which delivers a perfect 50/50 weight distribution by mounting the transmission at the rear of the car. It was tuned by the winningest motor company of all time. It was built to be a sports car and nothing else.

The 240SX is built out of cheap steel that is obvious by the fact that 99% of them are rusted out at this point. It was built as a cheap, fun sport compact car.

So, there you have it - a little objective fact, a little biased opinion. That's why a 1987 944 costs twice as much as a 1995 240SX, even today.

[phaqgm]

You're asking me to compare a Japanese rustbucket to the single greatest handling car of the 1980s (and still one of the best handling cars available to date)?

Well, my friend used to have an S13, and I currently own a 944S, have owned a 944 Turbo (951), and have driven lots of 944s.

First, lets look at classing for autocross - classing is done by comparing how fast the cars actually are, and then putting them in the appropriate class.

The 944 is in E stock, the 240SX is in G-Stock, so the tards at the SCCA say that the 944 is faster than the 240SX in stock form.

But what if we mod them for the street (street touring class)? The 944 is in STR, the 240SX is in simple ST. So, again, the SCCA says the 944 is a faster car.

How about prepped as a street legal race car (street prepared class)? The SCCA puts the 944 in CSP, they place the 240SX in DSP. Once more, its faster.

I can't find any lap times for the 240SX, so I can't compare it on a more open track, but I will say that I race at Watkins Glen, and the 944s have no problem keeping up with brand new, modern 911s and everything in between. The 944 Turbos are downright monsters, but we're not getting into that in this discussion as you wanted to keep it to the NA cars.

As far as top speed is concerned, the bottom of the barrel 944 will hit 141.36 mph, or 228 km/h. The 240SX is limited to 115 mph. Top speed with the limiter removed is still roughly 120 mph.

How about the engine? The Porsche engine is built in house by Porsche and features balance shafts to ensure incredibly smooth running. In fact, it is still lauded today as one of the smoothest 4 cylinders ever made. The 240SX's engine comes from a truck.

Finally, lets look at the chassis. The 944 is constructed of fully galvanized steel that will not rust, ever. It has a transaxle which delivers a perfect 50/50 weight distribution by mounting the transmission at the rear of the car. It was tuned by the winningest motor company of all time. It was built to be a sports car and nothing else.

The 240SX is built out of cheap steel that is obvious by the fact that 99% of them are rusted out at this point. It was built as a cheap, fun sport compact car.

So, there you have it - a little objective fact, a little biased opinion. That's why a 1987 944 costs twice as much as a 1995 240SX, even today.

I definitely agree with Marc on this one. The 944 was a superbly designed chassis. I know Marc didn't want to touch on the 944 Turbo, but I will. I nearly bought one 10 years ago, but it was sold out from under me at the dealership. When I was test driving the 951 I took it into a 15 mph corner at 40 mph and rolled on the throttle for a controlled over steer exit. The handling and road feel of the 944 chassis is amazing. It's almost telepathic. It doesn't take much to make a 944 Turbo outperform a 911 on a racetrack. I am pretty certain that I will add one to my collection some day. Preferably a 944 Turbo S which has a little more power than the standard 944 Turbo, and even better suspension and brakes. Having driven both the 240 and the 944's, my nod goes to the 944 without question.

[GSBoek]

The 944 is constructed of fully galvanized steel that will not rust, ever.
Ahem!

http://i618.photobucket.com/albums/tt266/pontifex4/951%20stereo/floorrust.jpg

[RomanTaylor]

Marc, do you mind if I quote your post on Nissan forums? I am not saying you're wrong or right, I just want to heard more opinions on this and see what others have to say.
(I'll post a link in this thread as well so you guys can read it)

[marc]

Marc, do you mind if I quote your post on Nissan forums? I am not saying you're wrong or right, I just want to heard more opinions on this and see what others have to say.
(I'll post a link in this thread as well so you guys can read it)

I don't care what you say on the Niss-anne forums, but I already know what the Niss-anne fanboys will say.

And I guarantee 100% of the fanboys have never ever driven a 944.