longsh07

Pretty sure whoever buys that m spec will be doing no different to you paying 80k off your mortgage, I.e making an investment, it will sit in a private collection and not see a road in anger, pretty sad really

Agreed. It is a real shame.

I can see it from both sides though, If you own something like this it's nice to keep it pristine though if it were me I'd want to drive it everywhere to show it off!

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

 

If you want a realistic answer I'd spend that £80K on paying of a chunk of mortgage

 

With current interest rates of below 1.5% for many mortgage products a £80k mortgage debt over 25 years only incur interest payments of £15k. Inflation over the same time period will probably mean realistically the value of the debt will be dropping year on year.

 

Currently I wouldn't bother clearing £80k off the mortgage, if you have to spend it use it to do £80k worth of renovation to the house. Your likely add more value compared to the savings made by not paying interest.

 

Ofcourse in 12-24months times things could be different, but currently monetary policy is to make us stop saving and spend. With the whole housing market now dependent/use to loe interest rates I cannot see that changing anytime soon.

That may work for you but my house is a new build that currently isn't even finished yet so renovation is pointless. Plus we owe the government 20% of its value through help to buy. There is no monthly repayment on that so that's the bit I'd pay off.

What on earth happened around here? Seems a lot more serious of late. I didn't expect my throw away comments to be picked appart.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

But you can buy and build that spec for less than £50k - £35k GTR plus £15k on the modifications and you are there. There is no dream vs waste to be had here? You are paying something like £25k-£30k premium for a limited edition. Its like someone buying a £10k zed, spending £20k on it in mods and selling it for £40k?

Of course there is dream vs waste in this example.

Some people do not have the knowledge, ability, or willingness to modify a base car to an equivalent spec or alternatively they may feel a conversion from base is simply a clone rather than a genuine original. To them that may not be good enough regardless of if anyone else agrees or disagrees. With that said, the only way for them to meet their goal of owning X limited edition car is to pay the going rate.

To you that may be a waste, to someone else, they are fulfilling their dream.

Looking at it slightly differently but making the same point, I could buy a Supra and modify it to out drag a Ferrari but for someone else they might just want a Ferrari because its a Ferrari.

The Supra owner has met their goal and so has the Ferrari owner. Both may think the others goal is a waste of money. Is one right and the other wrong?

No of course not, it's all just personal opinion my friend.

For cry out loud I own a GT4 350Z, why did I pay more money for a GT4 when I could have bought a regular 350 that was just a good? Because its f*cking yellow and I like yellow.

Stupid money, not worth that by a long shot, so what it has a Nismo list that includes rad cap, oil caps and lug nuts - hardly bank breaking extras. The first 5 things on the list are the only Nismo extras of value the rest is purely guff. Hugely overpriced. Get an R33 400R instead for that money.

One persons waste of money is another persons dream. It's like posh watches, I don't see the point, others do. Still tells the time at the end of the day.

If you want a realistic answer I'd spend that £80K on paying of a chunk of mortgage but as this is car forum and that's mindbogglingly dull I didn't bother saying it.

Ridiculous money for that. Utterly ridiculous.

I give it a fortnight tops before its sold though.

Should I be lucky enough to have this sort of money to spend on a GTR then this is where my £80K would go :in_love:

I'd still gave a bit of change too!

http://torque-gt.co....4-gtr-m-spec-3/

It is a real shame having to go to every single dealer/seller full of distrust and scepticism.

Have you tried Torque-GT? No personal experience but I've heard a lot of good things.

I have no idea what your budget it but they might be able to find you a decent fresh import without all this hassle.

Given I've seen some destroy their Porsche by lifting off I don't blame them.

In my case at least the owner was courteous enough to let me past. I think they were just happy to be out enjoying their car on a leisurely Sunday pootle.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

Bloody slow, those Ferraris!

Agreed I had a similar problem a Ferrari in my FN2.

My FN2 is stock except for a set of AD08R tyres, braided brake lines and a set of YellowStuff pads.

Watching this back reminds me you don't really need lots of power or a dedicated track car to have fun.

Its probably a better investment to get more track time or professional tuition than spending loads of money to change cars or trying to eek out as many ponies as you can.

I had endless problems with the CEL coming on when running high flow cats even after remap. Gave up in the end and reverted to stock. The gains were totally not worth the hassle IMHO

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Afraid I agree with JetPilot and G. Really disappointed that the GTR has become so expensive. First gen GTR's were super car killers at the time but for half the price. Other manufacturers have upped their game now and the GTR just feels like an expensive fast car now. I feel like Nissan have lost their way with it totally.

Given the choice I'd spend the cash on a mint Skyline or first gen GTR.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

just a bit of an update

 

followed the key fob instructions, lamps flashed just as stated but when all done still no remote unlocking or un-imobilised and alarm stills goes off.(tried this many times)

(does this mean that the transponder is working but the remote is faulty ?)

 

 

is it time to get someone out to solve the problem ?

It's possible but id double check the battery in the remote just in case.

Is your car UK spec or import?

When I had my car remapped at Abbey Motorsport, Mark mentioned it's common for import immobilisers to fail.

Mine is a UK car but I had problems with my alarm not triggering and Nissan was not able to fix it so ended up having the factory immobiliser disabled as part of the UpRev then replaced it with an after market Cat1 alarm/immobiliser.

The only other thing I can think of is going over every fuse related to the door locks, immobiliser and alarm. I saw this somewhere in the service manual.

If you still have no joy then it would be worth speaking to an alarm specialist to see if they can offer any assistance.

Hi Phil,

Do you have spare key? If so, try that and make sure its working. If not then have you looked at the workshop manual at all? There is a procedure for registering keys in there without CONSULT-II.

I've attached the page just in case. Its from the 2005 version but I cant see it being vastly different.

If this doesn't work then it might be worth trying to get the workshop manual for your car and looking at the 'bl - BODY, LOCK & SECURITY SYSTEM' section.

bl - BODY, LOCK & SECURITY SYSTEM.pdf

I agree with Jetpilot, best check if it has been UpRev remapped already.

If you have cruise control, hold the top switch down to 'coast/set' and press the cancel button anything between 1 to 5 times then release 'coast/set'. The cruise light should flash corresponding to the number of times you pressed cancel. This is how you switch between maps.

I have no idea if its standard across the board or this is just what Abbey set on their remaps but maps 1, 2 and 3 are different throttle response levels, 4 is a valet map which is speed/rev limited, and map 5 is for running 95 octane just in case you cant find premium stuff. 5 is also rev limited lower than stock.

If you don't have cruise control I dont know of an easy way to check I'm afraid.

I'm going for my National B racing licence in a few weeks and have been getting lots of seat time in preparation for my test.

Good luck. I got my National B a few years ago at Silverstone. If you've already done some track days and you know your flags you'll have no problems with it.

I just decided one day it would be cool thing to have, I'd only driven on track once before and I managed just fine

20/25 F/R and LMGT's were 19x8.5 ET25 / 19x9.5 ET30

Came out like this:

With 20/25 they poked out 102.95mm and 115.65mm measured from hub face to outer edge (Front and Rear).

Without it was 82.95mm and 90.65mm (Front and Rear).

For comparison, I believe a set of 18x9.5 ET22 / 18x10.5 ET22 fit without rolling the arches right? If so, they poke out 98.65mm and 111.35mm.

If thats correct then 15/20 spacers on the LMGT4's would work as poke would be 97.95mm and 110.65mm

If you have them and the equipment to get the wheels off then give it a go!

When I got a set of LMGT4's I tried those with the spacers on first and it was very quickly apparent they wouldn't fit!

Slightly ironic when most insurance companies require uprated pads and discs if your running anything other than near std hp, when i insured my charged zed the question was asked, have the brakes been upgraded, no question of what make they were or did they have whatever ece r90 approval.

 

My advise would be, dont loose any sleep over it......

I spoke to my insurance company about all this too and they didn't seem to be bothered if the car was fitted with non-R90 pads.

Oddly never been required to upgrade the brakes but then again the 350 is only has intake, plenum spacer, exhaust and remap which would alter the power.

Is any consideration made for hot and cold braking performance? cos a race compound pad may perform very well when hot, but may not work at all well when cold, which is the circumstances under which the majority of braking on the road occurs.

Not from what I've seen in the UK legislation. The R90 reg does take cold and hot performance but only up to 500c I believe.

No MOT = no insurance (specialist insurance aside of course).

Nonsense. How many times does this come up still?? You're totally insured, however you may well find the insurer will reduce your payout if you write the car off.

 

MOT fail != unroadworthy.

 

Do you have a crack in your windscreen? Or a chip over the size of a pound? Do you still drive your car? How about if your numberplate fell off, could you drive your car home? How about if the numberplate didn't have the supplier on, or a non-spec flag (like a Nissan logo)? Or if the spare tyre was completely bald? Exactly. It's bobbins of the highest bobbinity.

 

Not having a pop at you fella, all of this said with a casual winky smile as you'll sit back and realise how daft the regs are.

No worries Dan, I realise your not having a pop

No MOT = No insurance was misleading to be fair. Poor choice of words on my part but was more for speed than accuracy.

My policy does say I have to maintain the car in a road worthy condition and have an MOT certificate if required or it might affect my right to claim.

As for how daft the regs are I'm all to aware as I'm sure you know from posting in my R90 thread a minute ago lol

Who are these jokers? What do they do when someone rolls in with a 350Z, check the chassis number to check whether it had 17's, 18's or 19's as standard? Do they point blank refuse to MoT anything with aftermarket wheels on, as they dont know what the OE sizes were?

 

Can someone tell me how does a smaller radius tyre reduce brake efficiency as well?

Link to their site is in the first post.

Needless to say I wont be buying anything from them.

The ECE R90 regulation is something that bothers me every time I look at brake parts and appears to be endlessly discussed online (oh the irony of adding to this).

I appreciate a lot of people do not care and will fit what ever they want anyway but for my own piece of mind I need to know the answer!

For the record I am in no way a legal expert, everything listed below has been obtained through (exessive) research to put my own mind at rest.

For those who are not aware, basically the R90 regulation controls the quality of replacement brake parts (currently brake pads but soon to be discs too) fitted to vehicles first used after 1st Sept 1999.

Sounds good right? Well the problem is the margin of error is PLUS or MINUS 15% from the performance of the OE part fitted meaning pads that perform 15% better than OE cannot obtain approval.

Every time it comes to replacing brake parts I always end up reading into this to try and get my head around it. Nothing in the ECE R90 document says that it is illegal to use these on the road but the manufactures often list on the product that, while safe, they are not approved or legal for use on the road.

Having reached out to HORIBA MIRA who do some of the testing, they said the following:

Under Statutory Instrument 1999 no. 2978, Consumer Protection, The Road Vehicles (Brake Linings Safety) Regulation 1999, brake pads have to be compliant with the Brake Devices Directive which in turn calls out the type approval requirements of UNECE Regulation 90 so the use of non-R90 approved pads is illegal except for “a relevant vehicle which was first used before 1st September 1999, provided that the replacement brake linings are not such as to cause the vehicle to contravene the version of the Braking Devices Directive that was applicable to it when it was first used “.

 

With regard to your modification query, the replacement calipers would need to be type approved units and as such should have appropriate approved pads. If you are using race brakes then I’m afraid unless they are type approved, they are not legal for road use.

Gutted.

Thankfully I decided not to stop there and looked up the 'The Road Vehicles (Brake Linings Safety) Regulation 1999'. (http://www.legislati...8/contents/made)

If you take a look at this link, paragraph (4) does say that brake linings have to be approved in accordance with ECE R90 and marked accordingly. Paragraph (5) is an exception to this for vehicles first used before 1st Sept 1999.

However, in 2003 there was an amendment made to this: (http://www.legislati...4/contents/made)

Paragraph (4) in this legislation is designed to replace paragraph (5), and if you read it, has one very important line.

(2) ( a ) Regulation 4 shall not apply in relation to replacement brake linings if -

(iii) a vehicle in respect of which the design of the braking system has been modified to enhance the brake performance beyond that required to secure EC type approval

I'm by no means a legal expert but to me that reads as though it is OK to use a non R90 pad, disc, big brake kit, that exceeds the type approved part (R90 approved OE part) as long as it meets the rest of the criteria about packing and per axle replacement (see (4) (3) ( a ) and ( b ) ).

I have no idea how this would ever be tested if the performance was ever called into question!

So there. Please by all means correct me if you think I am wrong or have misinterpreted this. As I've said twice already I am by no means an expert in this but all the information I have obtained and posted has been though my own (excessive) research. I just hope this is useful to somebody other than myself

Last reply from them:

If anything it should say 0% the rolling radius must be the same as originally fitted. I was given this info by various tyre suppliers. Might be best to phone the government. Certainly speedo error would eventually cause the biggest issue. Anyway as long as you are only reducing radius can't see it being an issue.

Certainly I've made track cars a lot quicker by going well under.

Not going to follow up with them any more on this.

I'm sure with the dice returned, technically your car would no longer be road worthy.

It's the same principle as passing an MOT with cats fitted then immediately removing them right?

If you were to get pulled over and really pi**ed on the coppers chips I'm sure they would find every reason possible to say your car is no longer road worthy because it cant pass an MOT right this minute.

No MOT = no insurance (specialist insurance aside of course).

Apparently it's part of an MOT

Hi Matt

Standard mot test covers this but a lot of cars get through with "wrong" tyres if all 4 are the same

by all means call to discuss as there are some benefits to using a smaller rolling radius but larger rolling radius will

- make speedo read slow

- reduce acceleration and top speed through longer gearing

- reduce brake effectiveness

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk