saliya

More responsive to phone or SMS IME. SMS should not cost you the world; but then again neither should an international call... particularly not compared to the price of the manifold. Regards, Saliya

Hey, main post updated I'm not hugely worried about the tuning side of things; more about the running. Yes, the running's only as good as the tune; but if I can run a D-Jetro and have as good running behaviour from the D-Jetro I'd like to delete the AFMs. Thanks again, Saliya edit: anybody from Sydney running a D-Jetro that would be willing to chauffeur me on a short trip? Anyone ? A case of New could be yours for the having if bribery's required

If you order a 6boost manifold, make sure: * you tell Kyle what you want it for specifically, in as much detail as is possible. He will be able to tell you whether or not he can help you. I think each one is made from scratch, using an existing car as a fit guide, so your requirements of 'fit an S14 LHD' might be harder than they sound * you get Kyle to _check_ each weld on the manifold individually before he sends it to you (an unwelded section slipped through QC on mine; which I had to have welded). See http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...113139&st=0 Regards, Saliya

Looking to change because I'm about to run out of resolution on the stock AFMs; I have a couple of Z32s that I was going to use but if the D-Jetro is "as good" as the standard PFC then the inlet piping will be substantially simpler without the AFMs (there is not a lot of room between my T04Z and air filter). If the D-Jetro is _not_ "as good" as the AFM PFC then I'll have to remake the split/join part of the inlet tract. I'm not looking for 'more' out of the D-Jetro, I'm looking for 'the same, but without the AFMs'... yes, there will be a restriction removal but I'm not expecting it to make a huge difference. edit: I've read the FAQ; but it doesn't really help me all that much. It's an overgeneralisation to imply that MAP-sensored cars will inherently run badly (the Toyota 1JZ seems to refute this pretty well) but it _may_ be true that MAP-sensored cars with multiple throttles will run badly - hence this thread Regards, Saliya

Hey folks, looking at ditching my PFC + stock AFMs for a PFC D-Jetro edit: see below for reasons Can anybody running a PFC D-Jetro add to this thread or PM me with info about: * performance of your car changed before/after fitment (and how ) * drivability of your car changed before/after fitment (and how: better/worse generally, at particular RPMs?) * who installed it / how long it took * who tuned it / how long it took * you have changed your plenum/throttles from standard (and if so, what changes were made?) * if you have a different plenum, and added it at a different time to the D-Jetro, what difference (if any) it made? I'm told by some knowledgeable tuning houses that a single throttle + aftermarket plenum is essential to getting the D-Jetro to run right. I'm also told by some well-respected sources that the D-Jetro will run fine on standard plenum and throttles. I'll summarise responses in the first post. Thanks guys/gals, Saliya edit: Thanks for everyones responses so far. Anyone had a BAD experience with a D-Jetro? Please PM me, if you don't want details like your name or the installer/tuner published then I of course won't. As per suggestion from jonn: Someone in the Sydney, NSW area with a d-jetro that would be willing to take a fellow SAUer for a drive? PM me (don't post here ) MAIN POINTS SO FAR: * tuning time is large, compared to 'standard' or l-jetro == expensive - I don't know whether the PFC tuning software has the ability to just map several points, then join-the-dots so to speak (similar to the way that the Haltech MAP ECU software works)but I suspect this could be used to cut down tuning time. Perhaps an enhancement for FC-Datalogit? * driveability and outright performance of d-jetro is as good as l-jetro * installation of the MAP sensors is a PITA, slow, fiddly == expensive. - nothing I can do to avoid this other than install them myself. * D-Jetro works fine for people with standard plenums/throttles (so far!) - this kind of puts the kybosh on the theorem that a single throttle/different plenum is _required_... any more information about this INCLUDING bad experiences would be good! * MAP sensors possibly affected by pressure waves and proximity to opening/closing valves - You'd think that Apexi would have run into this, and made the software handle it. My guess would be that this is the purpose of the dual sensors - that is, when one sensor is affected by a wave the other one won't be... Keep those responses coming... SW edit: response from Gav who installed: unknown, but MAP sensors take a long time and are fiddly who tuned: unknown, but takes a long time. Perhaps tune time costs more than std PFC? plenum/throttles: standard performance/driveability: excellent. Would use again edit: response from SydneyKid: who tuned: unknown, tuning time is high plenum: unknown raised point about pressure waves affecting MAP sensor readings edit: response from Willo: who tuned: unknown, finding a tuner was hard? update: Mark Jacobsen at Godzilla Motorsport (Brisbane) plenum/throttles: standard performance/driveability: excellent, fuel economy update: rephrased no problems edit: response from jonn: who tuned: Hyperdrive (Perth) plenum/throttles: standard performance/driveability: excellent. Would use again.

Is your existing manifold split-pulse or not (I'm assuming that the flange isn't a T4 flange) If it is split-pulse, you will need to try to find an adaptor plate (cutting off a split-pulse flange then welding a new one on nicely is just about impossible, because of the middle part of the flange). If it is not, and you must have a split-pulse turbo, then sell your manifold and buy one that's appropriate. If it is not, and you can live without split-pulse then go for the T04Z in the .81 'normal' housing and you can pretty easily have your existing flange cut off and the appropriate-sized one welded on. Regards, Saliya

Put it this way: the labour cost is going to be roughly the same whether you do 4th gear synchro only, or an entire rebuild on the internals of the box (getting to the 4th gear synchro probably requires complete disassembly). So it might be 'a fortune' now; but when a sleeve is burred or smashed and it's not replaceable, it's 'a fortune' plus another few large (Yes, you can buy secondhand drop-in boxes of similar vintage - but aside from the 'you haven't seen it running and/or disassembled, so how do you know it's any good' factor, any box that's of roughly the same mileage will probably have roughly the same problems... Regards, Saliya

Hey, When the gear is crunching you are doing damage to the sleeve that actually does the job of engaging the gear. Yep, your 4th synchro is most probably worn. Do this enough and even without breaking anything else you'll burr the front of the teeth on the sleeve - which will probably make it difficult to get it into gear and then keep it there. Getting replacement sleeves for some boxes is hard (e.g. I can't get one for my 32GTR box; I have to upgrade the entire 1st-3rd train in order to be able to use a different 4th sleeve). Your box might be different. Don't know your box; but on mine 1st, 4th and 5th synchros are 1-piece; 2nd and 3rd are 3-piece. This is probably why 4th seems to go first on GTR boxes The long and the short of it - I would fix the synchro before you do more damage. They are wearing parts and should be relatively cheap to replace - the hardened sleeves and/or gears are _not_ cheap to replace assuming they are even available. You probably want to do 3rd and 4th synchros. Do a bearing set while you're in there and you'll probably get another 10-15 years of motoring out of the box Regards, Saliya

The check valve stops fuel flowing back to the tank when the pump is off. So when you turn your car off basically you'll lose fuel pressure, the longer it's off the more pressure you lose. In real terms this means when turning it back on after it being off overnight you might need to wait a few seconds between switching the pump on and engaging the starter motor. I'd leave the check-valve on there Regards, Saliya

I had to cut mine out of my last GTR, I used an air hacksaw and a lot of care. I then had to machine up a drift to put the new one in... Regards, Saliya

Highly unlikely to be a real turbo given that i) it isn't connected to the exhaust and ii) the motor is probably a reed-valved 2-stroke Regards, Saliya

No, I haven't, _but_ I'm about to do this with my RB26 + PFC (no d-jetro yet, just with AFMs). I'll also be trying it with a d-jetro or other suitable MAP-based system eventually. The test you have to pass _should_ be the one from the year that your car was made. Any of the NSW Engineering Signatories from the RTA website should be able to quote you the numbers from the relevant ADR. The test conducted by the RTA at Botany and Penrith is called an IM240 - and if they're doing that one, it's not a no-boost test. The test is designed to simulate driving and the documentation on it is lengthy, to say the least. There is at least one full-throttle section. Good luck - I'm told it's do-able; I don't know how much trouble it's going to be but we will see what we will see Regards, Saliya

Hey, As someone else said a long time ago, oils ain't oils Not all 3" and not all 3.5" exhausts are equal. If you can find something that expands from the turbo outlet at 7deg angle to the sizes you want (say expanding to 2.5" on the dual pipes, merging to 3.5" then through a 3.5" high-flowing cat), you are in luck. A turbo will work the best with pretty much nothing behind it - you of course can't do that, so the bigger, the better. Bigger usually means more noise, so you need to factor that in - my old 4" is 95dB@3500 - and that's with the turbos, twin cats, a resonator and muffler to shut it up. My old exhaust isn't really suitable for a road car - very deep, nice note - but very loud. Personally if you can put up with the noise I'd go for 3.5" - it depends what your needs are. The difference in top end between 3" and 4" is noticeable - so I'd guess this would apply to 3.5" too (all other things being equal). Given that you're concerned about cost a dual 3" is probably not an option for you? If the price difference is so big you might want to ask about that... Regards, Saliya

Hey, Cheers I know they said 'no chit chat', but: It depends on what boost you're running. I think that flow rating's at 43psi (i.e. the stock fuel rail pressure, no boost) - and what you're _probably_ interested in if you've run out of flow on a GTR fuel pump is the flow rating at say 65psi or more (rail pressure + say 22psi boost). This is because if you're trying to run 600-700cc injectors out of flow, you're trying to make 600-700HP - and this doesn't happen @0bar of boost on an RB26. FWIW most people seem to need 25-30psi boost to make those kinds of numbers. Kind of hard to find accurate specs on the Nismo pumps though, so if you have flow data @65-70psi I'd love to see it. I guess it also depends on what you paid for it - an 044 these days would probably go for $250 delivered - I don't know what the Nismo one sells for but on Nengun it's probably close to double that. There's a lot to be said for 'bolt in' (so much stuff is called that, so little actually is)... Regards, Saliya

I have one if you don't already - I'm in Mittagong, NSW though. Regards, Saliya

If you remove the stock BOVs you have to block the end of the return pipe that is now open to atmosphere otherwise unfiltered air will enter the system. If you run MAFs (I presume you do) then it's worse - the extra air is unmeasured, too. Whether you block the pipe on the driver's side near the stockers, or remove the return pipe completely and block it off on the passenger side is up to you... I'd block it off on the driver's side since returning to the stockers will be a breeze if/when you decide you don't like your VTA BOV Regards, Saliya

"after" - by 'after', I mean 'closer to the engine'. Air that's re-circulated is not supposed to be measured twice. Just plumb your system back somewhere between your AFMs and the turbo inlet. If you take a look at a diagram or pull a GT-R's inlet pipework to bits you'll see where the re-circulation pipe rejoins the system. When you get all the bits onto the bench(es) you will not _believe_ that they all go back in that little tiny space ) This is possibly why the pipework was not included The valves are in parallel; so I'd guess that there are two simply to allow for more airflow when they are open while keeping the response characteristics of a single smaller valve. They _may_ be sprung differently (I've never tested) but they look identical. Regards, Saliya

Hey, you might be right; I'm just going on recommendations from my friendly Pirtek guy. Will look closer when we actually go to make the hoses and post photos (should not be too long) and your advice is appreciated... Regards, Saliya

Hi, It's pretty simple, near as I can tell (I am in the process of doing this right now and it's not finished yet). You can buy all the relevant fittings from Pirtek (they will either use Speedflow or Motorsport Connections to get the banjos they don't have). WATER: There's a water line going around the back of the motor that tees off to the two stock turbos in a double banjo fitting - I'm replacing the entire line as the fittings at the back are in the way of my exhaust + gate. Tee off this to one side of the water feed on the turbo. There's another two water lines that go to a double banjo on the block - I've replaced this with a single banjo for the other side of the water feed on the turbo. I'm not sure which of the water lines are high pressure/low pressure, but I don't think it matters. Put one to one side and the other to the other. OIL: I'm _told_ that the relevant restrictor is already part of the Garrett T04Z. There is certainly no mention in the documentation of installing further restriction. There is a single oil double-banjo about halfway up the block that you need to replace with a single banjo fitting. This banjo is (I believe!) 1.25mm pitch and 10mm - an odd fitting if you want a -3 outlet - I have to use an adaptor. Use this as your oil feed. There are 2 oil returns at the bottom of the block; block off the rearmost one with a plate/gasket goo (carefully!) and use the front one as your oil return. The T04Z comes with a gasket for this but without the fitting - I am going to make a fitting from a pipe and some plate as I haven't been able to find one. Make sure you crank the motor without the spark enabled until you get oil coming out the feed line - _then_ bolt it to the turbo, then crank a few more times before enabling spark. You will need to get custom lines made up in the diameters and lengths of your choice; I'm using -3 in teflon/braid high-temp hose for both oil and water. Hopefully this will be sufficient. Or buy a kit with the oil/water lines included - I don't know whether they include banjos and hollow bolts though. I'll add some pics to this when I dummy up the bits. Regards, Saliya

Hi, You will get the fastest boost rise with no air going to the WG actuator. For a bleeder to 'work' there has to be something for it to bleed off - there will be "some" (less, but not none) air going to the WG actuator. Thus, a bleed-based system cannot ever provide maximum boost rising rate (you can't bleed off 100% of the air). This applies for electronic bleed (solenoid) or manual bleed (valve) setups. An inline EBC _can_ provide the 'no' air requirement in the way that a bleed arrangement cannot, so yes, it can bring on boost earlier than a bleeder. Whether this is noticeable (or even desirable) in practical terms is another matter and depends on a whole bunch of stuff including personal preference Regards, Saliya

Hey, That one was one that I got from QLD. Personally, I can't see what all the fuss is about (in terms of manifold design) - the design of the HKS cast almost-log-style manifold was certainly not as good as the 6boost one I have; nor the ebay ones that go for $350. BUT: The section that was cracked was just where you'd expect that manifold to crack due to thermal stress - it's just after where 3 pipes join into 1 that _isn't_ the main collector and it's right in the middle of the manifold - it's most likely the 'hottest smallest' part of the manifold. The other 3 joined pipes go into the turbo outlet. Yes, they have a big, heavy cross section that would no doubt be tough - but the location of the cracking means that I'd be more inclined to say 'from design' rather than 'from a weight hanging off it'. All conjecture at this stage, I guess I have no idea how that manifold got like it did... Regards, Saliya

Hi, So where's your cracked one mounted? Turbo + near gearbox x member + just before rear axle + rear muffler? Or elsewhere? Regards, Saliya

Hi, No, there's no such thing as win/win (less effort + less travel = ideal) The slave is pushing back - so it's not like tipping water from one bottle to another Think of it as a relative thing. If you increase the diam of the master cylinder you will push more fluid for a given stroke length, but the pushing will be harder. That's less travel, with more effort. Regards, Saliya

Looks like I've found something we can agree on For anyone that's interested, Carroll Smith's 'Foo' to Win series have some useful things to say about metals and their properties. Engineer to Win is probably the most relevant here but there is some overlap within the series. Regards, Saliya

Hi, I got it directly from Kyle; I found that it was better to contact him via phone than email; but I guess this will get better as his business grows ( or not, who knows ) Since his number is on his website (www.6boost.com) I'd say that he won't mind me posting it here - 0410 730 598. Be warned - I needed to chase him up for delivery. As always, YMMV. The final product is, IMO (and at this stage!), very good value for money. You can also get them from Morrie Huckel @ horsepowerinabox; and Tarek @ Racespec. Tarek's on the forums as 'Racespec' I think, and Morrie is very easy to get hold of. Regards, Saliya