Sydneykid

Good work on the ET's and TS's so far, it's a matter of practise and improvement. It was never going to happen first time out. The problem is you have had 350 FREE dyno runs to get it right. How much would you charge a customer for 350 dyno runs? Even at $50 a run (which is cheap) that's $17,500. I think I would much rather spend my time and money on an RB30 with forged internals and still come out $10K in front. cheers PS, word of advice, you are promoting a retail business, it pays to treat you potential customers with repect.

Very interesting replies and some good questions, leaving me a few things to express my opinion on. 1. You would be surprised at how many RB26's there are with between 500 bhp and 600 bhp that have aftermaket fuel rails, people sucked in by retailers 2. My fluid dynamics is rusty, not that it was much good anyway. My understanding is the fuel pressure increases at the restriction (the fuel pressure regulator). This means #1 and #2 (at some point) will get more pressure than #5 and #6. That is not really the question, the question is at what point? Using the 2 examples I feel safe in saying 600 bhp is not the limit. The people involved are smart enough (and have most likely tested enough) to have left a safety margin. Hence my rule of thumb 700 bhp and the hint for puting the highest flowing injector in #6, then #5 etc. 3. That's 700 bhp with the feed at the rear of the rail and the FPR at the front. I wouldn't even consider duel inlets, centre pressure take off etc under that power target. 4. As Bezerkly pointed out, you can see (on the flow bench) when the fuel pressure gets too high for the injector and it looses spray control. Hence why I have a rule of thumb limit of not targeting higher than 10% additional flow from an injector. 5. Roy asked about spray patterns and fuel rails. When we are flow testing RB25DET injectors we use a standard RB25DET fuel rail. The flow bench comes with its own top feed fittings, so we don't need to use use a top feed rail. But it didn't come with side feed fittings, so we adapted an RB25 rail. The largest side feed injectors we have flow tested were a set of 740 cc Nismos. Accross the 6 they showed absolutely zero difference in spray pattern at 765 cc (they are a bit underrated) and 73.5 psi of fuel pressure. We test at 73.5 psi as it is the rated pressure at flow for the Bosch fuel pumps that we use. So that's (say) 38 psi of fuel pressure (standard) above 35.5 psi (2 bar) of boost. That's obviously at 100% duty, the injectors are fully open and stayed open for the full test. Pulsing (less than 100% duty cycle) makes no difference to the spray patterns, that you can see in the glass containers anyway. The internal dimensions of a standard RB25 fuel rail are slightly smaller than a standard RB26 fuel rail. So I have no hesitation is saying that an RB26 fuel rail would give similar results. 6. (For the rice boys), the standard rail is cad plated stainless steel, if you polish the cad, it will dull down over time. If you polish off the cad plating completely, you are left with stainless steel, which doesn't dull down after polishing for a long time. Then it quickly polishes back up to a mirror finish. cheers

Don't count on the speedo being accurate, mine was reading 170 kph at a genuine 164 kph with almost brand new 225/50/16 tyres. As they wear it would become even more optimistic. With the larger diameter of the 245/40/17's it's a bit more accurate. cheers

With the Whitleine coils and 5 extra grooves they will go to ~320 mm at the front and ~310mm at the rear. I can have extra grooves machined if you want, a few of the guys have done that for shows. As always I have to mnetion that anything under 350 mm will give reduced handling and decreased ride comfort. The dynamic camber angles go to hell, bump steer front and rear occurs, traction is reduced, the extra drive shaft angles soak up power and there is simply not enough travel to absorb the bumps. Some people are willing to sacrifice that for looks, each to his own. cheers

Hi, no Group4's for Skylines so I wouldn't count on much of a response here. Try the WRX forums, Group 4's for them are a BIG seller. cheers

Unlike some other cars, Skyline stabiliser bars and their links have full/free rotation, so it is not necessary to do them up with the car on its wheels. The rear subframe doesn't carry any verticle loads, that is done by the springs. The cradle carries longitudinal and lateral loads. So once again, unlike some other cars, it is not necessary to do them up with the car on its wheels. cheers

You can 't do that on an auto the ECU doesn't know the speed to change gear. Speed Cut Defeater/Defender/Defencer ($150 from Nengun) http://www.nengun.com/catalogue/product/759 What they do is allow normal (accurate) speed readings to get to the ECU up to 170 kph, so the gear changes etc are as per normal. Over 170 kph they limit the outgoing signal to the ECU to 170 kph, so the ECU never sees 180 kph and hence no speed limiter action. This doesn't effect gear changes as we should be well and truly in top gear at 170 kph. cheers

The upper of the 2 welsh plugs. Look at it from the inside, you can just see it past the camshaft, the oil runs into the Y valley behind the welsh plug. The lower welsh plug goes into the water jacket. cheers

The Production GTR was 0.75 sec faster at Oran Park with the DMS than off the shelf Bislteins. Which were 1.75 secs faster than the HKS's it had before. That's with optimised spring rates and alignment settings in all cases (we have over 100 pairs of springs). The Proflex are no faster than the DMS over 1 lap, but 10 seconds faster over 12 laps. If you are doing lap dashes, the Bilsteins are the best value for money. cheers

If you are thinking of an electric motor to wind up and down a thread, I strongly suggest that you do the calculations carefully based on the dimensions. The torque required to raise or lower a 1500 kg car would preclude any electric motor I know off. The space required would to fit one would be well in excess of that available in the Skyline suspension lay out. cheers

As advised via PM, sounds like pad knock off to me. Get the run out on the rotors checked. They were machined on the car, which can be risky if not done carefully. cheers

Hi Brendan, we only use Castrol lubricants in all the cars, so my Stagea has Edge 10W60 in it. At 5,000 k's I do the usual fluids check, radiator, auto trans, washer bottle fill, brake fluid, tyre pressures, ATTESA reservoir, all the globes (there is always one out somewhere, usually dash), brake pad thickness and brake hose condition. Then I do a quick whip around with the spanners and check the tightness of all of the non standard stuff. Lastly I make sure the wheel nuts can be removed by the female drivers (that's not more than 70 ft/lbs on the tension wrench). cheers PS; I also check the toe and camber settings, because I can

The springs and Bilsteins would be still under warranty, if they turn out to be the problem. cheers

It's all about your power target and what you use the car for. What is good intercooling for a 200 4wkw daily driver is not good intercooling for a 600 4wkw drag car. Until I have some idea of the power target and the intended usage pattern I don't think I can respond to the question. cheers PS, I don't believe a W2A intercooler system (water pump, controller, stainless steel barrel, water pipes, modified inlet pipe work and a heat exchanger in front of the radiator) is any more stealth than a return style, A2A FMIC painted black.

Definitely sounds like air reversion through the AFM. If it is you can see it on the AFM voltage trace you get spikes and troughs as the air bounces between the compressor and the AFM. I found a couple of things help; 1. Run as large a diameter pipework as you can. I use 100 mm alloy, mandrel bent pipe with a 100/90 silicone reducer to fit the Q45 AFM 2. Make the distance between the AFM and the compressor as long as you can. 3. Make the bend angle as large as you can. I noticed in the pictures some of the bend angles in the inlet pipework are around 30 degrees and they start almost straight off the compressor. Mine has a straight length off the compressor, about 300-400 mm long. Then a larger angle bend, maybe 60-70 degrees. A very short, straight length into the 100/90 silicom reducer. 4. Running a heat shield, I found the hot air coming in from the rear of the radiator made the rough idle worse. Particularly when the fan was running. The heat shield on its own made a difference. Some logic.........the longer/larger diameter is obvious, it simply gives more air buffering space between the compressor and the AFM. The larger angle bend is to stop the air off the compressor hitting the AFM directly, it has to bounce off the walls of the pipework. That worked OK at around 600 bhp using the T66, I wonder how it is going to go with another 200 bhp and a bigger turbo. cheers

Good feedback guys, thanks. My own fuel rail is a combination of the Gibson and Mines. I have used a Nismo bolt on FPR in the standard location at the front. I cut off the standard fuel pipework and fitted a dash fitting into the rear of the rail. It is simply threaded into the rear of the rail where I cut off the standard pipework. I will post up some pictures shortly. cheers PS; on the RB25DET Neo injectors question....when we had the R34GTT I used the Nismo 480 cc injectors. They had no problems with 315 rwkw with a slight upgrade in fuel pressure (couple of pounds). I figured that was plenty for the standard internals.

I have used an R34GTT SMIC on an R32GTST by cutting and rewelding the inlet pipe. Made a nice 215 rwkw and went quite well in Targa style events. Which is more testing than normal road work. Would also probably be OK for hillclimbs and supersprints. cheers

Work in progress on my own engine. cheers

From the number of PM's I get on this subject I figured it was time for a discussion on the fuel rails and fuel pressure regulators. Let me start off with 2 pictures, the first is the Gibson R32GTR; Notice that it has the standard fuel rail with a dash fitting welded into the end. It also uses a mechanical fuel pump, running off the inlet camshaft. The reason for this was the lack of really big electric fuel pumps (volume and pressure). This was necessary because there were no high volume injectors around like there are today, so to get the flow they used higher pressure. Hence the need for the dash fittings, the standard hoses and clamps would not have handled the fuel pressure. But they obviously believed that the standard fuel rail was sufficient for the task. The second picture is the Mines R34GTR; Notice that it also has the standard fuel rail, obviously Mines (like the Gibson Team) believed that the standard fuel rail was sufficient for the task. It also has an adjustable fuel pressure regulator (Nismo style) fitted to the end of the standard rail. It is reported to run 600 cc injectors to support its 600 bhp, so the adjustable fuel pressure regulator must only be used to give a little head room. This means not much more than standard fuel pressure, which is supported by the use of standard (looking) fuel hoses and clamps. What do these picture tell me; 1. The standard fuel rail must be pretty good for 600 to 650 bhp. 2. The local workshops who say that the adjustable fuel pressure regulators (Nismo style) fitted to the end of the standard rail are not reliable and/or stable in their pressure obviously know more than Mines do (I don’t think so Tim). 3. Upgrading hoses and clamps (to dash/screw on fittings) is not necessary when standard or close to standard fuel pressure is being used. Simply put, if you have the correct size injectors for the engine’s bhp then standard hoses (good condition of course) and clamps are OK because you are running standard fuel pressure. 4. Both of these teams have sufficient funds and technical skill to change whatever they want. Hence it is not unreasonable to say that if the components used where even CLOSE to their limit, they would have upgraded them. 5. Assuming a 10% headroom, that would mean ~700 bhp is a reasonable limit for the standard fuel rail, single fuel feed point, Nismo style fuel pressure regulator and standard hoses and clamps (in good condition) if the injectors are sized correctly. The bottom line I wouldn’t be changing the standard fuel rail unless your power target is over 700 bhp. For the “rice” lovers, the standard rail is cad plated stainless steel, so they polish up very nicely. Cheers PS; Bet the retailers don’t want to hear that!