Sydneykid

Hi Roy, I am not sure that I completely understand the question. It is not the maximum temperature that causes cylinder head or head gasket issues, it is the temperature differential that causes warpage or, in extreme cases, cracking. For example exhaust ports can be upwards of 800 degrees C, water jackets max is around 110 degrees, inlet ports 60 degrees, combustion chamber temperature etc So where you place the sensor determines what temperature you are likely to see. cheers

Usual plain bearing turbo problems, worn bearings, particularly thrust. Usual oil cooled turbo problems, oveheated seals that leak and carbon build up in the bearings. Cheers

It is worth noting that the Mines R34GTR (600 bhp) uses the standard airbox, with a high flow filter and their own snorkel. cheers PS; the Bass Junky Stagea air deflector (using my design) will also have a scoop for the inlet snorkel. This is the thread on my tests for inlet air temp using the prototype. http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...showtopic=55489

I have had a few questions on the design of the Group Buy deflector and the inlet air scoop, so I thought it would be best to have this thread appear on the current page. cheers

The major benefit in suspension rigidity from a strut brace occurs when it links the upper control arm inner mounting points to each other. The strut brace then effectively doubles the strength and helps to preventing unwanted dynamic changes in camber. This is a picture of the front suspension (R34GTR in this case, however R32/33 are much the same). As you can see, there is no subframe linking the upper arms, they are bolted to the inner guards (the chassis). So linking the shock tops (on the inner guards) with a strut brace, effectively links the inner joints on the upper control arms; Contrast this with the rear where the rear subframe already very effectively links the inner joints on the upper control arms. Noting that the arms are not bolted to the chassis at all, they are in fact bolted directly to the subframe; Consequently adding a high mounted rear strut brace adds very little (if any) rigidity to the upper control arm mounting points. There is a very small (in fact tiny) argument that could be put that says the rear strut brace adds to the overall rigidity of the chassis. But the pivot joints on the strut bar where it joins to the tops, makes even this small this benefit negligible. The bottom line, a front strut is a very useful device on R32/3/34, and should be a must have on your list of handling improvements. A rear strut brace is, in my opinion, a far bit lower on the priorities list and for road arguably shouldn’t be on the priorities list at all. Cheers

Every car is different, R33GTST caster is usually around 5 degrees positive without adjustment, so don't stress if yours is 4.5 or 5.5. I had a standard car this week that was 3.5, but it had stuffed caster rod bushes. cheers

The Supra problem is quite simple, it is 2wd and yet weighs the same as a 4wd GTR. So they will never be comparable, the GTR wins easily on traction. If you compare the Supra with a GTST the GTST wins because they are 250 kgs lighter. The other notable issue is not the inside of a 2JZ, it's all the CRAP stuff on the outside. For example it's a doddle to get 600 bhp out of a standard RB26 exhaust manifold, no chance with a standard 2JZ exhaust manifold. It's a piece of cake to get 500 bhp out of a standard GTR intercooler. try that with a standard Supra intercooler. GTR's regulary run low 9's on road radials with a standard inlet manifold/plenum, like hell that's gunna happen with the standard Supra rubbish. Shall I get into diff's? Fancy a turbo comparison? You gotta look at the big picture, not just the up and down bits. If you spend the same amount of money on a GTR it will always be faster than a Supra with the same amount of money spent on it, who cares where the money is spent. cheers

Several years ago (there is thread on it), we flow bench tested a standard RB20 cylinder head, inlet manifold plenum and throttle body up to airflow sufficient to make 500 bhp. It showed no improvement when we removed the throttle body completely. So fitting a larger diameter throttle body is a waste of time and money until at least 300 rwkw is reached. It maybe even more than that, we stopped testing at 500 bhp. cheers

There is not a black and white answer to this question. Just because the AFM reaches 5.1 volts output doesn't always mean it has to be changed The only time you really need an AFM upgrade is when unanticipateable changes in airflow occur, ie; not linear with rpm changes. At high rpm (ie; past boost build and camshaft timing effects) this shouldn't be an issue. The fuel and ignition requirements are satisfactorily driven off the rpm change. Keeping the above in mind, I have seen an RB30 run quite happily on an RB20 AFM at 265 rwkw. I have also had to change an RB25 AFM at 225 rwkw because the airflow changes where unpredicable (ie; not linear with rpm). cheers

No problems, just PM me with the details. cheers

1.Yes 2. This picture is on the first page of this thread, it shows what comes in the kit, there is a reasonable amount of hose as you can see; 3. The Stagea uses a coil in the bottom tank of the radiator and the loop of aluminium pipe (with fins) transcooler standard. I just replaced the loppy aluminium cooler with the larger better flowing cooler. Never had a problem, so don't think you would neeed 2. 4. I use Castrol Tranmax Z cheers

I quickly checked though the thread and I haven't seen the obvious R33GTR rims (17 X 9 X 30) on an R33GTST. Do they fit with 255/40/17 tyres without guard lip rolling? cheers

5kg/mm is 280 lbs per inch, that >70% higher than the standard spring rate. Most Australian lowering springs (Whiteline, Kings etc) are 20 to 30% higher rate than standard. cheers

the best exhaust manifold I have seen for RB20/25's is the GTSR Group A from Nissan. It is equal length, exceptionally well made and utilises the superior (for circuit racing) low/rear mount. A true work of art. Not a good picture, I have better ones somewhere, I'll post them up later. cheers

Generally speaking, I reckon circuit work is better (cooler) then towing as there is lots of airflow. Towing can be lots of torque converter and gearbox load with very low airflow eg; in traffic. I am upgrading the R32GTST power steering cooler from the standard loop of aluminium to the transmission cooler I took off the Stagea. Plenty big enough and I am being environmentally sound by recycling. cheers

Colour, width and offset ? cheers

There is no doubt that leaf sprung, solid axle, rear end is better for towing, look at a semi for proof of that. But with good shocks and stabiliser bars I have found no issues with IRS, and I have towed interstate with race cars on the back many times. If you want to tow all the time then buy a truck, otherwise the Stagea is the best for both towing and non towing activites, it does them all very well. A truck is always a truck, even when its not towing. cheers

Injector duration is a far better measure of load (and therefore boost generation) than RPM. Everybody knows that you get different boost in different gears at the same rpm because of the different load. Even up and down hills changes the boost rpm. So measuring load via injector duration is far more effective than rpm. cheers

Yes cheers

Hi Dave, the Whiteline springs in the Group Buy are 30 mm lower than standard new height, giving around 350 mm front and 340 mm rear, centre of wheel to guard. This is the best handling height which also gives acceptable ride comfort. In addition the Group Buy Bilstein shocks have an additional 5 circlip grooves (8mm apart) for setting the height prior to fitting. So you can choose any height from a standard'ish 366 mm to a super low 325 mm. All of the details are included on the Group Thread for your model of Skyline. cheers PS, the particular car in the above example was at 315 mm when we got it, the springs appear to have been designed for 330 mm (325 mm after settling) so that it had sagged 10 mm further due to excessive wear caused by using the standard shocks.

I have marked up the HICAS schematic; The Blue dot is the power steering cooler The Red dots should be joined together, this bypasses the HICAS solenoids completely. No cutting of pipes required, around those locations you will find the steel pipework has clamped rubber hose sections, just remove the (short) hoses and substitute them with the new (longer) piece of joining hose. If you are not removing the rest of the HICAs system, then block off the (no longer used) hoses to keep the crap out. There will be power steeing fluid trapped in the hoses, so make sure the capping is liquid proof. cheeers

I get asked a lot about using lowering springs with standard shocks. The line usually goes "I only want to lower my car" or " I can only afford springs" or "I will get springs now and shocks later" or " I don't care about handling or ride, I just want a low look". I usually respond by saying that it’s not a good idea and not something I would recommend. The following are some pictures that I took of the suspension off an R33GTST that had been lowered with a well known brand name spring using the 60,000k's old standard shocks. I am not going to name the brand, because it's not the spring's fault. This all occurred within 20,000k’s. The first picture is off the complete unit from the LHS, note the bump stop hanging out to the side of the shock, not around the shock shaft as it supposed to be. The dust cover was completely destroyed allowing dust and dirt to wear the top seal and shaft of the shock absorber. The next 2 pictures are off the bump stop itself after I removed it, as you can see its not really a bump stop, its a bush for a suspension arm used as a bump stop. It's split top to bottom and wasn't really performing its task, even before it fell out; This picture is of the top spring seat, as you can see the shock shaft locating hole is worn off centre. This occurred because the spring was bottoming out due to insufficient bump valving in the standard shock, plus insufficient rebound damping allowing the spring to oscillate uncontrollably. This uncontrolled oscillation also prematurely wore out the spring and it sagged 15 mm from its original height (around 5 mm is considered normal settling). The pounding destroyed the rubber mounts that protect the shock shaft from the top mount. If this had continued much longer the shock shaft may well have broken off at the top mount, the result would not have been pretty. This continual bottom out of the springs over large and small bumps transferred the load to the radius rods and the bushes suffered as a result; The last picture is off the sump which as you can see, suffered some damage as a result of the sagging in the ride height. I will try and take some more photos of the damage to the other suspension components over the next few days and post them up. Hopefully this thread will serve as an example as to why I say "it's not a good idea to use lowering springs with standard shocks". cheers