Sydneykid

If I only had time (that's a song isn't it?) :lol: Maybe I should just put all my posts together in one document and sell that. Sort of like a collection of short stories. Shakespear did it with sonnets, so Sydneykid can do it with posts Now all I need is a catchy title B) Cheers

Hi, Whiteline don't make shocks themselves, they use Koni or Bilstein in their kits. Noting that they don't have a Group 4 kit for Skylines yet. For Skylines, Whiteline use Bilsteins as they are the best engineering fit for Skyline suspension design and weight. The valving I have specified is not the same as Whiteline, plus additonal circlip grooves are machined to give the variety of ride heights that I have chosen. This means I can specify all of the other parts/settings exactly to suite those ride heights. I have specified the valving in the Group Buy Bilsteins to suite those ride heights, with bump stop dimensions and spring and stabiliser bar rates. I have also specified the alignment settings (inc rear sub frame) to suite those spring, shock and bar rates. You can use whatever parts of the Group Buy you want, but you will only get the total result I have designed if you use all of the parts. The Group Buy kits are not a simple random selection of parts, I spent 3 months choosing and testing the various combinations. My target was a sporty, but not uncomfortable, ride and great handling. According to the 20 or so guys who already have kits, I have been pretty successful in meeting that target. As I have said to a few of the guys, I don't make anything out of what you buy. Jamex paid me for the engineering months ago. So whether you buy or don't buy various bits doesn't really affect me. Other than the fact that I know you won't be getting the best out of mixing other parts in with the kit. Hope that clarifies cheers

Hi Saliya, PM sent and I have made sure that you are on the PM list. Cheers

So what you are saying is the spring rate increases as you compress the spring? Since the spring compresses when you sit on the bike, that means the spring rate is higher with you on the bike than it is with you off the bike? The spring rate is even higher when you have a pillion, because the spring compresses even more? Try this test. 1. Put the spring height adjuster on the lowest setting 2. Measure how far off the ground the tailight is 3. Then sit on the bike and measure how far off the ground the tail light is 4. The difference between those two measurements is how much your weight compresses the spring (ie; the spring rate) 5. Put the spring height adjuster on the highest setting 6. Measure how far off the ground the taillight is 7. Then sit on the bike and measure how far off the ground the tail light is 8. If you are right, the difference between those two measurements should be less than that the measurement in #4. ie; the spring should compress less because the spring rate is higher (according to your logic). Do you want to try the test, or can you already see how illogical your assessment is? cheers

Hi Gav, suggestion to your questions follow; 1. The closer to the turbine outlet the quicker the response to changes in A/F ratio. ie; make a change and see the result instantly. The further away from the tailpipe the less likely to get ambient air contamination, which can be a problem at low airflows with big exhaust outlets. We have the F&W lambda sensor on the race cars just after where the engine pipes join. No ambient air contamination and very fast response, as fast as the lambda sensor itself in fact. 2. Nope, waste of money I reckon. We do have 4 X lambda sensors on the engine dyno for tuning the SuperTourer engines. But 2 on 6 cylinders, I can't see much of an advantage. 3. Not that I can see 4. Standard lambda sensor bung Hope that answered your questions Cheers

Waste of time and money, disconnect it and move on with your life. cheers PS; obviously this doesn't apply to fast and wide lambda sensors and properly calibrated A/F ratio meters.

Quick update, finished building the kit last night; As usual once I got past the tedious resistor installs, the rest was easy. Now it is just a matter of testing it, then it will be ready for use. More updates shortly. cheers

Using the standard wiring (ie; 11.5 volts at the pump) the R32GTR fuel pumps are OK for ~265 rwkw. If you use a relay and dedicated wiring (ie; 13.8 volts at the pump) they are OK for ~300 rwkw. The Z32 fuel pump is pretty similar to the R32GTR one. The R33GTR fuel pump actually flows slightly more. I have not tested an R34GTR fuel pump, or seen a proper test of one. Following is the best test of Nissan pumps I have seen; The following is a good example of what happens to a fuel pump's flow when the voltage changes; Fuel pumps are rated at flow versus pressure, that's why I laugh when is see stuff like "500 bhp fuel pump". Bosch fule pumps are rated at 73.6 psi, Assuming 36 psi fuel pressure (above boost) the Bosch pumps will flow their rated capacity up to 2.5 bar boost. As you can see from the above at 13.5 volts the Walbro GSS341 flows 260 l/h (its rating) at zero boost (ie; ~36 psi fuel pressure). But at 2 bar this drops to 220 l/h. A comparsion in size; Flow at pressure is all about consistent torque, and a fuel pump needs torque from its electric motor. As usual if you want more torque you need a bigger motor. Hope that was of some help cheers

That dyno is either very happy, the injectors aren't really standard or the fuel pressure is way above standard. There are no miracles in engines, including fuel injectors. cheers

I thought I might have a bit of fun with this power graph using a couple of data logs that I have seen recently as a basis. What the following numbers do is simulate what it would look like if you have a video camera pointed at your tacho during a perfect run. 1st gear average power assuming 5,000 rpm held at launch 8,000 415 rwkw 7,500 410 rwkw 7,000 380 rwkw 6,500 340 rwkw 6,000 275 rwkw 5,500 200 rwkw 5,000 140 rwkw Total 2,160 rwkw Average 309 rwkw 1st to 2 gear average power assuming 2/10th second gearshift 8,000 415 rwkw 7,500 410 rwkw 7,000 380 rwkw 6,500 340 rwkw 6,000 275 rwkw 5,500 200 rwkw 5,000 140 rwkw Total 2,160 rwkw Average 309 rwkw 2nd to 3rd gear average power assuming 2/10th second gearshift 8,000 415 rwkw 7,500 410 rwkw 7,000 380 rwkw 6,500 340 rwkw 6,000 275 rwkw 5,500 200 rwkw Total 2,020 rwkw Average 337 rwkw 3rd to 4th gear average power assuming 2/10th second gearshift 7,500 410 rwkw 7,000 380 rwkw 6,500 340 rwkw 6,000 275 rwkw Total 1,405 rwkw Average 351 rwkw Average of all 4 gears = 326 rwkw If the above result is actualy achieved you are looking at an ET of ~10.6 seconds with a TS of ~210 kph. If you can speed up the gearshift by 50% you are looking at an ET of ~10.4 seconds. It will be interesting to compare the actual results after you have had a couple of runs. Cheers PS; I have assumed standard R32GTR gearbox and diff ratios and a tyre circumference of 2,050 mm (ie; = 245/45/17).

I need a drivers side wind deflector, as you may remember mine let go at 110kph driving down the freeway one night on the way home. Frightened the beeegeesus out of me. The double sided tape was a bit loose (lost its stick) at the front near the rear vision mirror. There was a strong cross wind, which must have flipped it up just enough for the 100 kph breeze to rip it off. So if you are getting some, mark me down for a pair, might as well change the LHS to a new one at the same time. cheers

From the pictures I would say the rim is repairable. cheers

From a purely suspension engineering point of view the need for adjustment of the length of the shock is very simple. As usual it boils down to cost cutting. For example, R32/33/34 Skylines have a number of different lengths of shock absorber, as well as the rear fork/eye differences. This means you have to make a different shock body for each model due to this requirement for different lengths. Bilstein, for example, make 5 different front shock lengths for these models of Skylines. But if you have an adjustable length shock body, you only need one model. Hence cheaper to manufacture, cheaper to ship and cheaper to stock (less required). One shock length instead of five = 80% reduction. Also if you make the shock bottom interchangeable between fork and eye style, that reduces the number of rear shock derivatives you need to make/ship/carry by 50%. Now if you add that bottom screw on mount adaptability to other cars, you find quite a lot of interchangeability. So the 80% reduction in manufactured shock bodies numbers may in fact end up many times that. All you need to do is make the adaptors different, not the whole shock. A lot of the cost of making shocks is tooling up to make the shock body, so any reduction in that area is important. A well known legal requirement is to ensure the springs are trapped at all times, excessively lowering the bottom spring seat can sometimes lead to non trapped springs. This is why flat wire tender/helper springs are used, in extreme cases you may need 2 helper/tender springs to achieve the lowest height adjustment. But if you reduce the length of the shock body you can avoid this need and save the cost of a helper/tender spring. Being flat wire, the cost of making a tender/helper is in fact higher than making the main coil from round wire. So the cost saving from this is very worthwhile. BUT (there is always a but), the problem is this cost cutting easily extends to the valving. Logically if I have reduced the number of different shock bodies, I will also need to reduce the variety of shock valving to maximise the cost reduction. The thought of an R33GTR front shock running the same valving as an R32GTST is quite a frightening one. Most certainly one that simplistically adjusting the rebound rate is not going to overcome. The bottom line, it is done to save money. cheers

No lowering the bottom spring seat will just make the car lower. That may in fact make it contact the bumps stops more often due to the less travel. So it may actually make the ride more harsh. Raising the bottom spring seat will just make the car higher. That would make it contact the bump stops less often and most likely will in fact make it less harsh. But only if bump top contact was a cause of the harshness in the first place. Neither will change the spring rate, if you want to change the spring rate buying different springs is your only solution. cheers

Not picking on the guys who posted this, that's why I have deleted their names. They are simply repeating stuff they have been told. It is absolute and complete RUBBISH, it's BS spread by one importer to make their inferior stuff somehow seem better than it really is. Using a 200 lbs per inch spring as an example. It takes 200 lbs to compress it one inch. It doesn't matter if that's the first inch or the tenth inch. It still takes 200 lbs to compress the spring one inch. So the spring rate doesn't go up because of preload. That is simpy a load of CRAP. Take a look at any race car and you will find lower spring seat adjusters used to adjust the height. Does anyone really think that we would use that system if it changed the spring rate? All the preload does is change the height of the car, it DOES NOT CHANGE THE SPRING RATE. A 200lbs per inch spring is always a 200 lbs per inch spring. If you want to change the spring rate, buy different springs. cheers PS; sorry if this seems a little harsh, but I am getting very tired of the BS from this importer.

Many, many guys use 100% nitrogen for the reasons I have posted above. A cylinder of 100% nitrogen from BOC costs less than $30, plus cylinder rental of course. When we were karting, one medium sized aluminium cylinder would last a whole year at least. Fits in the boot easily, makes pumping up tyres simple and fast, I have a cheap gas welding gauge kit for that purpose.. Note that some classes of racing don't allow nitrogen, but who would ever know? The real trick is getting all of the air out of the tyre before you put the nitrogen in. I have a friend with a vaccum pump (air con refills) and we use that to create a partial vacuum before we fill the tyres up with nitrogen. cheers

Bump just in case it isn't noticed as it is older than 30 days now. cheers

Bump, just in case someone doesn't do an all posts look. cheers

Hi Brendan. suggestions to your questions follow; 1. Yes, Tein are well know for having rediculously high spring rates, like most Jap suspension. The shocks have simplistic valving and are also very harshly valved. 2. The Whiteline polyurethane bushes are adjustable, and have sufficient compiance so as not to cause excessive NVH or cracking at the location points. 3. Nopwe, GTR's have forks on the bottom of their rear shocks, Stageas (except 260RS's of course) have bushes, like GTST's. Check out the Group Buy for more details http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...showtopic=85592 Hope that answered your questions cheers

The Stagea ECU switches negative to open the solenoid, the same as all R32/33/34 Skylines do. The IEBC switches negative as per the attached schematic from Page 138 of the Performance Electronics for Cars; So I have no idea why you are having a problem, the IEBC works perfectly with all of the Nissan boost control solenoids I have tried. None of them needed any wiring changes. cheers