Sydneykid

The simple stuff first; You would have to use the R32GTST radius rods otherwise you would loose all of the caster. From memory the bolt positioning on the R32 radius rod is different to that on the R33, so you may have to redrill one, or both, of them. The SAI on the R33's is different to the R32's, the lower ball joint and upper control arm orientation to the upright (hub) are quite different. If you change the lower control arm (to the R33 style) you would end up with a lot of scrub radius (positive SAI) unless you also changed the upright (hub) and upper control arm. The upright is easy, but an upper control arm change would require new brackets being welded onto the inner guards, which would also require R33 style reinforcing. Now for the complex stuff; Keeping the above in mind, the change in scrub radius also means unavoidable changes in the Ackerman. Which is not easy to fix, you could rebend the steering arms, provided you keep the metallurgy in mind. Or you could space the tie rod end away from the steering arm, that's a test, modify and check process that can take 6 or 7 iterations before you get it right. The alternative would be to move the steering rack, further forward would be my first guess. That, of course, means changes to the steering shaft and universal. Following on from that, once you have the Ackerman where you want it (usually around the rear diff centre line) you then have to correct the bump steer. Which will be fairly drastic by this stage, depending on the ride height . If you have moved the steering rack to fix the Ackerman then the easiest route would be to move the rack (upwards would be my guess) to eliminate some of the bump steer. Then a few minor changes with steering arm spacers should be enough to get the bump steer back to around standard tolerance. None of the above is rocket science, but it is time consuming to fix and you need some expertise and equipment (bump steer gauge, wheel alignment facilites etc). Cheers Gary

All relevant, but what sort of % difference (dyno versus real world) are we talking about here? I would be very surprised if it was 1%, even 2% is stretching my comprehension. So tune it 5% safe (rich) and you have pretty much covered any potential A/F ratio issues. The standard ECU knock retard will handle any ignition timing effects. Sure it's not ideal, but as a short term cheap fix I don't see it as being terrible. Cheers Gary

I am not a big fan of seat of the pants judgement, the placebo effect is strong in car modifications. In a pure technical sense I have yet to see a value for money result as far as improving torsional rigidity goes. The testing is actually quite simple, a basic home garage test of rigidity. Stick the car on 4 stands, under the sills is OK. Then jack one corner of the car up 100 mm and see how much the other corners move. I do that 4 times, once for each corner. Now bolt on any number of underfloor, in cabin, under bonnet and in boot braces. Then repeat the test. Note any differences. An example, my own R32GTST before and after the 6 point roll cage fitment across the chassis. LHR 100 mm - RHR 87 mm before, 93 mm after RHR 100 mm - LHR 86 mm before, 92 mm after LHF 100 mm - RHF 91 mm before, 95 mm after RHF 100 mm - RHF 90 mm before, 94 mm after That's obviously the across, you can also do along, put the jack in the middle, again under the sill and measure; Centre LH 100 mm - LHF 90 mm before, 95 mm after Centre RH 100 mm - RHF 91 mm before, 96 mm after Centre LH 100 mm - LHR 90 mm before, 94 mm after Centre RH 100 mm - RHR 91 mm before, 97 mm after This is not an absolute test as the chassis walks on the stands, it is a comparison test only. So when you do it yourself don't get hung up on the numbers themselves, the difference (improvement) is all that matters. The other test is corner weights, how many mm of adjustment of the spring seat on one corner alters how much weight on that corner. A soft (flexible) chassis means more turns to achieve the same weight transfer as a rigid (inflexible) chassis. That is a more reliable real world test as it is the wheels that move up and down and that is what is passed though the chassis. That's how we tell when a V8Supercar chassis is due for replacement, it gets lazy in its response to changes, hence why a new chassis is built each season. Usually around Bathurst time as long distance events show up any lack of rigidity. Cheers Gary

It's catch 22 with slots. If you don't take them to the edge, then they simply don't work as well in their wiping function. The trapped gas and loose material can't escape the slot, so it builds up under the outermost portion of the pad (the outer end of the slot). This decreases the braking performance and causes uneven pad wear. Cheers Gary

Yes Cheers Gary

Changing front lower control arms (their location or their length) means you will need to carry out bump steer and Ackerman correction. This can (and usually does) cost way more in time and parts than the actual change to the lower control arm itself. Plus correcting bump steer and Ackerman are not something that can be learnt overnight, it is somewhat complex and not an easy DIY. Hence why I would always suggest achieving the result with upper control arm modifications. Cheers Gary

The first answer; 280 litres per hour = 4.667 litres per minute = 4,667 cc's per minute = 6 x 778 cc per minute injectors. But the important question; 280 litres per hour AT WHAT PRESSURE? Cheers Gary

Did you have change the trigger in the CAS and/or the ignitor? They used to cause problems with Autronics. We had a Nissan at Bathurst with an Autronic no talk problem last weekend. Cheers Gary

Some things to keep in mind. You can parrallel wire up AFM's, the ECU sees the average voltage and you tune from that average. This is doing externally what an RB26 Power FC does internally, take 2 x AFM signals and turn it into 1 load axis. Hence you don't need an RB26 Power FC to run 2 x AFM's. I can plug in a Power FC and start tuning on the dyno in less than 5 minutes. A Power FC comes with very acceptable base mapping. An EMS/Autronic/Motec will take at least 1 full day to get to the same stage. A Power FC comes with very acceptable cold start and run mapping. An EMS/Autronic/Motec will take at least 3 days to get to the same stage (it has to be cold before you can tune). So don't fall for the trap of looking at only the price of the hardware, ask how much a FULL tune will cost. By full I mean cold, warm, hot, traffic, stall, air con, power steer, limp home, fuel economy etc etc. Cheers Gary

When we need a HE sump, I always have to send them a standard one to upgrade. I find the telephone is a good communication device, much more reliable than email. BTW, we make swaybars to clear HE sumps in most applications, PM me for details. Cheers Gary

Unlike the Wrecks, Skylines have good suspension pick up point rigidity, which should not be confused with general chassis rigidity. Obviously in the areas of general chassis rigidity R33's are an improvement over R32's and R34's are even more rigid. What is perhaps not so obvious is that series within those model changes have chassis rigidity improvements. Mostly as a result of mandated improvements in occupant safety. Hence an R32 S2 (post 1990) is more rigid than an R32 S1 (1989/90). I can say without exception that I have yet to see any bracing that I would consider worthwhile. Simply put, they all fail the triangulation test. Cheers Gary

Why would you want to use an N1 water pump on an RB30? Planning on circuit work using more than 7,000 rpm continuously? That's what N1 water pumps were designed for. They were NOT designed for driving around the streets using the full range of rpm or idling in traffic. Cheers Gary

another bump

They are my numbers determined in the tuning of well over 40 Skylines since 1999. They are RWKW at 5.1 volts on a properly calibrated Dyno Dynamics at zero knock with circuit racing safe A/F ratios and using 98 ron pump fuel. They do not allow for happy dynos, hub dynos, boost spikes, race fuel, dangerous A/F ratios or smart tuning past 5.1 volts. Cheers Gary

I assume it includes turbo/turbo's, pipework, cams, valve springs, porting, hoses, oil control mods, etc etc .......all installed, tuned and drive away. Cheers Gary

So your assumption is that ALWAYS you need to adjust the shocks firmer for the track? What if the track is bumpy, such as Oran Park? Will you get faster lap times if you simply increase both front and rear damping? What if rear traction is the problem and the shocks only adjust rebound damping (very common)? Isn't that going to amplify the lack of rear traction because the shock simply slows down the reaction of the tyre to the bump, it doesn't return fast enough after absorbing the impact? What if you want more roll control AND more straight line traction at the same time? The most common of track situations. How does adjusting the rebound damping help with those issues? The simple answer is it can't, doesn't and never will. Ask any suspension engineer and we will tell you, swaybars are the best way to adjust the handling balance of a car. That's why most circuit race cars have driver adjustable swaybars. Cheers Gary

Probably not, I would go with 2 fuel lines to the rail. Cheers Gary

The BMW E30 Group A and E36 Super Tourers were ~940 kgs, that's with all steel panels and the cast iron bottom end 4 cylinder engines (2.3, 2.5 and 2.0 litre). The all alloy engines were lighter and the cars carried ballast as a result. The weight distribution was a perfect 50/50 and CoG was VERY low. It's not always the absolute weight that matters, it's where that weight is concentrated. Cheers Gary

1200 bhp should be no problem. Just be aware that you have no surge protection without a surge tank, so hard launches or cornering G forces WILL interrupt the fuel flow whenever the tank gets much below half. Cheers Gary

You don't have to put the 2 x 044's side by side, you could have one under the bonnet if you wanted. The only location limit is how far you want to run the wiring (voltage drop). An 044 pumping against zero pressure flows almost twice as much as at it's rated pressure (72.5 psi). Plus the 2 x 044's suck, creating a partial vacuum at the outlet of the supplying 044, hence further increasing its flow. As a comparison, 1 x standard R33GTR pump keeps the surge tank full with 2 x 044's supplying the engine. Cheers Gary

What piston crown dimension? What head gasket thickness? What combustion chamber volume? What deck machining? What length rod? Cheers Gary

Around 1.19 from memory, that was with A032R's on a perfect day. I am hoping for a 1.15 with the RB30, but it depends on how much testing time we get between now and then. Aside from the obvious engine (RB31DET) and gearbox (R33GTST) changes there are also different rotors, pads, shocks, springs, bars, roll cage......even the instruments and data logging are different. Big learning curve to negotiate both on set up and driving (I'm rusty, very rusty). Cheers Gary

Not sure what bhp has to do with calliper type. There are lots of other factors, like calliper condition, pad compound, rotor diameter, tyres, brake fluid, suspension, weight and most important of all, what you use the car for? Cheers Gary

Some reading on lowered springs and standard shocks. http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...c=103158&hl BTW R32/33/34's have coil overs standard Cheers Gary

Shoot, I hope not Would a Snowman Versus GT (in the Toll car last year) comparison be meaningful? Phillip Island 1.47 Vs 1.34 Sandown 1.19 Vs 1.10 Winton 1.34 Vs 1.23 Eastern Creek 1.50.1 Vs 1.32 Barbagallo 1.05 Vs 56 Maybe not.......................different cars etc From memory (always dangerous) GT did a 1.09 last year at OP and the Improved Production lap record (Lofty in the GTR) is 1.15. So it will be interesting to see how much faster it goes sans restrictors. Cheers Gary