Sydneykid

Hi Mark, before you go ahead and waste your money, do you know what adjusting the damper rates actually does? Do you know what you are actually adjusting? Bump, rebound, both? If both, then in what ratio? Which way do you adjust them to overcome some low speed understeer? What about high speed oversteer? Do you really think that changing the rebound damping, on end or both ends, will affect the overall handling balance? Perhaps you think that soft for street is the go and then hard for track? What if that isn't right? If you don't know exactly what you are doing, wouldn't you be better off with a shock that has a large window of operating efficiency so that you don't have to adjust them? Happy New Year Gary

Sure you can run the engine in on the dyno, as long as you run it though the various load cycles, it's no different to running it in on the road. That's what we do on the engine dyno with a new engine, we don't want to put it in the car (to run it in) then take it out (to tune it) then put it back in the car (to race). That's a lot of workshop expense, so it is cheaper to use the engine dyno time. Plus the engine dyno has a "running in" program, you just kick it off and then go and work on something else. There are the usual safeguards that shut the engine down in a controlled fashion if soemthing happens, like high temps or low pressures. But for a chassis dyno it is much cheaper to run the car in on the road, having the dyno tied up for a whole day running in, with the operator sitting in the car varying the loads, is expensive. Plus you have issues with the gearbox and diff overheating because there simply isn't the same amount of airflow that you get driving along the road. We run 2 dyno fans and it still isn't enough airflow. So you have to stop for an hour or so every 20 to 30 minutes to let things cool down. In summary it works, but it's expensive and not good for the drivetrain. Happy New Year Gary

From memory the 2003 Update is to Euro 2 standard (ADR 79/00). Euro 3 didn't start until 2005. The Euro 2 standard is tight in HC + Nox, there are a few simple/easy things done to reduce them, even if only temporarily. From my limited understanding the tricks are to run it on 10% ethanol, move the cat right up as close to the turbine outlet as possible and advance the ignition timing. To accomplish the latter you may have to back the boost off a little bit. All up, not a very costly excercise. Do you know if they have even attempted this (or any other) physical "upgrades"? Or are they simply trying to get a paperwork solution? Happy New Year Gary

Valve body upgrade is around $500 in parts, that's the replacement (exchange) valve body itself, transmission fluid and filter. If you don't DIY, labour would be around $100 or so. One of the guys did a Group Buy with MV Autos in SA and the saving was $100 or so. The Stagea S1 auto is the same as the R33GTST auto, so plenty of guys to join in. Check out the Group Buy section. The full auto upgrade is around $3K (including the valve body upgrade) as it involves a lot of parts and is most definitely not a DIY project. Except removing the gearbox yourself if you want/can. As with everything mechanical, you get nothing for nothing. The valve body upgade gives faster shifts that are also firmer, hence not as smooth. The full upgrade adds quite a bit to that, not quite as bad as a savage manual gearbocx change, but certainly much harsher than standard. Add to that the lack of ignition retard and you end up with heavy handed manual gearchange feel, all of the time. You will find yourself backing off the throttle, anticipating the gearchange, just to smooth it out a little. Bottom line, don't expect anything like the nice smooth gearchanges you get now. Happy New Year Gary

The standard one. The 4th one (counting from the bottom). Most importantly, the one that gives 350 mm front and 340 mm rear. Happy New Year Gary

It's in a lightweight 240SX, not an full weight R32GTST like yours. Take 200 kgs out and see how fast your's goes. Why? Because some guys typically stick the DD temp probe behind the radiator to inflate the power figures. Was the dyno run done with the bonnet open? Usually, so the tuner can listen for detonation. So why the hell should the inlet air temp be higher than the ambient? Cheers Gary

So the gearbox/diff continues to stretch? I don't think so, eventually it reaches its limit of elasticity and either breaks or stops stretching. Since it doesn't break, we can assume it stopped stretching. So where does the (lost) engergy go then? It must be heat, there is no kinetic energy going anywhere else but driving the car. Anyway, I think were are talking a bit at cross purpsoses, losses increase with RPM, I think we both agree on that? It's when the rpm is constant that we dissagree. So let's concentrate on that issue. Since my race car is at 100% throttle for over 75% of every lap and never gets out of the 5,000 rpm to 7,250 rpm range, the heat build up in the % loss method must go somewhere. I have not changed the transmision coolers on the race car since we doubled the power output and the transmission fluid temperatures have not changed noticeably, we log them. So where is this doubling of heat going? A lot of heat mind you, 50 kw of it. Cheers Gary

The bump stops in the kit are very compliant, so I doubt that you are not hitiing them, just not feeling it as harsh as you might expect. Are you already on the lowest circlip grooves on the front and rear? If so, you are at the limit of the suspension geometry. Regardless of where you set the static camber, the dynamic camber change will start going positive, you will have noticeable bump steer and the extreme drive shaft angles will start to soak up even more power than they currently are. If you avoid the rear problems, by keeping it at the same height, and simply lower the front some more, you will have a few additional issues. Firstly, increased roll oversteer as the front CoG will be lower than the rear CoG, we have found that the recommended 10 mm rake (nose down) is the best. Lower the front only and you will end up with more than the ideal rake. Plus the front centre of roll will be below ground, so the roll couple will be somewhat larger. Hence you will get more roll at the front than would otherwise be the case. This will manifest itself as excessive wieght transfer to the outside front tyre and it will understeer accordingly. Add the major symptoms together and you will get understeer on the way into a corner, oversteer on the way out and unpredictable toe angle changes (bump steer) if you hit a bump mid corner. So, yeh nothing to worry, about as long as you don't mind bad handling. Cheers Gary

Yep they arrived OK, I guess you may not have received a credit, perhaps? If so PM me the details and I will chase it up. Cheers Gary

Typical Nissan, the Stagea S2 front brake pad is the same as Infinity M35, M45 and Q45. The MFSI number is 7766 D888. They are very popular models in the US, so any decent US brake web site should be able to supply them for you. While I was doing the race team cars orders for next year, I just ordered some Hawk HPS compound pads for our S1, they were under $US300 for the full set, delivered. I can't see the S2 pads being much different in price. I was going to check out the interest on a Group Buy, after I have tested the HPS's for a month or so. I was thinking Hawk pads and DBA 4000 series rotors (machined to the correct sizes of course). Thoughts? Cheers Gary

I really only talk about stuff I have tried myself. I haven't had a remapped ECU since the original R32GTR with RB30DET and that was nearly 7 years ago. What we found then, and I can't see it being that much different now, was that there were limitations on how far away from the "standard" maps you could go. So it was full of compromises, pretty much the same compromises as we face with piggy backs. If your modifications fit within the "window" then they are a good way to go. But if you want something a bit more, then you hit the wall. Let me try an 3 example. With a larger turbo fitted (T04E) we wanted to improve the response. The best way is by advancing the ignition timing. Since the bigger turbo is not generating as much boost (at the rpm and airflow that the standard turbo is) there was an opportunity to advance the ignition timing A LOT, over 20 degrees in fact. But the standard ECU simply wouldn't let us do it, it had some form of limit built in that stopped us going that far. There were similar limits on fuel tuning because of the dramatic change in boost characteristics of the turbo. So we ended up with a compromised tune. No doubt things are better now, with much more knowledge around, so the tuning limits may well be higher. But (the big one) I can tune, by myself, my Skylines/Stagea with a Power FC, a Motec, an Autronic, a Haltec or a Microtech. I can't tune with a ROM upgrade because I don't have the knowledge or the equipment. So it's not a cost effective solution for me. Cheers Gary

Check out the Group Buy thread for prices of Bilsteins. http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/R3...tel-t87826.html Cheers Gary

Harry says % for losses is better and gives some good reasoning. Perhaps the fixed amount method deserves equal time, some reasons are; If I double the horsepower do I double the losses? If I have a 200 kw engine it looses 50 kw (using a 25% loss), when it makes 400 kw does the same gearbox, tailshaft, diff, driveshafts, tyres, wheels etc suddenly loose an extra 50 kw? Since energy can neither be gained nor lost, where does the extra 50 kw go? Heat? Keep in mind that 50 kw is a heap of heat (think 50 x 1 kw heaters). I would have boiling gearbox/diff oil all over the place in no time. Personally I think it is somewhere in between, whilst keeping in mind that it is torque (not horsepower) that turns the divetrain. Hence any horsepower losses would be rpm dependant. Think of Harry's turning the gearbox by hand example, I can't do it at idle speed (750 rpm) let alone 7,500 rpm. Merry XMas Gary

Is that not CURRENTLY available or NEVER going to be available? If it's never, then doesn't that mean no more SEVS vehicles made after 11/03? That can't be right either, aren't Evo X's coming in under SEVS? Cheers Gary

Absolutely excellent thread, well done, thank you, I know how much it slows down the process when you take pictures. But it sure helps us other guys attempting the same thing. The RB25DET in the R33GTST is finished its forged internals rebuild and as part of that upgrade I grabbed one of these inexpensive Chineses copies. Since the head was already ported we had to port the manifold to match, which is a good idea anyway as the original casting didn't line up with the ports very well. The engine is on the engine stand so it will be a bit easier to fit it all up before it goes into the engine bay. The only real difference to this installation is that I am using some RB26 top feed injectors that I had lying around. In fact that's the reason why I went for this manifold, it was cheaper than buying side feed injectors. I have some questions; In this picture you can see the water feed and return on the top of the throttle body. It would appear that you haven't connected them up to the water system. Did you simply leave them open (as they appear in the picture) or did you block them off? Or perhaps removed them entirely? Are you not concerned with freezing up of the throttle body on cold wet nights? It happened to us twice (Goulborne & Philip Island) when we where going there for a race meeting in winter. At the front of the throttle body (you can see it in this picture) is a small vaccuum fitting which from memory is used for the carbon cannister. Did you use it for that or something else or just block it off? I noticed that you removed the washer bottle and ran the intercooler pipe throough the created vacant space, as per the following picture. Other installations I have seen use the GTR style hole in the side of the inner guard which allow the retention of the washer bottle in its normal location. I assume that you did it your way to eliminate the one extra bend in the intercooler pipe, or was there another reason? Merry Xmas Gary

While I am in a realist mood, let's move on to this one. The ambient temperature is 21 degrees and the inlet air temp is 33 degrees. That's a 12 degree correction factor, rule of thumb 8 degrees is worth around 5%, so the 405 rwhp is really 374 rwhp or 279 rwkw. Cubes observation that "a car that makes more torque requires more fuel for a given power level as it will tend to make its peak power at an earlier rpm" is pretty close. Perhaps a better explanation would be that the maximum injector flow rate determines the maximum torque output. Since horsepower is simply torque X rpm, the higher rpm (lower torque) would allow slightly more horsepower with the same injector sizing. Back to the car at hand, I have never seen a GTR make more than a genuine 265 rwkw with standard injectors. The extra 14 rwkw (265 versus 279) could be put down to the "Cubes" effect and/or the slightly lower drivetrain losses in AD4M's case. As I said, no magic in engines. Cheers Gary

Please excuse me, but I am a facts based realist and, as the guys on here know, I tell it like I see it. No way it's got 300 rwkw with standard R32GTR injectors at standard fuel pressure, my experience tells me that there is no magic when it comes to engines. Some further evidence; The ET indicates ~220 rwkw The TS indicates ~190 rwkw The dicrepancy (220 versus 190) is due to the use of drag slicks on what is most likely a prepared track Cheers Gary

There is some dumbarse stuff in there; - Sequential Gear Boxes Not Permitted in Street Class. - Sequential Gear Boxes Not Permitted in Modified Class. But sir, my car (35GTR, M3, M5, VW, Audi etc etc) comes standard with a sequential gearbox - All Street Class vehicles must use DOT street tires with a UTQG tread wear rating of 140 or higher, Tires with UTQG tread wear rating under 140 are not permitted in Street Class But sir, my car (35GTR, M3, M5, VW, Audi etc etc) comes standard with a tyre rated less than 140 - All Modified Class vehicles are required to use DOT approved tires with UTQG tread wear ratings of 50 and above. Tires with less than a UTQG rating of 50 are not permitted in Modified Class. No problem, Hoosier make a tyre that has a rating of 50 printed on it, but it's really a 30 - Front under tray cannot go rearward past the center-line of the front axle But sir, my car comes standard with a front undertray that goes rearward past the centre line of the front axle And lastly; - All vehicles must use tires that are legal for use on public roadways in the United States, Japan or the European Union. What about us Ozzies? Merry Xmas Gary

Engine oil needs to get to 100 degrees C to boil off any build up of condensation. What you are seeing, 80 to 105, is quite normal. Merry Xmas Gary

Can you be specific about what is actually preventing compliance? Cheers Gary

Welcome, you will find SAU is the most informative forum on Skylines anywhere in the world. Being new to the forum the first thing you should learn how to do is use the search button. Use it frequently. Once you have done a search you will find that there is no ECU that is 100% suitable for an auto Skyline. They are all compromised in one way. Nissan uses extensive logic (programming) of the engine ECU to protect the auto gearbox on gear changes. This is accomplished by a complex set of ignition retard and cut mapping that is designed to remove the variations in engine load from the gearbox input while it is changing gear, that's up shift and down shift. So that there is no confusion I should point out that there is a separate gearbox ECU which does exactly (an only) that, control the gearbox itself. The engine ECU has nothing to do with when the gearbox changes gear, its task is simply to retard/cut the ignition to protect the gearbox and make the change smooth and seamless. It's one of the reasons (the main reason) why Nissan autos last so long. A Nissan engineeer told me some years ago that the gearbox protection mapping in the engine ECU actually contains more code than that required to get the engine to run. As a result of that complexity no ECU manufacturer (not even Apexi with the Power FC) has spent the programming time required to develop a set of aftermarket maps. So don't bother looking for one, they don't exist and probably never will. As your search will reveal there are partial solutions; 1. Ditch the auto and go manual 2. Use piggy backs to trick the standard ECU, there is a limit as to how far you can go power wise with that approach. Around 265 rwkw seems to be the limit there. 3. Change the auto gearbox to a more durable drag spec style with the strength to survive full throttle upshifts. There is no power limit with this approach, there are autos with 1,000 bhp. 4. Strengthen up the standard auto gearbox with hydraulic mods (valve body change), once again there is a limit as to how far you can go power wise with that approach. Around 300 rwkw seems to be the limit there. 5. Do a proper job on the gearbox, the valve body change plus upgraded bands and clutches. I don't know anyone who has exceed 400 rwkw with this approach, but more than that is possible. With options 1, 3, 4 and 5 it doesn't matter which ECU you use, none of them have the mapping logic. So simply choose the one that has a good tuner that you can use locally. That's more important than any minor differences in the ECU's themselves. All of them will "run" the engine, with the Power FC probably being the easiest to install and giving the closest to standard "niceness" to drive and live with everyday. If you want "advanced" functions like antilag, launch control, data logging, intercooler spray control etc, then a Motec or Autronic would be my choices. Merry Xmas, enjoy the search button, it is your best freind Gary

Cams in an N/A application are somewhat of a different proposition to cams in a turbo application. You use boost to fill in any midrange holes in the torque curve caused by the longer duration. The extra lift is a real benefit as it lets the air flow hence reduces the amount of boost required for the same power out put. More importantly in an N/A engine being boosted, the increased overlap is beneficial as it reduces the effective compression ratio. Plus I can run more ignition timing for better response, than would otherwise be the case. Simply put, I don't care about an N/A hole in the mid range, it just won't be there when we apply some boost. Cheers Gary

It depends on what style of fitting you are using. With ours, it is simply a matter of movng the oil & water lines down a bit. Cheers Gary

There is no magic here, it is simply a mater of increasing the fuel presure to squirt more fuel through the same sized hole. We do it all the time, when we only need a slight increase in flow. Big increases in flow (like this one) are not something we would EVER do. Here's the problem Simon, you have to be running the injectors at higher than standard fuel pressure, much higher than standard. This means several things; 1. You need to have superior than standard fuel lines and fittings, a petrol fire is not pretty. The right stuff is not cheap. 2. You need to buy an ajustable FPR and tune it to the required pressure, there is a cost involved in doing that. 3. Your fuel pump is working at a pressure that is higher than its rated pressure, that means it has reduced flow. Plus its life will be much shorter. As a result I would hope that you bought a larger fuel pump than you really needed, that will have cost more 4. The big one, the injector solenoids are opening against much high pressure than they were designed for. One day one of them with fail, without notice, the solenoid will simply cease to function. Then you will have one cylinder gone west, the first thing you will know about it will be a plume of smoke. The real quations is. have you realy saved any money by not buying larger injectors and spending it on an adj FPR, a larger than neccesary fuel pump and superior fuel lines and fittings? Not in my experience. Then factor in the risk and the cost when it fails. Roll the dice by all means, but you will lose eventually, why? Because everyone else has. Merry Xmas Gary

Move them out of the way, bend them carefully and slowly. Cheers Gary