Sydneykid

Suggestions follow; 1. Depends on you power target, around 190 rwkw seems to be the compromise limit 2. Depends on your power target, the standard fuel pump is OK for ~200 4wkw 3. Using the standard exhaust and compliance cat, around 160 rwkw 4. R33 GTST autos put out ~120 rwkw standard, a tuned DFA and 10 psi will get you to around 150 4wkw 5. The tranmission losses are pretty much constant, so what ever kw increase you see at the wheels will translate to kw at the engine. cheers

Thanks for the response, I have a few suggestions/comments; 1. So you are going to use an S14 rear shock on the front of a Stagea? What are you doing about the shock valving requirements OTHER than spring rate? Stabiliser bar rate, unsprung weight, leverage and movement rates, travel limitations etc 2. I thought that would be necessary 3. Why not buy the right diameter tyres? Surely that is more logical 4. You will 5. Yep, you could do that 6. What about the horsepower loss due to missaligned CV's? Plus the greatly accelerated wear? 7. They will fix the static camber, what are you doing about the dynamic camber change? 8. No it won't, you will need to correct the geometry of the steering arms to align with the lower control arms. There are no off the shelf solutions I have seen for #1, #4, #6. #7 and #8, you will either have to design and make them yourself or have someone who knows about suspension geometry make them for you. Metal fabrication skills, suspension geometry simulation software, welding skills, a good understanding of shock absorber hydraulic engineering etc, will all be necessary. As I said, it's an interesting project, I just hope that you have a full understanding of the hurdles you are facing and the budget that will be required to overcome those hurdles. cheers

As you can see from this picture the LHS bolt has bottomed out, use that to rotate the eccentric crush tube. The lock nut is then tightened. cheers

Adjustable shocks are only worthwhile if you know what you are doing with the adjustments. Most of the time shocks have adjustment to cover up for their unsophisticated valving. This means they only work in a small range of conditions and so they have to have the adjustment. High quality dampers (Eg: Bilsteins) have very sophisticated valving and consequently have a large window that they operate well in. Simply put, they don't need adjusting. cheers

haven't used 98 E10, use 100 E5 (Shell V Power Racing) all the time. Slight change in A/F ratios (leaner) not enough to stress over. But big advances in ignition timing, much faster boost build (standard turbo at 10 psi at 1,800 rpm) and much better throttle response. Shell V Power Racing works great on the default Power FC Maps, virtually zero knock. cheers

I agree wiht Castrol SAF-XA 75W/140 cheers

My vote is twin GT2871RS with the 0.60 compressor and 0.64 turbine. They each flow enough air for 400 bhp using 1.5 bar at 74% efficiency. You should be looking at 1 bar boost by 4,000 rpm, which leaves plenty of room for rpm changes on gearchanges etc. The 1 bar at 4,00 rpm is based on 3 litre capacity with 9 to 1 compression ratio and 264 degree cams with around 9.5 mm lift and some decent porting on an RB26 cylinder head. cheers

Did you order via email or PM? If email, then the response would have gone out by email. cheers

Sorry for the delay, only 1 set of bump stop/dust covers in stock, delivery expected today. If so, they will go out to you tomorrow. I will PM you a con note number as soon as it is issued. cheers

They were hard to track down, found them yesterday. I should have them tonight and send them to you tomorrow. I will PM you the con note number as soon as I have it. cheers

Have a look down the bolt holes in the crush tube, you can see that one is very shallow. The bolt that goes in that hole bottoms out, so you use that to rotate the crush tube. It is not that hard to turn. There is a lock nut that goes on that bolt to tighten when you are finished so it doesn't rotate. The bolt on the other side doesn't bottom out. so you can tighten it. cheers

First run, no burn out SOSK found 0.3 sec using the MT ET's. cheers

Well done Ray, I told you it was in there, you just had to dig it out. cheers

Yep, Walbros are fine as long as they don't have to pump much pressure. cheers

OK, try the other steps and please report back on progress. cheers

Hi, did you get around to trying this? Did it work? cheers

You are pretty much spot on, the standard ECU will see excessive knock and retard the ignition timing, it also does a bit of richening. That's why you need the SITC. You can simulate most things on the dyno, such as lots of load at low rpm, but you can't simulate everything that the car experiences in a normal week's driving. cheers

The front at 345 mm is too low, raise it up 5 mm The rear at 345 mm is too high, lower it 5 mm Stiffen up the rear bar Stifen up the rear shock settings The front bar is already on full soft How much toe out do you have on the rear? Does it still have HICAS? cheers

Let's get over the Superpro Whiteline comparison first, colour is NOT the only difference, the duro (hardness) is different. Suprerpo tend to go for a higher duro, which is noticeable in the increased NVH for zero benefit in handling. You can push the protruding bush back in using a wide jaw vice. If you don’t have one of those then two big washers and the supplied bolts will do it. Put the washers at either end of the bushes, screw the bolts into the crush tube and tighten then down on the washers. OR Use a long bolt and 2 big washers either end, bolt through the crush tune and tighten. You can buy 6mm high tensile long bolts and big washers from your local SupaCheap, Repco, AutoOne, AutoPro, AutoBarn etc. Cheers

Sounds like an interesting project, I would like some more information if that's OK; 1. Didn't you say you were using S14 rear shocks because they were shorter? 2. Are you are going to flare the guards? I didn't think that 9 x 20 mm offset would clear the standard guards? 3. Are you running a lower rolling diameter tyre? Rim diameter is IRRELEVANT, most people run the same (or similar) overall wheel/tyre diameter to avoid excessive speedo error, what are you doing to correct that? 4. Are you going to cut a hole in the rear subframe? Whereabouts? 5. What are you doing with the exhaust system where it goes under the LHS rear drive shaft? 6. What are you doing about the excessive drive shaft angles? Front and rear? 7. What are you doing about dynamic camber change? Front and Rear? 8. What are you doing about bump steer? Front and rear? cheers

What do you mean by full boost? cheers

Firstly I should remind the auto owners that I tune them with 2nd gear selected and the “snow” setting on the ATTESA, they stay in 2nd all the time then, no kick down. If you try and tune in 3rd gear you will find that the gearbox will kick down to 2nd when you put load on the dyno. This makes the car jump around on the rollers something fierce, sometimes they can even jump sideways, very nasty. Moving on to the main subject................ Recently a few guys have been asking me about how to get around the DFA (SAFC) compromise of leaner A/F ratios at high boost and higher rpm and richer A/F ratios during (and sometimes just after) boost build. The problem is if you increase the AFM voltage at higher rpm (to get richer A/F ratios) the standard ECU sees this as increased airflow, which may push it into R&R mapping. Which results in power dips and a lack of response. Sometimes this doesn't show up on the dyno but raises it ugly head when you drive in variable conditions on the road or track. To fix this “R&R versus too lean at higher boost” problem you have to increase the fuel pressure (via an adjustable fuel pressure regulator). The trick is to increase the fuel pressure just enough to get the A/F ratios to the target (say 12 to 1) in the rpm range that it is currently running too lean (usually above 4,500 rpm). For adjustable FPR I use the Nismo bolt on style, ~$150 from Nengun. Once you get the higher rpm A/F ratios in the range that you want them, you use the DFA (SAFC) to lean it out in the other rpm ranges where it will then be too rich. This (reduced AFM voltage) also helps with preventing the ECU going to R&R, as it uses lower airflow map load points. So you get 2 benefits. In order to lean out the A/F ratios, the DFA settings are used to reduce the AFM voltage (that the ECU sees) which usually advances the ignition timing. So the SITC is used to retard the ignition timing. This retarding is mostly required at revs over 4,500 rpm. Most times under 4,000 rpm you can sneak in a bit more advance, which improves the response considerably. If you are using a suitable turbo (eg; GCG ball bearing high flow) the adj FPR, DFA and SITC you should be able to get the boost up to 1 bar, maybe 1.1 bar. That will give you another 30 to 40 kw over the 12 psi that you may well be restricted to if you don’t use the adj FPR to cure the high rpm leanness first. It does require some fiddling around, but no more than trying to achieve the same results with a Power FC on a manual. It’s just a matter of tuning the right bit first. Hope that was of some help to fellow auto owners. cheers

What you need is; KLS090B - 90 mm single eye link kit (with all bushes, nuts. washers and bolts) Retail = $125.00 Group Buy price = $106.00 inc delivery to anywhere is Australia PM me for details cheers

Since you have not supplied any information on what mods you have, what mods you intend ot have, what tuning you have and what your usage patterns are it is impossible to answer this question properly. Some things for you to think about; A 91 ron tune on a Skyline is not very common, you may well be the first person that you tuner will have ever done it for. So it might cost you $5-600 to get it tuned for 91 ron as well as the $5-600 for a 98 ron tune. That cos tduplication re=occurs every time you do an upgrade and need a tune If you want to swap between fuel, you will need to keep both sets of maps available for uploading. That means laptop tuning software (eg; Datalogit for Power FC's) and a laptop itself, of course. Talking about 20 rwkw loss is excessively simplistic, think about HALF AS MUCH POWER at 3,000 rpm as being more indicative. If you are thinking that the standard computer will save your ass, then you are right as far as that goes. But the knock driven rich and retard will KILL the performance and KILL the fuel economy. Much much more than a tune for 91 ron will. So, fill in the information gaps and we can go from there. cheers

By the time you pay for all that stuff for the standard rods, you could have bought forged ones. cheers