• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About Blue

  • Rank
    Rank: RB20DET
  • Birthday 07/09/1971

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Car(s)
    R31 coupe
  • Real Name
  1. Sweet, I will grab them when I get home. Haltech are remarkably reticent to release them, the only one I had seen was from some years ago and apparently quite obsolete with a number of new or changed messages. Now I wish I could just find the CAN message set for a Madza 3 MPS. A mate has one with an AIM dash in it but very few of the parameters that were advertised as being available for the car (Which led to him buying the dash) actually appear. I may have to go CAN sniffing for him and that will be time consuming to say the least. He want's to do proper logging so he does not really want to go OBD2 and low data rate, through it might be better for him that when he has now, he is only getting very basic engine data, no boost pressure etc.
  2. It is not in the C127 manager. I just downloaded the latest one today to check if they had added it. In C127 manager they have the old V1 message set as a compound message, or as individual 4 channel messages on 010, 011, 012 hex etc. Not that it matters to me (I have an Emtron KV8 ECU) but what MoTec software is it in? I occasionally get help requests from mates.
  3. If you can track down the Haltech V2 CAN message set the MoTec can display it. I have seen it about but I have not got it to hand. It is not all that hard to build a receive template for the MoTec dashes once you have a look at a few. I will say that the racepak/Haltech and MoTec dash build quality is like chalk and cheese. The C127 weighs a lot more than an IQ3 but in comparison feels like it has been machines out of a billet! (They might be for all I know)
  4. To keep it in the right spirit for the thread, my setup in mostly complete guise. Data coming from the ECU over CAN to test that I have it functioning properly.
  5. Bit late to the party, I had a Haltech branded IQ3 logger and to be honest I found the software and configurability very limiting. Not to mention it had a dose of the dreaded "Segment loss" issue that earlier ones had. No idea about the later ones. I ended up selling it as when I sent it back for repair they were nice enough to update the firmware for me. Read that to mean that they changed it to the Haltech V2 CAN protocol and it would no longer work with the old ECU that I yanked out of my HR31 to put in something else without paying to send it back to the states again to have the CAN version changed. I got pissed about it and sold it. I replaced it in the HR31 with a MoTec C127 with logging and I/O enabled. I/O I no longer need as such as I updated the ECU as well and the things I wanted that for I am inputting to my ECU and sending to the dash over CAN. About the only thing I will now use that for is a signal to trigger in car cameras when the logger starts running so I don't have to remember to do it myself. The MoTec is far from cheap but IMO the IQ3 is geriatric and showing it, you get what you pay for.
  6. I can live with dropping a little lower RPM performance, so long as I can also live with the potential extra maintenance cost of anti lag! One issue I face no matter what is the range of housings with a T3 flange is pretty limited. Dyno sheets from when the car was tuned, I would not want to loose too much at the low end or midrange. Bearing in mind that the car could easily make more at the same boost, given the total lack of engine protection on the old E11 I asked for and received a nice safe tune. Before and after on these sheets is a proper tune at 18PSI versus a very rough track tune at 13.
  7. I will dig out the dyno sheet from hen it was tuned when I get home. Suffice to say it was on boost pretty early for a 20 and it was/is pretty snappy.
  8. Without digging too deep the 7064 can be had with a T3 flange, I would just need to dig in to maps to see how it compares with the potato. All this is a little by the by anyway as I doubt the money will be there to throw a new snail at it this year, but you never know. I can see up to about $5K between it and back on track as it is so it is not really very likely to be changed this year, but I tend to plan these tings a long way ahead. The RS is snappy enough on it that I gave up on closed loop control with the previous ECU (Old E11 Haltech) as it was impossible to dial out big boost spikes at high RPM. The new ECU just about has more tables for closed loop than the E11 did for everything it had. Edit: Whatever ends up on it next what I would really like to do though is get rid of the split adapter. Aside from anything else I have had constant issues with the tiny T25 nuts and studs undoing in use. At least it was easy to get a lock tab for the T3 setup.
  9. So, a long long time since I posted on SAU, and my eyes glazed over a long long way back in this thread. Here is the bones of it, I have had my track car off track for nearly three years for a full wiring and electronics refresh (Wiring, PDM, dash, ECU) and as usual time and money had their way. Long story short I hope to have the car running again in the next month or so. The car has a GT2860RS (.64 exhaust housing) on a redtop RB20DET making 208RWKW on 98 RON at 18PSI while being nice and snappy for the usual uses of the car, short tracks with slow corners and hillclimbs. The turbo is on one of those horrid little T3 to T25 adapters on the standard manifold and I would love to get rid of it. I know the RB20 in any guise is getting long in the tooth but have people had much success with the EFR turbos on these? The only advice I have had is "Go a size bigger than you think'. What I would love is if the newer design would give me the same kind of small turbo responsiveness without choking it as much at higher revs. My biggest wants on a conversion would be marginal to no loss of lower rev range performance, T3 bolt on (Unless the T3 to T4 adapters are a better thing than the two part T3 to T25 ones) and after that a bit of an extension of higher RPM capability. Am I dreaming? My other thought was to build an adapter to take it to a V band turbine and fit the .72 A/R housing and an external gate.
  10. Ta, that is what I thought, it was sold as a non ABS cylinder but Dan who owns the car would not know the difference, the main thing was to get the Japanese booster so that we have the correct bolt pattern. Aus R31 has the master cylinder flange bolts at an angle where Japanese ones are horizontal, going to a JDM booster lets us use bigger master cylinders without as much stuffing around. No difference to me it being an ABS cylinder, we will just fit an external prop valve in the cabin. It is a track only car so no legality to worry about and it is not going to be set up the same as the donor car so bias tweaks are almost certain to be needed to get the best out of it. I am seriously looking at a bias box and twin cylinders on my own car so we might even pinch my master cylinder (Bigger again, 17/16" off a Navara) and bias valve to get Dan's car on the track as my car is off-track for a few months for a tidy up.
  11. Folks, I am trying to confirm if my brother in law has been sold what he needs. We are in the middle of a brake upgrade on his R31 track car. We are going to R33 GTS-T gear all around (A huge improvement on stock Australian R31 stuff) He has bought an R33 booster and master cylinder off ebay which was listed as coming from a non ABS R33 GTS-T, but it only has two ports. Can I confirm if the R33 had two ports on the cylinder and a splitter block in the lines be split to the front wheels? The cylinder has what looks like a bias valve cast into the housing, but my sister's S15 looks the same and it has ABS fitted. I was under the impression that ABS cars had two ports and non ABS had three. I am not all that worried about it is it does prove to be an ABS cylinder with no bias valve as we will just plumb in an adjustable one in the cabin if that is the case. I just need to confirm what he actually has. Aside from that, does anyone have a part number handy for a seal kit for the BM44? It is in good apparent condition but I would prefer to replace the seals before I put it on the track.
  12. OK, I started with some searching but did not find an answer to the specific question. I run a HR31 track car, currently using the stock HR31 brake master cylinder and booster. The front brakes are R33 GT-R brembos and the rears are stock R33 GTS-T/GT-R ones. My pedal is too soft and sensitive for my liking and there is not enough rear bias. The two options are to fiddle around with a Patrol master cylinder and bias valve or just go the whole hog with a pedal box and twin masters on a bias bar. My preferred option is the pedal box and I am looking at the Tilton 600 series alloy one. The question, is there anyone in the SAU community running a pedal box in a 33 GT-R with Brembos? If so, what size master cylinders are you using? I am looking for moderately high pedal effort to make them work as one of the things I like least is a soft pedal. My system shoudl be close enough to the GT-R original that I should be able to get enough rearward bias even with the smaller rears I am currently running (The Brembo upgrade is on the cards for the rear too, I am keeping my eye out for a pair of calipers at the right price)
  13. Yeah, the guys picked up on it on the night but to be honest I was so buggered by then I did not realise they had done.
  14. Just a note on the sprint classes. Dennis has been moved across to class D and the results amended. That was done a couple of days ago when it was pointed out to me but the results are on the same link as before. The remainder had to be checked out by myself while I dropped a sprint run to try to spot every car to check on classes. Most cars which were registered and driven to the day would have not ended up in race class, Fatz cause it is Fatz! Plus he and Jenna have been tracking that car pretty hard for a couple of years. I think Dennis is one of two cars I did not manage to spot while walking around. The regularity results are up on the same forum link with the rest of the sprint results. To explain them, the regularity is scored by the standard deviation calculated in Excel between your three fastest laps of the day, so every driver who did at least three timed laps on the day went in the regularity, the closer together your fastest three the smaller your standard deviation and the better you do. A small club I am part of has been doing it's whole championship like that for years as we have about six regular competing members in five very different cars and the regularity format takes the car out of the picture while still not having to do anything but drive it as hard or as gently as you want. GTR32G, just to put in another apology, I actually was expecting you to move up behind me pretty quickly and was looking for you, but between us we managed to time you moving across with me changing mirrors as I was starting to move towards the kink and I lost sight of you entirely as you went into a blind spot (Between the cage and helmet and driving position (Very very low, the windows are at my shoulder) the blind spots are not small) Just glad that there was no damage done, not what I want to see happen at a track day and certainly nothing I want to find myself involved in. I also want to put up a thank you to everyone who helped on the day and everyone who entered, Given the format of the day (With Group A/C demos and or passenger laps between each timed run) I think that five timed runs of 12 mins plus two passenger sessions at the end of the day is not bad going. on a normal day without the historics there we would probably have had seven timed runs for the day.
  15. RB25 repower or just an RB25 box? If it is an RB25 gearbox replacement you would need to tell people is it an RB25DET box or a DE box?