BoostdR

I guess the idea is to give more direct response in manual mode without the cushion of the converter. I agree with a power increase without a corresponding trans reprogram lockup is a bad idea at high throttle openings. 6 years is a good soak test. I called Mike yest twice to confirm his thoughts... Can't argue with hard data. I'll keep investigating this power switch

Testing tonight showed that mikes comments held true for normal driving mode but as pointed out on previously the torque converter does indeed try to lockup in manual mode from 2nd to 5th gear at any throttle opening position. First gear has no lockup. I did note the lockup solenoid starts at 0.3amp and Ramps to 0.5amp Max. I tried to stall the car up and confirmed the brake wire mod was giving 100% throttle opening. The TCM however was still getting a brake signal. 5th gear comes active at 66 degrees trams oil temp and over. My Gscan tool also showed a power switch setting which interests me, would be nice if this switches the TCM to different maps. Matt

Hi all, first of all I don't want to upset anyone with what I'm about to say, I am just trying to ensure the correct info is available to all. Talking with Mike from MV Automatics here in Adelaide he advised against this mod as it will just increase box wear and fuel consumption with no added benefit. The M35 RE5R05A in manual mode will completely unlock the torque convertor at anything over 45% throttle input so the switch mod does nothing over 45% tps. An effect will be felt at low-part throttle only. The ECU controls the transmission shift durations to the extent fitting a shift kit's effect is negated to a % due to the ecu trying to bring the shift duration back to target. This is most noticeable at part throttle when making anything over std power..the trans is prone to slip and groan. The Trans Go shift kit whilst does make a noticeable difference at higher throttle openings, the reason it is still smooth down low is the ECU bringing back the longer/smoother shift durations. Personally I feel a boost controller mapped with tps on the x axis and boost on the y will most likely reduce M35 owners blowing up their transmissions as it would be able to restrict the torque levels at part throttle to the transmission ecu's controller shift duration zone. Another work around could be a TECU load input convertor to fool the ecu into thinking the tps is higher without effecting fuel and ign mapping in turn giving shorter duration shifts at lower throttle openings He did recommend the thermistor and oil cooler mod and said there is no down side. He also mentioned if you want a better dyno figure to lockup the torque convertor, this will also reduce torque multiplication in the mid range however I would like to hear if anyone has actually monitored the lockup clutch in manual mode to see if it does indeed lockup at full throttle as indicated in this thread. I'm going to check mine at the shop with the scope tonight. Will report back to confirm or dismiss Mike's comments Matt

That's good advise scotty to fit the OEM conical upper rubber under the rear BC spring to get an inch of height back. I have to do this also as I almost ripped my exhaust off going out the driveway after fitting up some BC's(2011). On full extension without the rubber the car sits a fingers width to the tyre and the spring is not overly captive. Matt

I can do it, PM me

Normal with e85, warm up tune can make a noticeable difference though. You want to get it in closed loop asap after cold start. Matt

EFR 's are a looong turbo. Prob would be able to close the hood with a Garrett unit

Be interested to know how they fixed this when the inherent flaw is that lack of a crank mounted sensor rather than the Ecu. I know the Oem ecu actually changes its read mode to ignore the interference at high revs...

Running Nistune with Eflex and HPX MAF sensor on a friends S2 C34 Stagea. Currently installing a BW EFR 6758 with .8A/R. Should make a nice responsive 350kw daily. Matt Brown(Nistune) did comment he has M35 daughter board development on the list as a teaser Matt

Nice, I've had good results with haltech but only experience with sub 500hp and Oem cas. Be interested to hear how it goes. Does the haltech have a ref sync capture tool for analysing an oscilloscope style log? Would be good to obtain a before and after to see the change in noise.

If you want to make your BC's even better, fit them with swift springs. Their springs are more linear, lighter and give longer stroke.

That's all well and good but you have taken my comment out of context. Scotty was leveraging on my use of the word competent, I was leveraging on his contradiction. It's all good. I'll sort it out and post up my setting when I do. Let's not fill this thread with useless posts anymore.

We just machine slots into the harmonic balancer, might be easier over a trigger gear. I can get pic's next time I'm at the shop if it helps.

The factory CAS doesn't work well with Motec or Autronic, I can't comment on the Haltech. We run a custom Ref/Sync (Crank/Cam) setup on anything over 500hp. Be aware noisy signals could cause premature bearing failure. It's better/cleaner to trigger from the crank as it is not effected by timing belt harmonics.

The head drain will work as a breather in reality so may still give a small benefit. As for catch cans, if you run into trouble the Autech catch cans work well on the R. Same principle the Bathurst R32 Race GTR used back in the day. If you don't plumb back into the intake( as your running MAP) you will probably be fine anyway.

oh, also. Run redline lightweight gear oil in your box. I blew 13 boxes then changed oil..blew none. Don't flat change with the std box and you should be good. R32 gearbox runs different energiser clip than the series 3 33 GTR. If you do replace the box get the Series 3 33 R box. The EFR vband outlet is a weird size that only BW sell have you sorted suspension? If not take a look at MCA reds www.mcasuspension.com

rear oil drain is not required(doesn't work anyway, same deal with the mines triple flow baffles) if you got the block to head restrictor size matched to your oil pump you will be sweet. I ran a .9mm restrictor with a Reinmax pump(JUN pump flow). The solid lifters don't require a great deal of oil. The EFR turbo's have a turbine speed limit(560m/s for the 8374). It is a very good idea to run their speed sensor(with a road rage gauge) to ensure you stay below this limit other wise they will eventually spit the Gamma Ti turbine out the exhaust. Many teams running the EFR will dyno tune and then put new turbo's on prior to each race as they run at or above the turbine speed limit. Anti Lag also isn't a good idea. Apart from that they are the best turbo in the world. Matt

The spirit of sharing information on forums to assist fellow enthusiasts...is no more? 'quick smart' and 'years to work out' are a tad of a contradiction don't you think... Tell you what, I'll start my own thread with my findings (HyperGear SS2 + E85) Matt

Anyone?

Hi All, I have a Greddy Ultimate with a Hypergear SS2, 98 + E85 in my sights. I am a competent tuner but any tips and tricks will help greatly. Could anyone advise of any tips on setting up the emanage to get around the factory restrictions: ECU Config: VQ20 Setting? ECU Jumpers: positions? Boost/load Cut: MAF clamp setting? Rev Limit: settings for adjusting? CEL light: Daughter board for V35? Ignition retard: Knock sensor removed? Keep out of various map axis points? Any associated problems running 1000cc injectors? What is the driving experience like with the SS2? Will I be able to get her up on boost at launch with a std stall convertor and the brake wire mod? Or will I get beaten by mazda 121's off the line (ie: horrible to drive around town). Car has, 80mm exhaust from Dump-no cats, HDI FMIC. OEM intake pipe with pod filter. Kind Regards, Matt

Be aware anti surge comp cover will reduce compressor efficiency\flow and hence power capacity. Compressor surge can be tuned out with boost vs Rpm control

laggier? up to 2000rpm according to your own info

Tao's testing points to yes a JJR cooler is better but a 100mm Takashi would be better still. Matt

PWR uses a design borrowed from the VR4 and EVO's over a decade ago. The little nodules on the inside of the core actually create a larger surface area over traditional intercoolers which cools better whilst increasing flow capacity. The Delta fin(Apexi Style) of the Takashi reduces flow over a comparable 68mm core which also lets it down. Best cooler to date I have tested is the ARC R Twin entry, flared bell mouth style inlets, flow through knife edged tubes(outside air for radiator). If only you could use the EVO/PWR style core with the ARC core (inlet air) bell mouths you would have it all so to speak. Pity they are almost impossible to find these days. Matt

Yes. I'll change it out myself. Still after standard, don't want any more lag