Kinkstaah

I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!

This is the check list they sign off on. This implies that adjustable coilovers of the type we're referring to are not a "Variable Ride Height" system. This very much is in the ethos of "I can change the height while moving/while parked without pulling wheels off the car and mechanically doing so"

I would think making the argument that the travel is limited by a spring flexing against a spring perch as "the same method". Later on in the document they do state that the spring can't bind on full bump travel and cannot come loose in full rebound travel as well. (which is all very sensible). The laws are actually pretty sensible and reasonable. It's just that the people who enforce and check them don't actually read them or know them accurately. "Oh, coilovers? Instant fail mate. Don't even need to look at it." - Guy who will be instantly reported by me. There is probably merit to people who do get defected for height also get defected for the suspension in that state that allows it. I did never consider the people who are complaining about coilovers being picked on are also running around at 50mm off the floor.

I think given SAU's knowledge of E85 we can strongly conclude that 10% ethanol in almost any situation is entirely fine. Almost all of the myths against E85 were overblown, let alone E10.

They actually don't - They adhere to VSB14 rules just like Victoria. The rules are against CABIN adjustable height, and it quite clearly states that the height has to be within parameters. I asked the VASS engineer to confirm this when I got my car engineered and they refused to engineer the coilovers because they didn't meet the requirements for requiring engineering. (mine are height adjustable.) People "Not wanting to bother" with "Actually reading/knowing/adhering to the rules" should result in fines and immediately losing the ability to issue blue slips and/or RWC's in Vic.

Sorry, are coilovers ACTUALLY ILLEGAL in NSW? They aren't in Vic, as long as they retain 70% of stock travel and the car is above 100mm off the ground. Does NSW actually have a law making coilovers actually illegal? RWC/Blue Slip/Engineering people not knowing the actual f**king laws boils my blood. Demand them to point to the documentation that states a coilover is illegal. (it may exist in NSW ) Edit: I checked. They aren't. https://www.nsw.gov.au/sites/default/files/2021-02/RMS-infosheet-light-vehicle-modifications-manual-suspension-and-ride-height.pdf

So yes. All of them. Something like 98% of all fuel in the USA has 10% ethanol: https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/ethanol-fuel-basics It's labelled as like, AKI, 87, 91, 93 with an E10 or E5 or E15 label on the pump. At a certain point, it's not just "E10" instead of 91. It is 91, 95, 98, and all of them have 10% Ethanol in them. You can also get E85 and E30 which is why you do see some people rolling around with E30 tunes in them.

I was mostly jesting. In my experience (and probably only my experience) the R34 GTT physical airbox space is actually too small to flow the amount of power it wanted. By sealing the box, I made it so it could only be fed by the ducts themselves. So you can seal it up and get nice cold air which IS good, but at a certain crossover point: More Hot Air > Less Cold Air I don't think you're at this point. In my case merely ducting the hot air intake with a very focused set of ducts counteracts the fact it's in a V8 engine bay. More cold air obviously best. The solution looks great.

Is this where I say "Hey man my airbox cost me horsepower in my Naturally Aspirated Engine"? (I know you need them for legality in NSW)

Yea mine does, I assume we all use the same sensor. I'm not sure whether it is exact down to the .1%, but it definitely does have decimal points involved.

It works but you have to download it, save it somewhere, open it from app of choice. Also it sounds awesome. I went back 50 pages to see what gearbox was in it. During this I saw a lot of memes about going to All Japan Day, whatever that is. I'm pretty happy to see you finally made it with no issues as I am sure you are too!!

I think you'll find that all fuel in some countries has 10% ethanol in it.

Yes mine will scale from 0.1% to 100%. It is feasible that the retailer does have a strict adherence to the formula..

Sorry yeah - My post was a mess and I attempted to fix it. In my example both sensors are post-cat. I realized later that I had literally pulled the motor apart and we saw no evidence of any knock and everything was sweet, so my WB was likely accurate (enough!, if anything the engine looked a little rich) In your example I'd want to recalibrate both sensors. I realize this is not possible in the real world. Best you can do is: 1) Calibrate current sensor 2) Calibrate a brand new sensor in same location (do you have an older one to compare to? Or is this a new purchase) Observe any changes in readings. I always thought it was 1M, I am clearly out of date. Mine is likely 2m+. I didn't want to have to choose one bank over another in my application.

Supposedly because being (further) inside the pipe means it won't be affected as much by outside air. Mine is mounted roughly middle of the car, just after where my exhaust merges. No science there - Just where it fit and I wanted it after the merge of a V8. Most widebands request it be 1M from the exhaust port or thereabouts as a minimum.

I just went through this on the dyno. - Only to realise most people consider the one in the sniffer on the dyno to run artificially/fake leaner by about half a point. We trusted the dyno readout. Dang. Most tuners tend to prefer the one closer to the header location, but also most dyno's will trust their own gear (obviously) and that gear usually involves a sniffer at the end of the exhaust as this is used on every vehicle. And if it reads 'incorrectly' it reads falsely lean which is safer than too lean.

I'd make the argument that "Just a daily" is what needs the real engine management and real tune for it's driving around casual needs. You can cut corners when you DGAF for dailying or road use on a car.

I mean it's basically an ad and says "Don't overcomplicate things" which is pretty variable. The illustration of spring rate versus hz is actually something that was a great visualization for me. I got PTSD because I did get my shocks rebuilt and revalved to be custom. I now upon seeing that realize that the HZ is way too high for normal driving because over mild but numerous bumps it is HELL. Oh well

Looks handsome in front and rear. Side dimensions are awful.

Well, I'm back from the dyno today. Some things do partially make sense. The pod filter/airbox delete picked up between 6-10rwkw on 98 - because heat soak does kind of affect things and there was playing with tune/timing/AFR. Oddly enough, the car was running much leaner than before. So lean it was audibly pinging on the dyno which I got video of: 70de0dd5-2099-4a71-8b10-6fc833fb9d59.mp4 We're talking going from ~12.7 in the past to the first run being at like ~14.0. It is now tuned to ~12.5 on the Dyno, which correlates to about ~12.1 on my wideband in the car. These matched last time, which is very odd. The dyno plots only show the dyno's reported AFR - should be last time, yet now it no longer agrees and was way leaner. Nobody has an explanation for how a pod can make the car run notably leaner, yet not really give any more power when you add fuel in. A few different types of intake design were tested: 94c22c34-7991-4902-af85-314b5f5bf352.mp4 There was no difference other than IAT with the pod sticking out of the bay. The pod sticking out of the bay (but connected) is actually still warmer than what I usually see on the road. Removing the pod entirely lost about ~2kw. But to be fair, all of the runs could be argued to vary by that amount when temperatures climb etc etc. It's safe to say that the filter isn't causing any restrictions of any note that can be reasonably altered in any way. This is in line with what I'd expect given the Engine Masters testing. 323KW on 98 and ~335KW on E85 is actually a pretty solid result, up about ~45kw from 99% of LS1 cammed combos, with generally much larger cams/exhaust etc as well. It is after all up 42KW (98) and 54KW (E85) from before. +10KW from a pod and removing the box is cheap as chips compared to what the head work cost per kw No, I did not get to drop the exhaust and test. When it comes to exhaust... it all just seems to change frequencies and cost or gain 2hp here or there. I don't realistically think I'll drop this to test it - because there's not much else I can really do about it/route it any other way/make it bigger/just bought mufflers. Engine masters beat the hell out of headers with a hammer to deliberately kink them and didn't lose power at all, I sincerely doubt that going larger primaries would help. If it were even possible for clearance/conversion reasons... which it's not... I may throw the E85 in there at some point and do a drag run to see what MPH it traps for science. It isn't lost on me that ~320kw Skylines do trap about the same MPH that ~370kw F-Body/Corvettes do in the USA for the same or similar weight. (122-125mph). Of course, if I go there and trap 104mph or something then I'll just 'accidentally' have an accident on the way home from the drag strip and buy a M4.

100% Also "Not wanting to spend money" is THE WORST IDEA IMAGINABLE when coming to a project car of any kind. They EXIST to BURN MONEY. Sure, gas money is a thing. A stock car with the worst fuel economy ever sold would probably be cheaper than modifying a car with FREE petrol for the life of your ownership of it, lol.

Yeah see, I didn't want to gatekeep but there's a difference in enjoying fixing seals and making things 'right' versus throwing money at a 1000HP R33. Most don't have the option, maybe the OP does. But this well into built, not bought category and I don't think I'm alone in saying people who do this get a bit of an asterisk as to their "Car guy" status. Yes it's a slippery slope - Someone may say "Well if you don't do 100% of the labor rebuilding your own engine, are you really a car guy?" but I think it'd be a lie to say we don't all feel that way to a degree when it comes to 'built not bought'.

This is actually great advice. Lets be honest. Most of car modification is fixing up broken things. If you can find joy in fixing up something that is cheap for a reason (anything) then you will enjoy car mods. If you don't enjoy and get satisifaction fixing up things that are broken (even minor, trivial things like brackets, and plugs, and wiring, and seals, etc), then this is not the hobby for you.

I definitely don't.... I have a Samsung S9. Though for giggles I did this as I was messing with idle calcs anyway and thought, well. This is with the Civic parked right behind it. Basically almost touching. I have no idea if that affects anything but this is hardly a fully scientific test lol. Varex Closed: Varex Open:

I'm gonna use the "Sound Meter" app from the Google Play Store and as close as I can bother to these procedures: 4. TEST METHOD FOR ALL VEHICLES EXCEPT PRE ADR83 IN-SERVICE GOODS VEHICLES AND OMNIBUSES 4.1 Microphone position 4.1.1 The microphone shall be directed towards the orifice of the exhaust outlet and shall be supported by a tripod or similar device not providing excessive acoustic reflection. The general requirements for positioning microphones are shown in the Appendix. 4.1.2 The nominal axis of maximum sensitivity of the microphone shall be substantially parallel to the test site surface and shall make an angle of 45 degrees ±10 degrees with the principal direction of gas flow from the exhaust. 4.1.3 In selecting the 45 degree alignment from the outlet of a motor vehicle fitted with two or more outlets, only the angle resulting in the microphone being farthest from any other outlet must be used. National Stationary Exhaust Noise Test Procedures for In-Service Motor Vehicles Page 3 4.1.4 The height of the microphone above the test site surface shall be equal to that of the orifice of the exhaust outlet ±25mm but shall not be less than 200mm above the test site surface. 4.1.5 The distance of the microphone from the exhaust outlet orifice shall be 500mm±25mm. 4.1.6 [Relates to vertical exhaust outlets] 4.1.7 For vehicles fitted with one exhaust outlet the microphone shall be placed so that the greatest possible distance is achieved between it and the vehicle. 4.1.8 [Relates to multi exhaust outlets] 4.1.9 [Relates to multi exhaust outlets] TLDR: 200mm off ground 45 degree angle relative to exhaust flow 500mm from tailpipe exit. (I probably won't use a tripod) Here's a photo, cause I read the instructions wrong myself.