Nee-san

Group A GT-R's had Inconel headers, it is also used widely in turbochargers.

Hey guys, did a search and couldn't really find what i was looking for. I am looking at painting the cover for the injector loom in my 32 GT-R black like factory as it was painted silver by the previous owner and I need to know what sort of prep i should do to it so the finish is nice, and also what kind of paint i should get for using on such plastics. Cheers, Mitch.

Hater

I have already mentally spent sooo much money Lol...

the centrecaps say "apexi" and there is a sticker with 17x9jj which is obviously the size ?

Are there many servo's with 98 if your heading down from brisbane just asking because my car really chews the juice ?

f**ken LOL

Hey Guys, When I bought my 32 GT-R it came with what appears to be 'Apexi' wheels and although I have done some looking I could only ever find one picture on google images from the states. they are 17x9 with a bit of dish, there is a pic attached of what they look like. Can anyone tell me anything about these wheels ? Cheers, Mitch.

mine was an 89 block that had done 68000 ;) different built engine in the car now though

saw this advertised out at QR definately going.

Greetings guys, I from Russia here am difficult enough to receive a trustworthy information on motors, therefore I wish to address to recognised gurus)) I have s13 silvia with 300hp rb20det on board, but for normal 3rd gear its not enough also reliability leaves much to be desired, so I have made the decision to swap another engene - and now before me it is necessary to take a choice rather fresh rb25det neo or to play russian roulette with r32 rb26dett. That you will advise if the purpose nearby 350ps on stock bottom with a minimum of alterations and investment))) but with the maximum reliability. transmission I will leave with rb20det, hope it handle 350 horses. Ill be happy with any advisez about comparing this 2 motors to my requirementz PLEASE give to my advice also concerning the turbine - that will meet my requirements better? 2535? GTRS? or ... SPASIBO! Hey mate ! I'm not sure how much difficulty you will have sourcing parts in your part of the world, perhaps talk to Guilt Toy on here as he may know things that could be helpful. As for your dilemma, for what you require, definately go with the RB25DET Neo, as you say it is a much fresher engine whereas many of the R32 RB26DETT's you are likely to find will be well used with wear and tear, which is not ideal for a motor that will be stressed under drift conditions. An RB26DETT will ofcourse produce more power in the long run but as you have stated your requirement is 350PS which either engine will make without any difficulty not to mention dare I say it, the issue with the oil pump drive issue with early run RB26's the balance in terms of performance and economy is stacked firmly towards the RB25. Throw a GT-RS on it which are rated for I beleive 440PS (don't quote me) and the required ancilliary modifications such as ECU, injectors etc and enjoy your skids Buddy

The ultimate test is to launch it, and see if it has so much torque it twists the chassis.

What's wrong with Nengun ?

Thanks for the Offer Unfortunately I'm a banana bender Do you mind if I ask where you look at wheels and that sort of interior stuff as Ebaby and some of the other places are a little hit and miss. As for my Car I plan on doing the wheel, leave the standard GT-R seat in it, throw a harness in probably a gt500 gearknob and I only use Apexi gauges as I agree with the interior being super important to the feel and enjoyment of the car.

Damnit Baron ! your making this hard I really like that Keys Wheel now, the flat non suede one Thanks for the Link I don't know what I want now, seriously it's like clothes shopping with a woman lol

I love how it just hauls in those Evos, nice bit of driving

Alot of nice wheels out there, I'm going to see how i can go about getting a Personal Grinta that BeerBaron was talking about, very nice looking wheel for the price, although getting a sparco with buttons and hooking the scramble boost upto it would be a whole lot of boy racer fun

yes talking about the cooroy (end of 110kmh section) to gympie stretch of road. the 90kmh bit goes on a bit past gympie (you may know that though). the actual road from here to cooroy isn't that bad, but the idiots that drive on it are, and yet a lot of the blame gets put on the road. a lot of the accidents have been caused by servere driver error or not driving to the conditions. From what I have heard you are correct in that it is mainly driving error, I've also heard driver fatigue is a big one along that stretch. and i understand the revenue raising bit is what annoys everyone, but the fact is that there seems to be a small perception difference between having a high police presence on the road and setting up an automated machine to do a similar thing. part of me thinks that all speed cameras should be painted neon pink so that people know that they are there and slow down. but the problem is that then they will only slow down for that short section of road then speed back up again. this is where the covert speed cameras come into play. they catch the people who are generally habitual speeders. unfortunately most of these just keep on speeding even after recieving the fine, and no amount of speed cameras or police presence on the road will slow them down until they have lost their licence, and then once they get it back it will start over. You have outlined how ineffective the covert speed camera program is at reducing habitual offenders, So I ask, if the government is really serious about this why keep using such an ineffective method ... ? What it comes down to is that people must be taught what driving to the conditions entails through an extreme and intensive driving training program coupled with the tightening of requirements for having a drivers licence. Another simple solution is to relax the legislation surrounding speeding and give offences such as dangerous driving a wider range of interpretation. This way, the courts would then be relieved of the pressure of frivolos case loads and could concentrate on removing the truly dangerous people from our roads. the general argument against speed cameras is the same as the argument that always pops up after traffic fines are increased. "it's just revenue raising". but to be honest it isn't really. it's not like they are forcing som involuntary tax unpon us, or are raising the price of something. it's not like we have no choice in the matter. we have all the choice in the world on this. anyone complaining needs to look at it a different way. you are complaining about the punishment for someone breaking the law. if they made the minimum jail sentence for murder longer than what it currently is would you complain? no because it isn't going to affect you (hopefully). all that is happening here is that the police, main roads and the government are trying to crack down on people breaking the law. ultimately whether it stops crashes doesn't really come into it. they just use it as an excuse. but the real thing here is, people are breaking the law and being punished for it. a lot of people just don't really see speeding as breaking the law and therefore don't think that they should be punished. I think this just highlights how disenchanted the public is with the current laws and their enforcement, to what level will non compliance have to reach before the government actually begins to take the approach that maybe it is the legislation which needs work and not the tax paying public, as for the comparison with murder the two issues are so legally and morally different that its use as an example is pretty limited. Cheers, Mitch.

Well, mine could be the compliance cat as I'm not the first aus owner, all i know that it is tiny 2.5" and non highflow, makes my turbos come on atleast 1250 RPM later.

I had a stock cat on a 4" exhaust coming off 2 x 3.5 inch dumps, it makes it made it a massive lag broad minded person LOL

At that bodyweight, they really do scream for more cubes... or less weight Evo's have always been a very good package, especially when your talking upto moderate levels of modification, the 4g63 is an excellent engine and as a whole probably a nicer package then a GT-R when you take price into consideration. That said, after you start spending the big cash money is when the GT-R really streaks ahead. And yes, I agree it's sad seeing people spend money making their cars worse. Your right, the On off on off, half throttle, WOT and fast changes in direction that personify rally is infinately closer to street driving then a lap at bathurst where the engine is living up in the danger zone as far as revs go for most of the lap. And on a final note, I was very sad they didn't make the 370 Z a TT.. That would have been cool.

i'm not brainwashed at all. i think you may be by thinking that a petition on the internet will have the slightest bit of an effect on the government and make them get rid of speed cameras. you could print it out, hand it to the PM, and i bet that in 5 mins it would've gone through the shredder already, and to spite you they'd probably find out where you live and put a speed camera out the front of your house. This is truth ! and did you ever think that the road toll may rise regardless simply because there are more and more people on the roads every year? so it is an enivtable fact that the number of crashes will increase due to their being more people on the roads as people get more frustrated. Usually people look at the figures per capita or per 1000 people, total figures are useless without any relative comparison. as for the road toll vs number of speed cameras, it has been raised a few times in this thread and is one of the most stupid comparisons i have ever seen. it's as if people are almost trying to lay blame on speed cameras. a speed camera located in sydney can't be blamed for, or even remotely associated to, a crash that happens in any other part of the town/state/country. also they are only there to control speed, so if the crash was caused by a drunk driver or someone tailgating, etc, you can't link it in anyway to the speed camera. the sole aim of speed cameras is to catch the people breaking the law, and make people slow down because when an accident happens at a lower speed the impact force is less. It has been found that for some reason government statistics like to add that speeding was a "factor" in many accidents when it was not the "cause" and as im sure you can all work out, the day of the week or the kind of moon at that time is technically a "factor" but doesn't necessarily mean that either of these "factors" weighed heavily in the causation of the accident as for the revenue from speed cameras increasing, there is no one to blame other than the idiots who are speeding. you asked how i can argue with the facts, well how can you argue with that fact? it is extremely simple. don't speed = no fines. if you are dumb enough to not be able to figure that out, then i'm sorry, you are too stupid to help. Although yes, it is revenue raising the major gripe people have with the system is that it masquerades as a public service, whilst as many others have already pointed our the effectiveness of the covert speedcamera program is marginal. as for the speed limits decreasing, i think that you will actually find that the council or government that is in charge of that road (smaller local roads = local council remember), has asked for the speed limit to be reviewed due to complaints about the road (or the number of accidents). a stretch of the highway (about 50km long) where i live has had the speed limit reduced from 100kmh to 90kmh because of the number of accidents on it. it was lowered because of public demand for something to be done to reduce the road toll, and since there is a bypass under construction which will remove 90% of traffic from that stretch of road, it was the easiest, quickest, cheapest solution. since lowering the speed limit the number of fatal accidents has dropped dramatically (by probably 70%), because 20kmh has been taken off the impact force. And now we come down to to what it is really about, the government finding the "easiest, quickest, cheapest solution" to a problem, I mean, the road system is a national joke anyway, so making it even less efficient won't matter right guys ? And yeah, I f**king hate the drive into gympie now which is the stretch of road im assuming you are talking about finally, the actual road toll is a bit of a misleading number anyway. the reason being that from 1 year to the next there may a higher road toll, but a reduction in the number of accidents. all it takes is for 2 cars with 5 occupants to collide and the road toll number is going to be much higher than if there had been 3 accidents that were either single car accidents or 2 car accidents with only 1 person in each car Exactly my friend ! you just highlighted why the use of government statistics is pretty much useless.

High Visibility policing has been and always will be, the most effecive measure against ALL crime, not only traffic infringements. Speeding, along with a number of other traffic offences, when you forget all the dramatisation and sensationalism created from many years of highly expensive government media campaigns is a joke really, When you think about what is actually occuring and the impact the actual penalties have on peoples lives in the way of fines etc you begin to realise what speed enforcement really is; A highly efficient revenue stream. How many other money making assets do you know of that break even on capital expendature in such a short space of time ?

Im glad you replied disco, saved me a big write up Lol Another point I'll spell out involves turbo performance (response) vs engine speed and torque delivery . A well thought out and sized ball bearing turbo idles or windmills at reasonably high speeds even when engine load is not high or throttle fully open . There obviously is a point below which even wide open throttle (WOT) won't produce a lot of torque or acceleration - the engine can't because it isn't venting enough exhaust heat/velocity energy to spin the turbine/compressor rotating groups fast enough to do much . The BIG question is are people going to be practically minded enough to chose turbos that will produce some part throttle extra air and engine torque (Plan A) or are they biasing their engine spec on what happens at WOT and 4-8000 revs (Plan B) . In my opinion there are turbochargers for RB26/GTR that try to achieve Plan A and I personally won't bother deciphering why people opt to do much else on an almost totally street driven car . These 707160-9 turbos have most of the smarts to be better everywhere than any of the OE RB26 turbos - except maybe the R34 GT2556Rs right down low . The nice light NS111ish turbine in the smaller 62T trim size , the low friction BB center section , the obviously dialled in 56T 59.6mm compressor wheels . Blind Freddy can see that Garrett didn't put large housings on these turbos like they do at times with single GT25/GT28 BB turbos but then again they aren't often going on the side of effectively an inline three cylinder like parallel twins on an RB26 do . Actually that's not strictly true because an inline three's continuous cycles don't have the extended pause between exhaust events like an I6 divided in half between 3 and 4 does . Engines that make extra part throttle torque from forced induction are always nicer to drive because they tend to feel linear and more like a larger that std capacity NA engine . You can't escape the fact that this is because the engine torque is increasing earlier in the engines rev range than either no forced induction or turbos sized too large to achieve this . The bottom line is that a 2568cc 8.5:1 CR engine is not going to be impressive with just atmospheric pressure to charge its cylinders (minus any inlet system losses that is) trying to drag around an almost 1500 kilogram Skyline . Without the dryers they would be a total slug , when the dryers don't do anything for whatever reason including sizing it's the same deal . QFT Just on Toms long vs short stroke myth theory . Fact 1) How often would anyone increase the stroke and reduce the bore size ? Not too often I'd think . This gets bandied around a lot but I think essentially the question being asked is will my engine make more torque low down if I increase the cranks stroke . My thoughts are that provided the rods don't get ridiculously short yes it should make more torque down low because the cylinders capacity has increased - in theory more air and fuel to compress and then burn . You'd have to say that increasing the stroke of an engine that the factory had already done this to might be doubtful but if you cant increase the bore size and revs are kept low it may be the only way . I don't look at an RB30 as a long stroke engine , I do look at an RB26 as being long in the stroke for the deck height of the block which means shortish rods etc . AFAIK the RB20 was the original and smallest of the RB engine family and they pinched their bore/stroke dimensions from the old L series L20a . In some ways I wish Nissan had used a taller deck height on RB25s and RB26's but they obviously wanted to stay within the external dimensions of the RB20's block . Plainly it was never going to work with a 3 litre engine and the bore centers are not wide enough in the RB family to increase it significantly . Also QFT. My thoughts are still the same , turbos sized to drag torque out of a 26 lower than Nissan had it or throw an RB30 at it . It's still possible to drive enthusiastically a car that's makes good torque without too many revs , lots of haul without necessarily warp 9 velocity . Get in a car that's a Honda Zot up to 3500-4000 and see how fast you're going when you get to the meaty part of the rev range in 1st and 2nd gears . In the excitement wave to the cop or contractor in the plain white Territory with the dinky little radar dish on the roof . Six cars a second they are claiming they can nail at any one time . Whilst I agree with the above, there is also a factor of personal choice coupled with the requirements of the a car as outlined by the driver. I am often frustrated when people who build engines with racing outlooks IE the use of large framed turbocharger'(s) complain about lag or as we have previously discussed the big kicker detrimental 'Transient response' as they obviously fail to comprehend the inherent compromise between driveability, comfort and optimum performance, unfortunately you really can't have your cake and eat it to. Personally I do enjoy the performance of the larger paired turbochargers such as -5's, however I am extremely aware of the trade offs I am making in using these sized turbochargers and will be the first to relate that their are much better street combinations available.

You raise good points, however I would put forward that the technology in any of the LS motors would still be obselete to that found in an RB26 mainly because they are designed with different purposes in mind. Also, labelling the RB26 as long in the tooth is in my view a little short sighted, given the motors your using for your comparison are LS series. I think it is also important to raise the point that any sort of comparison between engines should involve relative capacity as this is often the most important factor when we are talking motorsport classification; which, at the end of the day is what engine comparisons are all about right ? Obviously anyone can integrate any motor with any chassis combination, with wide ranging and myriad modifications making useful comparison between units useless, however, not everyone wants to build a sports sedan but I digress, we are getting off topic ! Please don't take this as a personal attack I just figured I should elaborate on what i said Cheers, Mitch.