GTSBoy

I don't think the fact that it is a Yaris is a problem in itself. Well, except that the driving position of all cars in that segment is more "small bus" than "performance car". Too short, tall and upright for my preferences. But as a goofy looking (as are all hatchy/SUV Toyotas at the moment) medium powered rally rocket..... props to them for doing it. Keep in mind, the Celica GT4 was based on the most appropriate chassis in the Toyota fleet at the time. Most appropriate for the purpose of building a rally car homo special, anyway. The other cars in their fleet? MA70 Supra? Cressida? Corolla? None of those were a good choice for a 4WD conversion, for various reasons. Now? Yaris looks like Corolla looks like H-RV or whatever the f**k they call that shit looking shopping trolley. And on all levels, both the design of the platforms and the exterior looks. All Toyota had to do was decide what power level they wanted to work to and choose the appropriate weight chassis to start with. The product would have looked the same and performed the same, might have just needed a 2.0L engine.

Too much romance, not enough common sense.

I have no idea how much it should cost. $1k does not sound out of the realms of reasonable. I just spent $750 getting the front bumper repainted. I have seen how much of a pain in the arse it is to straighten rails. I had to pull a few dents out of mine so it would go through Regency after the engine conversions. We made special tooling to go onto a slide hammer to reach up into the rails through the little drain holes and beat/pull the dents out from the inside. Also spot welded on hooks to use the slide hammer to pull where we couldn't make access to the inside. Then spend a lot of time tidying up and making it look "straight, but not brand new". The Regency guys will not fall for brand new paint over bog. They know a shitty job when they see one. I would not be surprised if it cost at least $1k, possibly double that, to pay a shop to unf**k a completely f**ked car.

Yuh, but spending $100k on fixing/playing with a GTR <> it being either worth $100k or selling for $100k. Arguably, if you spent $100k all up and then sold it for that, you would be in the very extreme minority of people ever to come close to recouping what was spent on the car. Only those cars that have super appreciated (old Ferraris, GTHOs, etc) would have stood much chance in the past. Regardless, I still think that if/when R32 GTRs are selling for that much money again, it will be almost exclusively to Americans and we will never see that car again.

Depends on how damaged they are. My bro-in-law has a performance workshop where they have done many minor repairs, pulling out some dents and reshaping a bit. But if they are pounded, then you will need a decent chassis/crash repair place. I can point you to either, in the northern 'burbs. My favourite crash repairer has actually recently been doing exactly this to an R32 GTR that had been treated really badly.

Yes, and no. To not ruin the split pulse design, you have to make sure that both halves of the manifold have equal access to wastegating and will not interfere with each other. The best way to be sure of that is to have 2x wastegates with no communication between them upstream of their seats. If you have 1x 44, then you wouldn't need 2x 44s. You could downsize. It is possible to design a split pulse manifold with a common wastegate outlet. Obviously there needs to be complete isolation of the two branches feeding the 'gate, and there should be a divider all the way up to the flat of the 'gate valve. This will provide sufficient isolation between the halves of the manifold....up until the 'gate cracks open. Then, sadly, there will be communication between the two halves of the manifold and pressure pulses will "leak". This is less of a problem than it sounds though, because the whole split pulse thing is more important when trying to spool the turbo than when making set boost. Split pulse housing/manifold doesn't really make any more power than a single inlet turbo does. it just makes it more responsive.

Big difference between the amount of torque you can apply by trying to turn the tailshaft by hand and how much you can apply using 2x large leg muscles through the diff gearing. No, it does not sound okay.

I was going to say the same thing. No point in crippling a small turbo.

0.94 A/R is quite a large housing for a 3076 sized turbo and will certainly negatively impact on response. 0.82 is already noticeably less nice than 0.63. Shall we take it that being a 240SX that you're in the US? How then should we interpret the power numbers that you mention? What sort of dyno? Is it a typical high reading US dyno? Or more realistic? The reason I ask is that this post in the RB turbo dyno thread is a good place to draw some idea of what the turbo is capable of. That one had a 0.83 housing and was on E85, making 336rwkW (~450 rwHP), on 19 psi. Depending on how optimistic your dyno is will tell you something about where you sit now and what gain you might get from (a) the bigger housing and (b) going to E85. Hard to know how much extra power you get from changing to E85 as a blanket rule, but if you apply a 20% discount from the power figure in that post, you get down to ~360rwHP. That's a lower number than you're reporting, on a smaller housing, with lower boost, and no E85.

R32 GTSt has all the same problems as GTR (poor front upper control arms, poor rear lower control arm geometry) and none of the good parts (enough power, AWD). RB20DEt with enough turbo to make power has a light-switch power onset and will give you nothing-nothing-nothing-wheelspin every time.

Dude - props for living there and not scoring a bullet yet!

Not to mention the boost sensor. It could be done, but aftermarket ECU would be a better option.

Just remove several mm of spacer.

Carbon fibre bonnet lip for R32 GTR. It's in perfect condition. Clean shiny clear finish on top, just a few bits of residual Sikaflex on the bottom from where I stuck it on the car, then next day when the supporting tape came off, looked at it and realised it didn't work with the rest of the look of my car, took it back off. $100 or decent offer. Can post at buyer's cost, which I can't imagine being more than $20 around Oz.

It's just a case of giving the pump a decently thick power feed (and decently thick earth to go with it!) that is no longer passing through the original fuel pump controller. The relay allows you to switch the power to the pump however you like/need (ie, possibly still with the fuel pump controller) but the relay makes the power path direct from a main 12V +ve to the pump. Fatter wires to carry the current without burning up or causing voltage drop problems.

And just to expand on what Duncan said..... If we're talking vanilla RB25 here, and you're using the factory ECU, then you really can't contemplate putting it anywhere except where he said. Between the airbox and the turbo. If you're using an aftermarket ECU on a vanilla RB25, then you shouldn't really be thinking about using an AFM anyway. If you're using a Neo 25, and the factory ECU, then if you put Nistune in the ECU then you could consider putting the stock AFM in the boost pipework (after the intercooler) but you really shouldn't because the stock one isn't really mechanically strong enough to be placed in boost. If Neo & Nistune, then you could use an R35 type AFM in the boost pipe with no pain.

Uek. Not good news. Hopefully the administration and/or asset sale process leaves a functioning business producing the same turbos and that they eventually get back to being able to pursue product R&D again.

I don't know whether the N1 pump cops a fair assessment or not. It is certainly only a small improvement over the vanilla pump. No-one should be claiming that it is a super strong or super capacity pump. I have no evidence to support this, but the general scuttlebutt was that the N1 pumps that were actually put into engines at Nissan, ie, into N1 26s and Neo 25s, were good. Not prone to failure, anyway, but that there might have been a batch towards the end of the 2000s that were not as good in some way. There were a number of people reporting N1 pump failures back then. One would assume that they had bought the pump, had it fail and therefore felt it worth telling everybody. I don't know if anyone would have complained too much if the original N1 pump out of a 10+ year old 25 or 26 had failed. Certainly, at that time, people building any 25 or 26 used to plan to put an N1 pump in if they weren't running on drug money. Now, it may actually be the case that there was no dud batch of pumps at that time and all the failures were just the typical failures of people not setting them up right, suffering oil starvation or otherwise limiter bashing the engine/pump to death, as per your typical RB owner yob behaviour of the period. I certainly have no overestimation of the IQ of the majority of that crowd.

Nah. Any good matched set of EV14 based injectors, or the equivalents from non-Bosch OEMs, are still the go.

Yeah. Have you heard of the Subaru FA engine? Half the Euros are just as bad. They burn more oil than the Gulf War did.

You should always make sure that the oil pump and the crank are as concentric as possible, even with flat drive pumps.

Or....just about every modern engine with really thin, low tension rings and 0W oil. But for an RB, agreed.

There's a big difference between spinning a crank up to high rpm bare (without actual engine loads, ie combustion) and using it at the same rpm making a lot of power. There's a certain sized grain of salt required when looking at a balancing report that says the crank was spun to X rpm. Sure, it was fine under those conditions, but add the reciprocating loads up and down the conrods onto the journals and it is suddenly not the same as spinning it from one end.

Actually, This ^. Just because you pull it apart doesn't mean you automatically do anything. The only thing you have to do is carefully inspect and measure everything. If the bores are round and especially if there is no nasty lip at the top and especially especially if the hone marks are still visible, then doing anything to the bores is unjustified. You always assess what you have before deciding what you're going to do to it.

Torque range because it clearly doesn't matter so much where it ends up. I don't understand "flange from the gearbox". Do you mean the input flange on the diff at the back end of the tailshaft? Most people just do bolts like that up as tight as they can manage with a regular ring spanner and say "click". I always just re-use subframe fasteners. Shit never comes off.