GTSBoy

Yeah - that's pretty gross.

Why? That parking perfectly suits the hairdresser aesthetic.

^ This. The mode door actuator is a common failure, as is the actuator and/or the actual valve for the coolant flow control valve. I also don't know how available the mode door actuator is these days. I've been meaning to look into it and get one from wherever is possible, to keep in the shed for the rainy day when mine eventually fails. Anyway, the advice to you is to search the usual NOS part supply places, or even just go to Nissan and see what they list.

My apologies. I forgot we were talking about weird beard M series stuff. Had been talking elsewhere with someone about an R33 with similar subject and got confused.

Maybe? I have the Supercheap ToolPro low thingo. It has a somewhat smaller diameter lifting "bowl" than you would expect on a workshop grade trolley jack, and a split rubber pad to suit that diameter. It clears the "N1" style skirts I have. Probably wouldn't if the jack's bowl and a suitably larger rubber block were in use. Having said that though.....you only need the rubber block to exist on the inner side of the pinchweld, so could carve away any rubber that fouled the skirt, leaving some there for "insurance" </simples>

The pinchweld is fine, even with a trolley jack, so long as you're not actually pushing on the pinchweld itself. More to the point, we shouldn't talk about lifting or supporting on the pinchweld, we should talk about using the sill "jacking points", which just happen to be adjacent to the pinchweld. I just have dense rubber blocks with grooves in them for each of the chassis stands and the trolley jack, that I use at the sill jacking points if/when I have to lift/support there. They put all the load onto the steel pad of the jacking point and not the pinchweld. As intended.

There would have to be hundreds of posts on the topic of doing the direct wire mod just on SAU alone. Just search SAU specifically, using google, and you should find stuff. Even just recently I have posted excerpts from the wiring diagrams, which are also all available, and discussed exactly how the FPCM does its job - mostly wrt how it interacts with the ECU/ignition wiring. But still, the info is there and relevant. Just search for posts by me on the topic in the last several months.

If it dies, then bypass. The task isn't difficult. I have one running on a standard R32 FPCM. That's after nearly 20 years of it running an 040, which pull substantially more current than the Walbro. They're not the same module, but I'd hope it indicates that the R33 one should be man enough for the job. I think people kill them when putting proper sized pumps on them, not these little toy pumps we're talking about here.

Silicone spray won't hurt anything. And if it does, that's an opportunity to put some solid steel spherical bushings in, so you can really learn what suspension noise sounds like, If you're going to try it, just spray one bush at a time, so you can work out which one is actually noisy. My best guess is that if the noise started only since putting the coilovers in, then it is just noise being transmitted up through the top mounts of the struts, and not necessarily "new" noise from bushes. But it's almost impossible to know.

Are you saying the 34 is SUV height, and not that we're talking about an SUV here? (because if we're talking about an SUV, you don't fix them. You just replace them when something breaks. Not worth establishing sufficient emotional connection with an SUV to warrant doing any work on one). I wouldn't jack my car up on a short little loop of 10mm steel rod poking out through a hole in the bumper bar, front or rear end. I realise that we're probably not talking about that type of loop at the front, being the one under/behind the bar on a Skyline.... but even for that one, trying to jack up on what amounts to a thin piece of steel, designed purely for withstanding a horizontal tension force, not a vertical compressive force (and so would be prone to buckling/crushing) and, my most particular bitch about it - located RIGHT AT THE EXTREME FRONT OF THE CAR, applying a load up through the radiator support panel, etc, with almost the entire mass of the car cantilevered between there and the rear wheels? Nope. Not doing that. Not on the regular. That structure out there in front of the front crossmember is not designed to carry load in the vertical direction. Not really designed to carry any load at all, really. The chassis rail that the tow point is connected to would be fine loaded in tension, as per towing. Not intended to carry the mass of the whole car, especially loaded all on one rail, with twisting and all sorts of shitty load distribution going on. No, I will happily drive up on some pieces of wood, thanks. That can only happen on driven wheels, and they are at the other end of the car, and this problem does not exist at that end of the car. And even then, I have been known to drive up on at least 1x piece of 2x8 each side at the rear, simply to reduce the amount of jack pumping necessary to get the car up high enough for the jack stands. What really really shits me about Skylines is the lack of decent places for chassis stands at either end of the car. You'd think they'd be designed into the crossmembers.

It will be fine. The real question is whether the existing wiring is fat enough for the current drawn by the bigger pump. The 342 is not that hungry, but it will be well worth pointing an IR pyrometer, or even better, a thermal camera, at the pump hat wiring when it is running, just to make sure. Or, you know, just touch it to see how hot it is.

That's a lot of bending moment to apply to a hook that was not intended for lifting though. I instinctively hate the idea.

Nah. You need 2x taps for anything that you cannot pass the tap all the way through. And even then, there's a point in response to the above which I will come back to. The 2x taps are 1x tapered for starting, and 1x plug tap for working to the bottom of blind holes. That block's port is effectively a blind hole from the perspective of the tap. The tapered tap/tapered thread response. You don't ever leave a female hole tapered. They are supposed to be parallel, hence the wide section of a tapered tap being parallel, the existince of plug taps, etc. The male is tapered so that it will eventually get too fat for the female thread, and yes, there is some risk if the tapped length of the female hole doesn't offer enough threads, that it will not lock up very nicely. But you can always buzz off the extra length on the male thread, and the tape is very good at adding bulk to the joint.

Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.

I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.

And if you have to drill the oil block, then just drill it for 1/4" and tap it BSP and get a 1/8 to 1/4 BSP bush. The Nissan sender will go straight in and the bush will suit the newly tapped hole. And it will be real strong, to boot.

No it doesn't. It just needs an ezy-out to pull that broken bit of alloy out of the hole and presto chango - it will be back to being a 1/8" hole tapped NPT. as per @MBS206 recco. That would be for making what you had in alloy, in steel. If you wanted to do just that instead of remote mounting like @Duncan and I have been pushing. A steel fitting would be unbreakable (compared to that tragically skinny little alloy adapter). But remote mounting would almost certainly be 10x better. Small engineering shops abound all over the place. A lathe and 10 minutes of time = 2x six packs.

10 minutes on a lathe would be one way to achieve literally anything you want, too. (except for AN type stuff - just talking about M-F with BSP and NPT in any mix/combo).

Wrong question. There's no point in spending the rather large sum of cash and effort to add turbo, without taking it to the "sensible" limit of the motor itself. If you have to upgrade injectors, etc, then so be it. That is a tiny fraction of what it will cost you to turbo it.

Measure voltage at the starter solenoid terminal when the key is at start and it has clicked. If it is really low, then the suspicion falls on the ignition switch (contacts or wiring thereof) as causing a voltage drop instead of sending enough volts to throw the solenoid all the way to engage the starter itself. If it is a decent voltage, then the suspicion is on the solenoid. Might have s horted coil, or might hva dirty contacts. Rip the starter off, dismantle, clean up contacts and inspect winding. It might not be possible to see if there is a short in the winding though. I have a spare starter here that I could measure the resistance of the coil, as a guide to about what it should be, if you need a comparison. <parts hoarder>No you cannot have it.</parts hoarder>

Absolutely matters because, while a temperature change will eventually reach a sensor at the end of a static line, the response time is far far far too slow to be useful. Might as well not have a temp gauge at all.

This. As for your options - I suggest remote mounting the Nissan sensor further away on a length of steel tube. That tube to have a loop in it to handle vibration, etc etc. You will need to either put a tee and a bleed fitting near the sensor, or crack the fitting at the sensor to bleed it full of oil when you first set it up, otherwise you won't get the line filled. But this is a small problem. Just needs enough access to get it done.

I NEVER think about using a scissor jack unless there is absolutely no other alternative. f**king things are dangerous, annoying and stupid.

The chart of front pressure to rear pressure (with one being on the x axis and the other being on the y axis) is not a straight line on a typical proportioning valve. At lower pressures there is a straight line with one slope, and at higher pressures that changes to a lower slope. That creates a bend in the line at that pressure, called the knee point. If you do not change the proportionng as the pressure gets higher, you will suffer excessive pressure (at one end of the car or the other, depending on which way you look at the proportioning action) and then get lockups at that end. The HFM BM57, from my memory of previous discussions, is based on the BM57 from a different car (to a Skyline), with a different requirement for the location of the knee point and the distribution of pressure front to rear, and so is not a good choice for an upgrade on a Skyline. Here's a couple of links to some old posts, one from here, one from elsewhere. A lot of it pertains to adjustable prop valves, but the idea is the same. There are plenty of discussions on here about this issue from al the many years of people wanting a cheap/accessible option. https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/learn-me-brake-proportioning-valves/236880/page1/ https://grassrootsmotorsports.com/forum/grm/learn-me-brake-proportioning-valves/236880/page1/

This thread keps giving with the OMG!