GTSBoy

I dunno. I think any one of those from each side to sump is probably enough. Remember - this is about creating a path for gas flow up from the sump to the cam covers. That gas flow then has to leave via the lines to the catch can. There's probably little point in providing 100% more capacity from sump up to covers cf. what you have from there to the catch can. Put in the 3 convenient ones? Any which way that you see fit. That'd be my thoughts.

There is X amount of load on a timing belt. Adding bigger duration cams and valve springs will certainly add some to that figure - but there is no way in creation that you need "300% stronger". There are plenty of big power RBs and JZs running stock belts. There have been more complaints about noise from Gates belts than there have been reports of stock belts dieing young.

Gates no better than Pitwork. These things only exist so that people can have different coloured silicone looking things to see through their clear timing covers. Fashion, not function.

But whatabout a V12!!?

Nissan/Pitwork is fine stuff. HKS is just marketing wank. I personally wouldn't do the idler if it is already new. If it looks and feels fine, it is fine. But as D says - it's cheap to add it to the job. The water pump ditto. Even more so. If it show no signs of problems, then it is nearly new - leave it.

And, given that you're in NC, go buy an LS7 or something equally sweet and piss that crappy old RB off. Or call up Wesley Kagan and get his help putting a Merc V12 into it.

I'm not trying to be rude - but can't you just go and take a peek at the pads you already have. I mean - they're right there, visible between the spokes of the wheels.

Yeah., so whilst the death of that one was actually caused by other factors - it's still a 30 year old turbo. It's alrwady had a life. There are no new ones.

OK, so all I can suggest is that - if you have all the parts, and you have all the wiring looms, and you have all the electronic modules, then....it really is just a wiring problem. You likely have a damaged wire, pin, etc, somewhere.

It's impossible to convey what it will feel like to get the right torque. But you can develop a feel for it. A 900mm breaker bar is.....f**king huge. I only use a normal ~400mm one. But with 900mm being very nearly a metre, and the right torque being in the order of 100Nm, then you're going to need a bit over 100N of force, which is about 10 kg. So if you practice using the bar pulling up, instead of pushing down, then it will be about the same effort as lifting a 10kg bucket of water. That's what the pressure against your fingers should feel like. Ish. If you use a more typical length breaker, then it's about twice that. So a good 20 litre bucket, or a little bit more.

I don't think that's what you're seeing. Something else doing that. The only time I've seen it get so retarded is when it's trying to control idle (in which case we're not talking about mapped timing tagets anyway) and when there is an extreme coolant temperature sensor fault. The RB26 ECU is essentially the same as the 20 ECU and I knew that ging inside out. There is no facility for it to retard that heavily on cold start. The OEMs never used to do it back then. I mean, shit, the catalyst is abotu 3 miles down the exhaust anyway. Early light-off was just a twinkle in some EPA arsehole's eye back then, not a regular engine control strategy.

I must preface my comments with a general expression of ignorance. I have no specific knowledge of these NA automatic things. I can only assume that the "steering wheel button" is for enabling the tiptronic controls. Wierd that it would even need/want a button for that... But anyway.... Was the car previously tiptronic? Did you put a new cluster in as part of all this?

Given that you have seen the dash indicator work briefly, then it would seem like you have a simple wiring problem. What happens when you simply jumper the wires on the "steering wheel switch"?

Hence why I said earlier that I don't think the turbo Neos ever would have actually qualified as an LEV. I suspect the only actual LEVs that came out of Nissan were the NA Neos. Still call them all Neos. They all stil have the Neo-ness. Just that they don't all qualify as as LEVs.

It's the same with many brands that find their way into promotion via Youtube channel sponsorships. Those stainless guys, e-mail cut shippit, various other service and product companies.... they try to make it so that the only name that comes to mind when you think of doing those things is them, and then you just go get their stuff because your favourite channels are using it, so it must be good AND good value. Notwithstanding that the YT'ers don't pay anything for it. But a lot of people are not that sophisticated.

Yes. All of this. But even when you get the NOx as low as you can go on an RB, it will no doubt still be way too high. Same with CO and HCs. The tech and the tuning time just isn't there.

Highest combustion temperature is achieved at 14.7:1. (or, I should say, lambda=1, because 14.7 is not constant for all fuels). NOx increases exponentially with combustion temperature. So it is in the engine designer/s best interest to find a way to operate at lower than stoich max temperatures if they want to minimise NOx. If you want to minimise CO, you really need to run at least 14.7:1. Any extra fuel can realistically only ever report to NOx. O4 HCs if you are sufficiently sub-stoich, or if the engine's fuel-air mixing is up the shit. All of this presumes that the catalyst is not doing anything, of course. In reality, the cat is there, it is doing things, and how capable it is of eliminating either NOx or CO will depend on its age, quality, design, operating temperature, and how much the engine/ECU is designed to help it along, with fuelling strategies, air pumps, etc. And of course, RBs, even those with very capable aftermarket ECUs, usually don't have anything to help. They are just tuned to make power.

This is a marketing ploy.

Bring back oil in 1 quart glass pour bottles at the servo forecourt, is what I say.

You need to jam something inside it to stop it collapsing. A washer, a spacer, a something. Needs to stay up at the fully pumped up height. I still say you can measure centrelines with a collapsed hydro lifter. Whatever max lift is will be max lift regardless of the state of the lifter.

Yeah, I've been watching him since the first 4 posts all arrived.

C-tek here. MXS 5 IIRC. It's the tits.

With an electronic boost controller, there are settings available to limit overboost.

Let's face it. 90s turbo 6 with 80s tech in it is not going to be the thing that runs as clean as a whistle.

No. See below. No. In the specific case of Enthusiast, the wording in the PDS says, explicitly, " We will not pay any claim on a Vehicle with any Modifications not agreed by us and not listed in the Schedule. This includes any Modifications or the fitting of a device that contravenes the requirements of the Australian Design Rules [ADRs] or where allowed, the Australian Vehicle Standards Rules [AVSR]." The 2nd paragraph needs to be read in a different tone of voice from the 1st. The two concepts are connected, but they are two different concepts. The 1st says your mods must be listed and agreed with us. The 2nd effectively says "we won't pay if any mods are not legal". The way that it has been written in more general insurances for a long time has been that if the mod contributes to the accident then you're shit out of luck, but if the mod didn't contribute, then you'll probably get away with it. With "probably" being a very flexible term, and being an insurance company, better left untested than hoped on!