GTSBoy

I'd say if it's not a spat out shim (and Neos are shim over bucket so it would be dead easy to see if it was spat), then I'd be dead worried that the VCT gear was about to explode. I wouldn't have driven that for more than the time taken to get it down to the workshop and the head off.

That's the sound of mechanical shit beating itself to death. I cannot believe that you have driven it that way for 3 years.

The engine builder might think it's "fine", but that's a f**king bodge job.

Cut open the weld. Open it back up so that it is round. Weld on a new bit of tube to extend it back so it will accept the inlet hose. Job done?

I've bought some trim pieces from a US dealer in the last year because they had them at better pricing than I could see elsewhere.

I was going to say..... "There's rust in those photos?" Nothing there. Buy it, assuming there's nothing else wrong with the car.

2s of googling shows 570cc as a common number. But apparently there is more than one injector across teh years. Why not search based on the part number on side of your injector? As to latency, the same search could tell you things. Nistune forum has this https://forum.nistune.com/viewtopic.php?t=3534

The electrical connector is clearly attached to a knock sensor. The oil leak photo appears to have been taken with a potato. Get a better picture.

Just repair it?

Depending on the cooler, you may struggle to get above 280rwkW anyway.

^as above, and you can make your own with a block of rubber and a hacksaw blade. I don't like chassis stands under the jacking points because they are too close to the centreline of the car and leave too much weight hanging out front and/or rear. OK for jacking up at the side of the road, but not great for working under.

As I said. NEVER put chassis stands under the chassis rails (your orange circled bits). They are simply not strong enough. Nearly every Skyline has had the chassis rails irrepairably damaged by people** doing that. **I use a special term for people like that. I never support the rear of the car on a jack stand under the diff. Reasons? 1) The jack is there, so it's hard to put a stand there. 2) As a single stand, a central support is just stupid. You cannot properly support a car on 3 stands at the rear. You can only get 2 of them loaded properly at a time. The 3rd one can only serve as a "safety" in case it falls off the others. In which case, you're doing it wrong. I support the rear on 2 stands under the subframe just adjacent to the lower rear arm pivots. You can't use the pivots because they are on an angle. The subframe is not ideal, but it is good enough if you are careful to place the chassis stands just right so you get the best contact and the lips on the tops in the right spots as you lower it off the jack. Do not support the rear on the subframe mounting bolts (which is where I think you have the red circled chassis stands). That's just asking for damage. As I already said, right on the lower inner pivot points. Go back and read it again. Those are not the "side rails", seeing as they are a long way from the sides of the car. They are the main chassis rails. The "side rails" would be the sills, if you were going to use the term "side rails".

Lack of compatibility of statements is concerning. Cosmetic trumps performance. So just do what you want. How do you come to that ratio? Have you done all the calcs? You have the hyradulic bias at the MC, then you have the hydraulic ratio at the calipers, courtesy of the different piston areas. Then you have the brake torque which is a calculation done off the pad force, coefficient of friction of the pads (which are not necessarily the same front & rear) and the effective working radius of the force applied to the rotor.

He's talking about GTRs. Trolley jack in the centre of that is fine, but make a rubber pad to stop the sheetmetal getting damaged. As I said above, it's not strong enough for point loadings. Never place chassis stands under ANY of the main chassis rails. They are not intended for that either. The official jacking points are strong enough to lift the car, using the scissor jack, as Duncan said. That is what they are for. BUT only the jacking points. Nowhere else along the sill seam.

What Duncan said. The diff casing is a heavy casting. I'm not sure why anyone would think it might crack. Just place the jack bowl evenly under the bottom rib. Don't put chassis stands under the front crossmember. It is not strong enough to take the point loads from the tops of chassis stands. The best way is put the chassis stands under the lower inner pivot points. You may have to grind the heads of the chassis stands to make them narrow enough to fit. And if you have to remove the lower arm, you will have to find an alternative support point. You can make a buffer to go between a chassis stand and the proper jacking point under the sill and support there. Don't use the chassis stand bare under the sill as you can still damage them, even if they are strong enough to carry the car.

Any Nissan that ends in Z. 240, 260, 280, 300, 350, 370. Specifically in this case though, the Z32 TT. Why would it not? Aftermarket arms take up the same space as any other arm.

Just put the bloody exhaust back on it.

THE R33 CROSSOVER PIPE IS LITERALLY MUCH LONGER THAN THE R34 ONE BECAUSE THE R33 ONE DOES NOT HAVE THAT TCS THROTTLEBODY! What you are putting onto the car CANNOT be an R33 crossover pipe. Just look at some pictures of the engine bays! And it literally does not matter that one of your crossover pipes has a nipple tapped into it and the other one doesn't. Just connect the boost sensor to where it is supposed to be connected.

Which is usually phosporic acid based. Don't use other snake oils.

I think you miss the points I made. 1. The "nipple" you circled in the pick of the R34 crossover pipe is not a nipple. It is what I said it is. 2. The R34 ECU (or actually, the R34 ABS/TCS CU) requires to see a present and fit and healthy traction control throttle body, upstream of the main throttle. Without it, the ABS/TCS CU goes into a tizzy, and as the ECU is with the same union, when one goes out on strike, they all go out on strike. You will have fault codes in the ECU that will not go away because of the removed TCS equipment, unless you are using a Stagea motor/ECU.

Um. What about the traction control throttle, motor and position sensor? Stock ECU won't be amused without it. Making a connection for the boost sensor is a triviality by comparison. Drill and tap a hole and put in a nipple. But "mostly stock" and your description of the shit that has been done to the car are somewhat worrying. Your photo came up as I was typing. That is not a nipple. That is a piece of line that runs under the crossover pipe. You can see the other end of it on the front side, next to the mounting bracket. It's the passthrough for vacuum to the charcoal canister.

I don't get it. Is it your plan to have both your turbos connected up to both exhaust manifolds? As in, the existing crossover pipe is still there, you're just hanging the GT30 off the same exhaust supply as the GT42? In that case, you are wrong about how it will work. You will to be lucky to spool either turbo, because each one will just be a bloody big wastegate for the other one! If your plan is to have the GT30 just running from only one bank, while the GT42 is running off the other bank, with both boosting into the same inlet system, then you are in for a different version of shit. The GT30 will then indeed be boosted by a 1.9L engine (a pretty shitty 1.9L engine though, not making as much flow as 1.8L of Honda). But that bank of the engine will be receiving the same boost as the other bank, whilst having a much tighter exhaust flow path. So the two halves of the engine won't be making anywhere near the same power. And, if you plan to have all sorts of exhaust and/or boost switchover valving to try to make it work, then you're back in the Toyota/Mazda sequential world I was talking about, and I wish you luck.

Because....2 different sized turbos implies a sequential system. An inexperienced hobbyist setting up a sequential system from scratch sounds like hilarity. Toyota and Mazda spent millions on their systems and never really got it right. So, I'll assume you're not doing a sequential system. I'll also assume you're not doing a true compound system, seeing as the turbos appear to be planned to be on opposite sides of the engine. And also because low boost and high boost numbers quoted appear to be about 1/4 of the values that you'd expect for compound. So, maybe just two stage compression? In which case, the GT30 is mahoosivley oversized. Either that or the GT42 is. Well, at least one side of each of them, probably. So, then I make a sensible suggestion of binning the additional turbo and putting an original M90 supercharger back into the Ecotec system and properly twincharge it. This actually makes a lot of sense because it will do what you suggest (fill the torque hole caused by the GT42) but.....if proper sequential is out of the question, then proper twincharging is also probably out of the question. And all of those thoughts went through my mind prior to posting my first response, and it all seemed too hard, so I just copped out and made the post I did.

I came in here to post something, but, for the life of me, I can't see how I can say anything that would be useful.

Yes. I have no idea about your neck of the woods. But here you can get them from GK-Tech, and probably many others. They are fairly common. In my experience, all the readily available boots do most of the job, but only most, not all. They still allow grease to get out and they still allow crap to get in. So they help, but they're not perfect. I have none on the front of my caster rods and I have made some covers out of 0.8mm thick clear PVC sheet and some velcro tie.