GTSBoy

Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.

Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.

Bah. I daily mine. ~60km per work day, 10-12 thousand km per year. What's the point of having a dirty old Datto and leaving it in the shed. It needs to be driven and enjoyed while the govco allows us to do so. It will only be a few years before we're forbidden to even start up internal combustion engines.

Judging by that spring perch and the normal looking spring on it - not a coilover. Well.... it is a coilover, just a stock format coilover, rather than what everyone calls a coilover.

Hmm. You might be right. @sinn3r, please post up more photos. Xtreme closeup of this side and the other side.

4 to 5 is fine. It will be slow, but that's better than blowing turbos. I don't have a PS pump idle up solenoid on my car, because... I think when we put the Neo in we retained my R32 lines. But.... From inspecton of the R34 vacuum hose diagram, you can see that the solenoid needs to be connected to the turbo inlet as source of clean air) and the plenum (as source of vacuum - which is the place for the air to flow to to cause the idle to increase). So 3 to 1 is VERY WRONG. 3 should go to either the turbo inlet, or the plenum. Follow the other hose from the PS solenoid and if it goes to the plenum, then your 3 goes to 2 2 would also serve as a bleed port for a boost solenoid.

Pull them out and pull more apart. You can't do shit with them still bolted to the floor of the car.

Yes it is. ZD1 is on the other side of the board. Where ZD1 is marked is clearly opposite a 2 pin device. Our 3 pin device here is not a ZD.

It's almost certainly the same as the one next to it. Have a fish around amongst these hits https://www.google.com/search?q=surface+mount+transistor+m33&sca_esv=9cb49794e0b2005d&source=hp&ei=2vJ5aNjTB7Kw0PEPldnS8QM&iflsig=AOw8s4IAAAAAaHoA6qkfmF6XcygtrZ4Vu9f92NXF_RFd&ved=0ahUKEwjYqIPP7MWOAxUyGDQIHZWsND4Q4dUDCA8&uact=5&oq=surface+mount+transistor+m33&gs_lp=Egdnd3Mtd2l6IhxzdXJmYWNlIG1vdW50IHRyYW5zaXN0b3IgbTMzMgUQIRigATIFECEYoAEyBRAhGKABMgUQIRigAUjKCFAAWABwAHgAkAEAmAHfAaAB3wGqAQMyLTG4AQPIAQD4AQL4AQGYAgGgAuYBmAMAkgcDMi0xoAfMBLIHAzItMbgH5gHCBwMyLTHIBwU&sclient=gws-wiz

South Australia, which is hardly as far behind as the rest pf Oz makes out, and who is also not a paragon of progressiveness (read that as over-legislation) in the area of vehicle standards, has this to say on the subject: Adjustable coil-over suspension Aftermarket adjustable coil-over suspension components are suspension units that incorporate an external thread on the main body and corresponding threaded spring saddle that allows the vehicle's suspension height to be varied. If fitting aftermarket or coil-over suspension components you must submit an Application to modify a light motor vehicle form and a report from a light vehicle engineering signatory (LVES).

I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.

The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.

No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.

Yes they do. For some maybe. But for those used the most by abusers, ie Skylines, the numbers are known. The stock eyebrow height for R32/3 Skylines is about 365/375mm or thereabouts. The minimum such heights are recorded in adjacent columns in the database.

My post contains the actual truth. Clause 3.2 b.

The problem has always been that coilovers are able to be adjusted, almost at any time, to be too low. Most people who ever get/got defected for/with coilovers were actually afoul of the minimum ride height rule. So the interpretation by cops/inspectors was always that it is pointless to allow numpty to raise his coilovers and get the car inspected/cleared, then just drop them back down again as soon as they get around the corner from the inspection station. This led to the interpretation that they were illegal unless rendered such that they can't be adjusted (ie, collars welded to the body, that sort of thing). That may or may not have ever actually been the official line, but I'm pretty sure it's not considered to be a solution these days. Coilovers themselves fall under clause 3.2 b of that manual, because they are an "installation of a variable ride height system" and they don't fit the exclusions in that clause (which point to air springs and other pneumatic adjusters). So, as per previous statements, they require engineering cert to be legal on the road. Once you have such cert, provided you do not adjust them outside the height range covered by the cert, you are OK. Without, you have an unroadworthy vehicle.

But seriously, can we ask for the results of the "tip a bottle of metho into a nearly empty tank" experiment?

Hang on. Let me get this straight. The desire is to have coilovers, BC in particular, to be MORE comfortable on Sydney roads than stock suspension? Well, that's obviously not right. BCs have crude damping design at the very best, and typically hard spring rates. BC stands for Billy Cart. And then, the desire is to put in some shitty old worn out stockers, to get it blue slipped and then put the BCs back in? And then.....what? Not worry about getting pulled up by the Plod? Because you seem to have raised a worry about paying for engineering (which actually does solve all your legality problems) and still getting pulled up.... but the only problem there is that if/when that happens you have to show your paperwork at the inspection station. Whereas, if you just swap in borrowed shitty old stockers to get it slipped now, and then you get defected in the future, you have to go find more shitty old stockers then too. You course of action looks like this set of options: Buy brand new stock type dampers, and springs. probably cost a bit more than $1k all up, but will last for the remaining life of the car. Put them in, pass inspection, drive on them forever more. Hell, they could even be really nice Bilsteins and Kings or other lower&stiffer springs if you wanted. Get the car engineered as is. ~$1k. Buy new Shockworks coilvers (or MCA) and also pay for engineering. You're spending a lot more here. But these will be the best things that you could drive around on.

If the gases flowing in those two tracts had the same properties, you could maybe use such broscience. But the exhaust has a different composition, different normal density, different actual density (because of different normal density, and mostly because of the massively higher temperature), and different viscosity (again because of much higher temperature). Consequently, all of the fluid dynamics parameters that matter, that you calculate from these inputs, such as the Reynolds number, friction factors (for wall friction) and so on, are all incomparable.

And we shall have to presume that Canada is the same?

The "long nose" diffs in your type of car, that have the speed sensor on the snout, are a pain because the casing is different from all the other short nose diffs. This means that the pinion shaft inside them is longer, which can make it harder to do certain types of diff swaps. But, if all you are going to do it swap the diff centre, and keep the gears (that's the crownwheel and pinion gears) then you won't have any problems.

Just tip a bottle of metho into a nearly empty tank. You should see that signal. 's'not difficult.

Well, in the same way that you can't tell any SUV from any manufacturer in any size category from any other one, "sports" coupes now all look identical. Stand back and squint your eyes and the Supra and the 400Z and the GR/BRZ things all look the same. I was just thinking last night, when sitting behind a Subaru CrossTrek, that I have no idea what it is, how it differs from an XV, or a Forester, or an Outback, or anything else Subaru offer, and I couldn't tell if it was supposed to be small, medium or large. I contrasted that to the good old days, where a HQ Kingswood had familial similarities to an LJ Torana, but there is no way that you could confuse them, and how a bit later, the HX Kinger and the concurrent Torana and the Gemini all had familial similarities, but you still could not confuse them. Ditto the ugly Fords and Chryslers of the era. But now, a RAV4 looks like a Kluger, looks like a Yaris/Cross/whatever they're calling those stupid f**king things, looks like every other Toyota that's not a Camry/Corolla sedan.

Yep. And if you ever do, you'll just have to deal with it then.

You say potato, I say potato?