GTSBoy

Well, that conrod is definitely more of a "because you can" rather than "because you should" thing. It doesn't have to look like a Geiger painting, they just want it to look that way so they can make people ooh and ahh.

Define "work". I presume that you have fitted a new head unit and are trying to drive the rear speakers direct from the head unit's speaker outputs? Have you run new speaker wires (even temporarily around the outside of the car) to drive the speakers from the headunit, to prove they work? Are are you just putting a AA battery on the terminals to see the cones move? (Not that the AA battery test is a bad test, just that it's not as convincing as using an actual amplifier to make noise come out of them). FWIW, I wouldn't use the original wiring that ran from the Nissan stereo to the rear amplifier for speaker level wiring. It's pretty skinny. It only take an hour or so to rip out some seats and run some new speaker wires from the front to the back.

WRT EVs - yes, all that is required is a better battery technology than lithium for them to be more acceptable. You need circa double the capacity, although more would be better. You need circa double the number charge cycles, although more would be better. And you need them not to be so bloody flammable. And they probably need to be recyclable in a reasonable fashion, which all lithium based batteries do not achieve right now. All of these things are possible. It might be hard to get all of them at the same time. But if you could get even just the non-flammable and recycling parts, you could go forward. As to powders for 3D printing. Easily available. If they have the printer, they know where the consumables are bought. Not cheap by any measure though, even via Alibaba, and the wastage can be a bit frightening for poor student. Inconel, like all "stainless" materials, has more corrosion failure modes than even mild steel. People don't seem to take notice of this fact. Steel pretty much just rusts, with a few variations on the theme. But simple stainlesses like 304 can do wierd arse shit like stress corrosion cracking and pinhole corrosion, where if you subject them to cycling stresses (like in a pressure vessel that doesn't operate at constant pressure) and a chloride environment, the chloride ion can invade the material at the grain boundaries, suck the chromium atoms out of the grains and precipitate a chromium chloride ceramic material out in the grain boundaries. This leave the stainless steel seriously chrome depleted in the bulk and it just rusts away. And then it tends to go bang. There are many other shitty things that can happen to 300 series stainlesses, and they all have their unique twists on them. Inconel in particular is only "strong" at elevated temperatures under certain conditions. Granted, these are fairly broad, and the scaling temperature of 600 series inconels is up around 1100°C or so. It retains a lot of strength up at those temperatures. But strength isn't everything. If you hold inconel at ~800°C in an atmosphere that contains sulphur or many sulphur containing species, then you get something that is called hot corrosion. The S attacks the oxide layer on the inconel and it just evaporates away. The new bare parent material forms a new oxide layer (if there is oxygen around to make it) and then that just jumps off the material under S attack. Rinse and repeat. The material loss rate can be truly frightening. I've had 25mm thick burner faceplates go away in weeks. These things could last forever under better circumstances, but they only last weeks when the conditions are wrong. All these materials have different responses to being operated at different temperatures in oxidising conditions compared to what they do in carburising condition. You really have to know your stuff before choosing a material for an application. If you don't, you soon learn. I agree that 3D printing in metals offers some massive advantages, particularly for the things you mention. Heat exchangers in particular can be done in ways that are otherwise unmanufacturable and yield terrific performance. The major problem associated with such manufacturing techniques for these sorts of things is that they are often non able to be inspected and offer challenges to maintainability. You often can't replace subassemblies because it is monolithic. You have to replace the whole thing - which leads back to wastage and recyclability again!

Good chat.

Yeah, I meant industrial combustion, not internal combustion. My business will still be moving forward in 20 years. Internal combustion will be nearly dead. I make the front ends of my equipment from materials like 253MA, 310, 314, various Inconels and Incolloys. And on top of those we use really tricky superalloy coatings. And we still end up having to rebuild burners every 9 months in many industrial processes, because shit is ugly in clinker kilns and acid roast kilns and the like. I have had burner tip components made using 3D printing. It is hugely expensive for very little to no gain and you cannot print in most of the materials we want to use. There is only a very limited range of high temperature high nickel alloys available, and you can't just use inconel in many of our applications because it doesn't like running at ~800°C in the presence of sulphur, and guess what much of our stuff has to do.

Sorry, I thought you'd circled back around to the rebuild.

They click onto clips. If the clips are broken, you need clips.

You do realise we're talking about the whole engine being excruiciatingly cleaned out? Not just the turbo? Right?

No. If there is loose metal, then it will be stuck all over the place. And if/when it shakes loose after the rebuild, it will cause damage to your new stuff. It's not to be contemplated.

I work in industrial combustion. The challenges there are very very different to recipro-internal combustion, but there are a wide selection of similarities. I have to keep telling my upper management, "If wishes were lollies there's be candy shops on every street corner". I have one particular member of upper management who seems to outright believe that just because he wants something to be true, then it must be achievable. You cannot point to the existence of the insulation tiles on the space shuttle and then tell me that it must be possible to insulate an umbilical carrying power, control signals and maybe even fuel while it passes through the 1800°C part of the flame, without giving me at least a suitably sized slice of NASA's budget to achieve it. And so it is also with any technical development. There are constraints, whether they be physical (ie, available space, material properties, whatever), or physics (ie, kinetics, turbulence, momentum, emergent phenomena, etc), or budget, or other resources that make for an N-dimensional array of compromises to pick from. Some compromises might mean "We can build it, but it won't do anything useful". Others might be "We can build it, but it will cost the earth, moon and half the output of the human race for the next 10000 years to make it happen". And then there's the always wonderful "You need Start Trek level technology to be able to identify specific minerals under the surface at a distance of 1000km" (and yes, I've had to deal with exactly that sort of thing in our other business, which does mineral analysis). Which is why I poo poo the prospect of successful TJI as a retrofit on RB26 or any similar vintage engine. There might be ways to make it happen, to whatever the limits that it can be realised are. And of course those limits are obviously driven by the fact that it has to be passive TJI to be even close to being described as a "retrofit", and the passive version only yields a tiny fraction of the full potential of the concept. And even the best possibility with passive requires things done (in the way of EGR, etc) that further muddy the possibility of being able to describe it as a "retrofit". And remember, you're all hoping to be able to do this TJI retrofit with whatever arbitrary combination of turbo and injectors and management and cams and manifolds and pipework and engine capacity and compression and whatever else could possibly be different between enthusiast modified engines some 30 years after they got shipped out of the somewhat low tech assembly line that they were built on. Whereas, any work that the developers of TJI have reported generally lists an extremely long list of extremely tight constraints that they put on it while they fiddled around for thousands of hours in the lab environment to even get it to work. In my world the equivalent is MILD combustion. This is a pot-of-gold-at-the-end-of-the-rainbow situation where you're firing fuel and oxidant into a chamber (not an engine combustion chamber, a furnace combustion chamber) with certain turbulence properties so that there is massive recirculation of the spent combustion products whizzing around in there and diluting the combustion reaction zone so that it moderates the peak temperatures and minimises NOx. This is a reasonably difficult condition to successfully create in the lab. And the lolly shop on the corner managers want to be able to create MILD combustion in practical combustion chambers with real industrial processes going on inside them (like, calcination, sintering, clinkering, roasting, of lime or analogues, iron ore pellets, raw minerals, acidified minerals, etc). Im-bloody-possible. Never going to happen in the real world. If you manage to get a MILD condition to even be achievable, you'd probably only be able to achieve it for 10 minutes on the 3rd Tuesday after the next cometary close approach. But no-one wants to hear it because they all want their lolly shops. If you have to put a hundred grand's worth of stuff into an RB engine/bay to be able to achieve TJI, surely it has to be better to just use a better engine? One that's actually designed to do what you need. It is at this point that the existence of people like Herman who are willing to develop castings becomes useful. In the modern world, the "democratisation of production", to coin some sort of phrase, driven by the ability to do decent design work in CAD and get complex stuff 3D printed for dev, for mould/blank production or even for final parts if you're willing to trust metal printers (which I am actually unlikely to put a lot of trust in for parts exposed to combustion and process conditions in my work) , starts to permit people to put some effort into making a head that might allow an RB to successfully work. It could have camless free-valve type stuff to permit the EGR to be internal. Or it might include necessary pathways for moving exhaust gas to the other side of the head to allow an EGR cooler to be placed on the better side under the intake. And it might have more room for a proper TJI injector/chamber. And it might have better port shapes/heights/chamber shape. And it might even have space for a tiny auxiliary spark plug if required, and so on. But you'd need to expect to be able to sell it to nearly every surviving RB engine to be able to recoup your costs. Or sell it for >$100k per installation, and....you can guess the likelihood of either of those coming off.

Yuh, I think my original point (yes, it was me who said "in your dreams bitch") that I'd be extremely unwilling to believe that you could just throw a special plug into a combustion chamber not designed to be fired that way, and expect very much from it. Certainly not to the extent that the technology is claimed to be able to deliver when used in chambers that are actually designed for it. And hence, not really a "retrofit". If it needs a special head, then it is something much more than just a retrofit.

Could you please express this thought again with some clarity added?

You'd be one of the few, if you hda.

I don't see it as a huge problem because I seldom watch embeds. I just click on the title link in the video and a new tab opens and you can watch the video there. This certainly works better for me in the years since I installed NoScript on all my browsers, because having to manually enable each automation (such as for embeds) is a pain in the arse (but a pain in the arse that I willingly submit to, in order to make it impossible for the creeps to track me around the web). The permissions for youtube at youtube are already enabled in all my browsers, so there's no extra work required.

It's on the same assembly as the pump. Little pressure vessel.

If it's uprated vs anything at all, it would be the diff only pump from the RWD cars. The ATESSA pump is waaaay more beefy than what is required to run the diff. I'd suspect that adding the diff duty to it would not even make it realise that it had extra work to do.

It's less about the sock and more about what might have been shaken loose from the tank walls/floor maybe by E85 or summat.

Dirty sock?

It's more a case of forcing videos to be viewed at YT.com instead of with embeds, because embeds were not getting shown adverts. And it is all about the adverts.

It's definitely the pump, not the regulator.

Whilst all of that ^ could be totally innocent, taken together it sounds like all the alarm bells ringing. You're just going to have to go forwards, not look backwards.

So this should drive the ability to upgrade the triggering system. Your tuner will thank you for it, as will your engine.

Stock oil pump on a Neo is the N1, and is ..... OK. But only OK. My position on rebuilding an RB is that no RB should be rebuilt with the original oil pump. You need more volume and pressure. And.... then you need to restrict the amount of oil that the pump will deliver to the head, hence the restrictors.

Buy the stock motor. While it is apart to put the head on it, do: Nitto oil pump. Add extra restrictors to the head as required. Front and rear crank seals, water pump, timing belt. Any water or oil hoses on the driver's side and wrt the turbo that look anything other than new and flexible. A very good head gasket. Nitto head bolts. Thermostat. Clean out all coolant passages that you can easily see anywhere. Neglected Neos can get sludge built up in the hoses to and from and the inside of the IACV at the rear of the stock plenum. Makes bleeding difficult. New balancer. What is the ECU? If not stock, then now is the time to put a different crank and cam sensor on it to get more reliable timing. If you're going to go with the rebuild of your dead motor, I'm more with the shop than with your desire to not spend on it. At the very least it will want pistons. Rods are cheap these days, so that's them too. The rest of it pretty much needs and wants to be done even if you were to cheap out on stock pistons and rods. All the spanner work, cleaning, machining, bearings and resizings of things all need to be done.

Since when is stock boost on a VQ 14 psi? Look to the health or otherwise of the coil looms. They can die, taking one or more coils out. Disassembling something in that state can make it go from barely working to not working at all.