Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

If we remove the 4wd fuse (gtr34 v-spec) to measure the rwkw on a 4wd dyno, what will affect or damage to the drive line??

In normall driving condition (without torque split), is it true that the gtrs are running permanant on 25% front and 75% rear power??

Any explains would be appriciated, CHEERS !!!

On 34 gtr, remove 4wd fuse and front driveshaft and it'll run on RWD mode.

Do a search as this topic has been covered many times.

Why you want to run RWD on 4WD dyno?

Cheers

Grant

What the mechanic did is fine on an R32...

R33/34 - consider the equivalent of slipping the clutch for the entire dyno run.

take a poke through the forums, have a search and I am sure that there will be a technical thread about it . Understand WHY it is not a good idea (its not...).

but i would not put it on a 2wd dyno without removing the fuse like in the 32gtr. i am unsure about 34gtr but i beleive its similar.

Its not similar. You won't damage the R32 like that.

Edited by ebola
as I mentioned, we had to run it in rwd mode (on a 4wd dyno) because during the tuning the 4wd check light came on and the torque didn't split at all. So the mechanic took a risk !!!

mentioned where? call me blind but in this thread you havent said anything about that

Anyways...

Please search, common topic this is for GTR owners.

And if your mechanic doesnt know this... i wouldnt take the car back there as they have no idea (obviously)

To answer the question briefly, the shaft MUST be removed.

This is crucial. Just pulling the fuse will still cause wear to the clutch packs in the 4WD transfer case as its not in "true" RWD mode with the drive shaft still connected.

yess. just incase. any awd post r32. you cant just pull the fuse as youl burn out the transfer case.

as its "preloaded"

as a general rule. if the cars got 2 drain plugs on the transfer case you can. if its only got 1 plug. you cant

I did search about this attesa controll topic, but I haven't satisfied because all GTRs can use after market torque split controlls (such as an HKS unit for example) to adjust the desire split levels. I've seen some footages about street drag in Japan, gtr33 and gtr34 did a massive burn out b4 they lined up. Hmm, how did they manage to do that without burning the clutch packs in the transfer case???

What I'm thinking is when we adjust the torque controll module at 0, means no torque transfer, isn't this equivalent to remove the fuse ( no torque transfer too) ??? can any one make this clear?? CHEERSS !!

why keep asking opinions if you are not going to beleive them?

the correct info is in this thread. 32 is fine to run in rwd mode indefinately due to different attesa pump preload on the plates in the transfer case. 33 and 34 all 4wd systems always have some front drive.

we make attesa controllers. They modify the signal to the computer to go rwd only, but that does *not* change the preload in later models so we recommend not using rwd mode in 33 and 34.

And a burnout is one thing (let the case slip for a while), and they may have line locker for the front brakes, but a dyno is totally different. What would happen if you have the rear on the rollers, start to spin the rollers, wheel speed sensors show rears are slipping so computer sends torque to the front wheels. I don't want to be standing nearby.

Mashrock: yeah its true now go back into your room and talk to the little fairies and stuffed toys that talk to you.

Either you have no idea or youve been smockin to much crack

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • 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.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...