Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I am aiming to make my car capable of running flat 14's but have had some conflicting advice on how to do so.

Was wondering if any ppl on here had similar powered cars and if so exactly wat mods u've done to achieve this.

So far I've heard u need:

1:

Full exhast with 2 chambers dump pipe

FMIC

POD

Boost to 9PSI

2: All of above plus Z32 aiflow meter

3:All of above + PowerFC or GREDDY equivalent

Plz keep in mind i dont wanna F$%K my stock turbo so i wanna run 14flat safely without doing any damage

Can ne1 help?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/127073-14-sec-r33-gts-t/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Full turbo-back exhaust (3inch) - $1000

Replace standard panel filter with a K&N Filter - $100

Bleed valve (10-12psi)- $100

FMIC - $1000

Adjustable exhaust cam gear - $180

= $2,380 + fitting

This should give you up around 180rwkw with a healthy engine. Using decent quality roadworthy standard size tyres (225/50/16) you should be able to do consistent 13.5-14.0 sec with a 1.9-2.0sec 60ft at around 100-103mph, the rest just comes down to driver ability and how long your clutch will last.

Edit: You won't need an Apexi PowerFC, but it certainly would help and you certainly won't need a Z32 AFM (until you change turbo's atleast but by then you will also need a new fuel pump and injectors).

Edited by benm

If you run it at 12psi all day every day you may experience problems but for 14sec a few times every now and then you wont have any problems.

Your clutch will be fine.

Do a search for the Exhaust cam gear, plenty of info available including a thread I created with before and after results.

I did a 13.2 running my car the way how it is:

hardwalled circuit semis. Rock hard coilovers. lowered quite a bit, so too much negative camber affecting traction (-2.5d).

12psi. full exhaust. stainless steel magic cat. No aftermarket ecu.

twin plate clutch with lightened flywheel.

I must admit though, I am really crap at drag racing. If it wasn't for the twin plate, I woulda probably killed the stock clutch in one outing.

PS: I run 12-13 psi all day everyday, and I don't drive it easily. It is still strong after 2 years, and god knows how long or what boost the jap owner ran it on.

I don't see any problem in blowing the stock turbo. They're cheap as chips (around the 3-400 mark for an r33 turbo). I'm happy to blow it and change it myself.

PS: I run 12-13 psi all day everyday, and I don't drive it easily. It is still strong after 2 years, and god knows how long or what boost the jap owner ran it on.

I don't see any problem in blowing the stock turbo. They're cheap as chips (around the 3-400 mark for an r33 turbo). I'm happy to blow it and change it myself.

Yea but u could blow ur engine in the proccess of blowing turbo, i'd be carefull

Mate as you can see in my sig, i have done a 14.04. the car is virtually stock, the mods i have are dump pipe off turbo, 3inch exhaust. thats it really. I run stock turbo, stock FMIC, stock ecu and standard boost. Ohh and that run was on shitty falkens 326's, worst tyre ever!!! well maybe not worst but damn close.

2rismo, I understand that you have extensive experience, and i've been following your progress.

Every car is different. I understand that some cars like benm's was only getting 14s with around 200rwkw. There are others like that.

I can only offer the experience I have from my car. Refer to above. With a catback, pod filter. stock boost. hardwalled circuit semis, I did a 14.01. I have a timeslip at wsid to prove it.

Then with the mods I mentioned above, I did a 13.2. My car is totally not setup at all for drag with the rock hard suspensions, lowered, way too much neg camber. But that's just what my car did. Maybe it's a freak?

I can tell it's definitely the stock turbo, because when I changed the dump, I verified that.

Every car is different. I understand that some cars like benm's was only getting 14s with around 200rwkw. There are others like that.

I call that driver ability, i'm now only doing 12.3sec with a 310+ kw gtr when I should be doing mid 11's.

Edited by benm

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...