Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi,

I have an RB26 Stagea but not an Autech. Wondering if someone can FAST;

VIN# WGNC34024634

and a separate FAST for Engine # RB26047962A

Thanks in advance.

Regards,

Allan

post-68505-1268527046_thumb.jpg

sorry FAST does not deal with Engine Numbers

Cheers Bundy

Brandon

mine comes up invalid to, thats on the VIN , the model No and using both???

I'm using FAST Ver 3.5 btw

cheers

Same version and I just checked it again it the same as what I've posted. I'm only using the VIN and model I got was KBNR32RXFS7AA.

Can someone check that NUR for me? My mate is looking at buying that. I cant get it out from FAST but for some reason I'm thinking maybe FAST doest show cars that were produced after 2001?

Can someone check that NUR for me? My mate is looking at buying that. I cant get it out from FAST but for some reason I'm thinking maybe FAST doest show cars that were produced after 2001?

Hmm it doesn't work for me either, says that it is invalid.

Fast this one for me. Thanks in advance!

BNR32001527

post-63532-1269007812_thumb.jpg

Hi,

Please lookup my VIN: HCR32003878

I am mostly interested in month/year of manufacture

Cheers

post-63532-1269007970_thumb.jpg

May 1989

please check this for me, i have fast downloading but may need it before it finishes...

BCNR33023740

mainly wanting to know if its qm1 white

thanks.

post-63532-1269008118_thumb.jpg

Yes its QM1 white

Hi,

Could you please check the following chassis number for me BNR32-304331.

Thanks in advance, much appreciated.

Z54

post-68505-1269325705_thumb.jpg

??GTR.17?? not sure what it is, bit I think I'll like it.

cheers Bundy

what does GTR.17 mean.

Guy claims its a V spec 1

What are your thoughts?

probably not, V Specs are normally listed as GTR/V in FAST like the one below

although I've never seen the 17, so looks like "Something" special, maybe someone else can shed a light

also just notice d the othert 32z I got 'on file' list engine as 'RB26DTT' yours lists as 'RB26DETT"

& your Geabox lists as MT.F5 not MT ... could be Series 2

maybe someone familiar with 32'z might know

post-68505-1269332841_thumb.jpg

EDIT: splelnig

Edited by BundyBear

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

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...