Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I think Nismoid you are mistaken.

I have 330rwkws on a rear wheel dyno and 260awkws on a 4 wheel drive dyno.

Both are different.

gtr32 has already the 320kws at the wheels he is asking for help with mods

to get him to 400rwkws.

Tuners also give you results in shoot out mode because it is a higher value.

In shoot out mode I have 370 rwkws with the 2530's,set at 1.3 bar

I will though clarify with my tuner tommorrow ,but of what I have read this is a correct statement.

Thanks for you help Nismoid in bringing this to my attention.

Cheers. :)

  • Replies 281
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think Nismoid you are mistaken.

I have 330rwkws on a rear wheel dyno and 260awkws on a 4 wheel drive dyno.

Both are different.

gtr32 has already the 320kws at the wheels he is asking for help with mods

to get him to 400rwkws.

Tuners also give you results in shoot out mode because it is a higher value.

In shoot out mode I have 370 rwkws with the 2530's,set at 1.3 bar

I will though clarify with my tuner tommorrow ,but of what I have read this is a correct statement.

Thanks for you help Nismoid in bringing this to my attention.

Cheers. :)

Im definately not mistaken. Please stop bringing mis-information into the thread.

I know what im talking about.

He does NOT have 320rwkw, thats what he wants. I dont know if you've read the first post correctly either.

He is looking for a turbo upgrade, ie, he doesnt have upgraded turbos as yet.

And he does not want 400rwkw. :P:rolleyes:

There is no way going from AWD ro RWD you loose 70rwkw

Thats madness and very very very incorrect

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...3&hl=*awkw*

Scroll down the Dirtgarage's post. Sums up what we are talking about here.

Simple enough to find using the search function, so not sure where you have "read" that awkw/rwkw is a 70kw difference, as its never been posted as such on this forum that i know of as its just rubbish :)

this correct. looking for 320awkw have well i dont no. my car is going on a dyno tommorrow so it will interesting to see how much power my car has...

exhaust,.9 bar of boost..so about 180kw yes.

by the way i have a faIR idea of the cars condition as it has only 89xxxx on (i no this could be incorrect)but the rest of the car seems to tell me its about right.

before i bought the car i made the bloke get a comp test at rigolis and all come back 150 throughout the 6....makes no funny noises and motor sounds tight?

say i had the cash would it be worth putting a n1 oil pump and collar?

kane

also the dyno im putting my car on is rearwheel dyno! i was just going to pull the 4wd fuse? will this be 100% rear wheel drive or cou;ld maybe slip some how fronts spin a little? just i dont want this top happen

to put a collar on = motor out.

So its not worth it unless your rebuilding it.

RWD - i think the fuse is ok on the R32 GTR.

You could always just drop the drive shaft, thats what R33/R34 owners have to do, takes a few mins, nothing major

044 needs cradle modification. Nismo pumps bolt straight in but cost ~$200 more :devil:

....Also i think you means 9psi?! or is it 0.9bar?!

....Oh, I see the 'point' now :wave:, I say you could expect closer to 200-210rwkw if you your not talking awkw

Sorry, theyre $230 and theyre an intank swap for your old one

the cradle needs slight modification but nothing the backyard mechanic cant do

theres a tutorial for the 32gtr in the tutorial section...have a look!

thanks slippery, ill have a look..

also i got a quote for nismo afm. $480 each... i think ill just stick with the stockies and see if they bottom out as im not sure when they would??? ideas?????

Dirtgarage tested RW & AW it, 1kw difference which is nothing but dyno variance at its best.

This only seems to work on a Dynolog (Mainline) Dyno...i don't know why but Dyno Dynamics reads higher in RW...dunno why...it just does.

We have been able to "spike" the figure in RW on a DD dyno by only about 30kw which seems about right on a 450AWKW car.

BUT...this is not a dyno thread so sorry to get off topic.

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...