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

    • 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...