Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

guys,

im confused with after market BOV, i mean std one for R32 is plum back, so if i swap for atmo one and block the plum back...is that bad for the turbo? because people tell me that it ruins your turbo or something....confused me BADLY@@!@

any help would be great!!

THANKS guys

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/144035-is-blocking-the-std-plumback-bad/
Share on other sites

You're confusing two things for one. You either swap your stock plumb back BOV for an ATMO one or you BLOCK the standard one. They generally both screw up your AFM readings resulting in backfire, stalling issues, idle issues.

I've blocked the stock BOV and the only thing I've noticed is that perhaps my fuel economy has gone down abit and that I get the occasional loud pop (backfire) on gearchanges. No stalling or idle issues.

ok well....im talking bout removing the std BOV and installing atmo one and blocking of that pipe....LOL no idea wats its called... i mean i swaped it over....car was fine for a bit...then the thing i used to block the pipe started leaking and then the car began stalling and shitting itself...

so i put std bov on again and yer fine....

so i dunno wat to do...i luv the sound of aftermarket bov though. atmo one that is

Ahh I understand, you fitted the BOV and blocked the recirculation pipe. Just make sure the bung used to block the pipe is on tight with a hose clamp. If you have problems regarding idle its most like your BOV is leaking.

Run a MAP sensor... no stalling or idle issues at all :happy:

Coke Cap = BAD - I had this in there for a day before I got the Turbosmart plug (billet) and it melted; I'm lucky that the temps did not get hot enough to turn it into a liquid and run down the recirc pipe.

IMO; if you must use DIY bungs, the end of a broom stick is better!

FLUTTER ON BRO....

waa? I don't know any one who has one with a BOV :) I meant any r32 model, btw.. All have the outlet on the inlet piping but all were blocked with rubber grommets.. Not to mention everything i've read on this site seems to suggest rb20's were BOV-less :woot:

Do you actually know anyone with an R32? The outlet on the inlet you speak of is actually the inlet for the plumback piping from the standard bov which is located on the standard crossover pipe..

Now I am questioning whether you can actually read at all :)

Beer Bottle Caps as Bungs FTW! Used two for a long time, no dramas. Also if you are smart, you put the question facing outward, then you have a little bit of trivia to keep you company each time you open the bonnet.

No, not kidding. Have pics of setup.

Well i know 3 people with them and all of the BOV outlets are bunged up (well the outlets from the plumb??). I thought r32 gts-t and below were all BOV-less.. I've never really looked into BOV's and consequently know very little (so no need to go hack). To me, in most respects, they appeared quite superfluous, but if 32 gts-t's have them from standard i'd be interested in putting one on. Any pics of this crossover pipe? Or of the positioning of the BOV?

Edited by 123456

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...