Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,i test drove a 1995 r33 GTS-t today and i got to admit it was fun but the only thing i didn't like was when you would take off in first (i didnt try takeing off in any other gears). the engine (not to sure if it cam from the engine it sounded like it came from the left hand side of the car) would make a rattling noise it was really bad, would any body be able to help.

Best regards Vlad Adam

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/144471-r33-problems-rattle/
Share on other sites

would it only do it with the clutch either in or out. it may be that the clutch is noisey (either the springs on the clutch plate or one of the bearings).

When i start to de-press the clutch, and take off it woiuld start to do it and then continue till i would change to second or boost would kick in, but it would not do it when the car was heated up.

If it's under any kind of load a 'rattle' like marbles in a tin is our good chinese friend 'ping'. If it's a sound coming from the 'left side of the car thats consistant with Mr Ping.

Mr Ping is visiting with his good friend 'Too much base timing'.

Make a mark on your CAS to see where you started with a marker pen, losen the bolts so you can rotate it. Get out your trusty Timing light take a few degrees of base timing out at idle, tighten it back up and see if it fixes the noise. In the mean time DONT try to make that sound anymore. If it means not driving you car till you can do this then so be it. RB25's 9:1 compression doesn't make for forgiving ringlands under boost with ping.

See how you go. It's not uncommon as an issue.

If it's under any kind of load a 'rattle' like marbles in a tin is our good chinese friend 'ping'. If it's a sound coming from the 'left side of the car thats consistant with Mr Ping.

Mr Ping is visiting with his good friend 'Too much base timing'.

Make a mark on your CAS to see where you started with a marker pen, losen the bolts so you can rotate it. Get out your trusty Timing light take a few degrees of base timing out at idle, tighten it back up and see if it fixes the noise. In the mean time DONT try to make that sound anymore. If it means not driving you car till you can do this then so be it. RB25's 9:1 compression doesn't make for forgiving ringlands under boost with ping.

See how you go. It's not uncommon as an issue.

from what i could see when i was taking a look at the car it's pritty much standerd, exept a blow-off -valve, a fool 3 and 1/2 inch exhaust system. and boost controler (valve type). some1 did mention that it was the intercooler pipings and now that i think of it the guy had aftermaket pipings, but a stanerd intercooler. so would that be it!!

And it was like a vibration with a lill bit of a rattle! (im sorry i cant really put a finger on it my haring is not that good so i had to get a trust worthy friend to come with me when i did then test drive, i could hear it but not that clear, im just going off what he explanied it like)

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...