Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

post-29722-1167103831.jpgpost-29722-1167103859.jpgpost-29722-1167103884.jpgpost-29722-1167103910.jpgpost-29722-1167103964.jpgpost-2503-1129127693.jpgpost-29722-1167104043.jpgpost-29722-1167104076.jpg[attachmen

=73470:attachment]

I AM SELLING FOR A FRIEND THE FOLLOWING,

HKS GT45R POLISHED FRONT HEAT COATED REAR BALL BEARING TURBO.

HAS DONE 9000KM

ALSO HAVE CUSTOM MANIFOLD AND 50MM WASTEGATE WITH SCREAMER PIPE TO SUIT RB26

REASON FOR SALE IS BLOWN MOTOR AND NOT GOING AHEAD WITH PROJECT

TOTAL PRICE FOR ALL THREE ITEMS IS $3000

POSSIBLY WILL SEPERATE ITEMS DEPENDING ON PRICE

CONTACT NATHAN ON 0404 866 327

post-29722-1167104015.jpg

post-29722-1167104115.jpg

If it came with the HKS cast low mount manifold its a TA45S .

this is actually a highmount turbo, hence the size. dont think it would fit anywhere but up the top

This is definately a T45S, same turbo as my car, made 360rwkw at 1.5bar, they do came lowmount, bit its a tight fit, and i dont think they are bb?

well there you go, could possibly be a t45s?? anyone else have any comments or opinions??

i've just posted whats been given to me by my mate... dont want to steer anyone in the wrong direction.

If your friend wants to sell items on this site, they need to register.

Please read the guidelines for posting in this section.

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...showtopic=76463

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • 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...