Jump to content
SAU Community

  

65 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 111
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Looks like the one I nearly got a year back, a nice white import turbo MX-5

you mean the pics i posted up before :) i dont know how you could have acquired that one, its GARAGE VARY's centre piece. they wouldnt part with it. unless someone else has a kit in oz as well :)

if this was your astina then it would use the same mounts. prob is both the familia and the astina are east-west mounted. mx5 is north-south. i know that they could line up fine, but there is a chance they might not. main concern is the turbo and manifolds etc. they could get in the way.

let me think..............everything will be on the left side of the engine if mounted in mx5. so i'd either have to get a new manifold made up and shift everything or i could be lucky and it might fit? not too sure :)

i had an idea today actually. was browsing the net, and found a couple of shells for sale. think it might be cheaper to buy a shell and then go from there rather than chop the car to pieces. not sure on the idea yet but will look into it more.

with the gearbox, we were planning to put either a 5sp supra box or rx7 box in, both of which are pretty strong and can take a bit of abuse.

with regards to the familia engine. i think the only issue wit the transplant would be the mounts. the engines themselves arent too different. if i managed to get a BPD, and put it in a 1996 model (1.8 with popup headlights) i dont think there would be too many problems. they are the same engine block really. the familia has the bpd while the mx5 only has a bp. so i dont think there would be any issues there except making new mounts.

i'm looking at purchasing a racing hardtop from bullet, they are about 4500 (1500 more than stock ones) but have extra supports (i think its like a mini roll cage) built into the roof and heavy duty latches in case you do flip it. i will also install the rollover bars as well and racing harnesses. also, they do have a soft top standard so rain isnt really an issue?

Either way man, if you cant put the bpd in, if its almost the same all the pistons and that shouldnt be too hard to get a hold of, the only reason I see a problem is I know other people who have tried the fwd engine, to rwd engine thing, and found it a lot harder than they thought, they did get it done, just a signficantly more cost than planned, something to do with gearboxs and clutches from memory, along with a few other small hicups. Just a bit of reasearch should sort it out.

But if you can get a good quality hard top, go for it hey man. It should be fairly reliable, obviously quick, good range of suspension mods for them. Common enough to not get hassled by the po po, yet still different enough to get a bit of interest.

I personally would still stick with the piston motor, I think it would be far less hassles in the long run, and just turbo the stocker until it blows up which gives you more time to save (ie money saved can be earning you some interest or something, pay off a bit more of your loan if you got one or whatever).

But yeah, go for it hey. Its just the 2 seat thing :laugh: Make sure you can live with only 2 seats.

turboing a stock BP will last all of 2 months on the outside, and you will have to go with aftermarket management (which would prob help anyway...)

I dont think turboing the stock engine for the intrum is a good idea, its wasted money, if it blows its liable to take the gearbox or turbo or something else with it.

yeah, 2 seats are fine with me. i usually only let one person in my car anyway so it should help :laugh:

i didnt really like the idea of turbocharging the stock engine, unless i put the forgies in it. but it would still end up costing bout 5k to turbo the stocker. for that price i could have a better engine. i know for a fact that a B6T fits in just fine as there is one going round with it in it, it pulls 10's down the quarter too :)

i found out that my mechanic is back from holidays now so i'm gonna pay him a visit and see what he thinks. he's pretty good with these sort of things, plus he'll put a mod plate on almost anything as long as he does the work :)

looks like its settled, we're keeping the stock engine. this is what my friend, the one helping me build it said.

QUOTE(70XIN @ Jan 6 2007, 09:17 AM)

MX5 B6 (stock engine)

-Manifold

-Td05-big 16g/Garrett GT28RS

-Big Hybrid Cooler

-Pod

-Piping + silicon bends

-Microtech LT-10s

-3" Dump pipe and Exhaust

-RX7 injectors

-Make an airbox for the pod

-Coilovers

-Strut Braces

-Kit

-Wheels

Goodluck to *most* cars keeping up with that on a mountain .. plus, in a straight line on 10-12psi, you will spin 2nd with ease

When shit breaks

-RX7 box and diff

-Forged rods and pistons

Running 20-25psi. Faster than the GTiR by a heap .. except from a standstill .. traction will be teh funneh!

You have my list That's what i always wanted to do.

I still think your waisting your time with the hole Mr5 thing. Sure spend 20 k on it and you will get

250kw easy and it will sound like a beast but hello gtr = wtf > you in a race. Sure you may not be interested in raceing now but sooner or later your going to want to and when you get blased by a GTR down the road and you want to race your tyre spin and lack of body weight is going to be the end of you.

Sure Mr5 Cheaper to mod and you can have a load of rear wheel fun with it * Burn outs *

But its nothing a GTS-T cant do and people take a skyline more seriously.

Thats my opinion ofcorse and if i was going to but another car it wouldnt be any of the ones you listed

Honda NSX Super Sport S series for the win

the reason i'm avoiding the GTR is: firstly, the price tag. just cant afford it. to buy and maintain a gtr right now would send me broke. secondly, i dont want to go awd again i decided. not till i can drive a rwd to almost its limits. once i have done that, then i will move onto another awd.

i'm not interested in straight line stuff anymore, anyone can do it. i want to challenge my self, not others. i'll get more satisfaction from beating myself than someone else.

also, honda nsx is not cheap and waaaaaaaay outta budget.

looks like its settled, we're keeping the stock engine. this is what my friend, the one helping me build it said.

QUOTE(70XIN @ Jan 6 2007, 09:17 AM)

MX5 B6 (stock engine)

-Manifold

-Td05-big 16g/Garrett GT28RS

-Big Hybrid Cooler

-Pod

-Piping + silicon bends

-Microtech LT-10s

-3" Dump pipe and Exhaust

-RX7 injectors

-Make an airbox for the pod

-Coilovers

-Strut Braces

-Kit

-Wheels

Goodluck to *most* cars keeping up with that on a mountain .. plus, in a straight line on 10-12psi, you will spin 2nd with ease

When shit breaks

-RX7 box and diff

-Forged rods and pistons

Running 20-25psi. Faster than the GTiR by a heap .. except from a standstill .. traction will be teh funneh!

You have my list That's what i always wanted to do.

Missed one MAJOR thing off that list dude. BRAKES!!!

breaks arent important when building a fast car daveo, dont you know that? :kiss:

Mike you were going to buy the MX5 from the word go with this thread. The majority vote was for a 32 GTR, yet you completly discarded this and went with the MX5 anyway.

Im not saying dont buy what you want and im not saying follow the trend or popular oppinion, but why ask for it when you dont particually care what everyone says? Or was it just to see if your MX5 idea was popular?

In any case, you will need much better breaks then the stock MX5 ones, and forgies and B6T rods from the outset, otherwise this project will just end in tears.

breaks arent important when building a fast car daveo, dont you know that? :)

Mike you were going to buy the MX5 from the word go with this thread. The majority vote was for a 32 GTR, yet you completly discarded this and went with the MX5 anyway.

Im not saying dont buy what you want and im not saying follow the trend or popular oppinion, but why ask for it when you dont particually care what everyone says? Or was it just to see if your MX5 idea was popular?

In any case, you will need much better breaks then the stock MX5 ones, and forgies and B6T rods from the outset, otherwise this project will just end in tears.

Not picking on you exclusivly here dude, but... This is a car site, so I think this needs to be addressed, to everyone who makes this mistake read the below.

Brakes is what stops your car.

If your brakes dont work, you break your car.

So lets go over that again. On a car its Brake. In music is breaks.

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

    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...