Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hi folks, have just aquired myself an r33 gtr which has been moderately modified and tuned, running 240awkw or 357kw at engine. i want to achieve 300-350awkw on stock internals.

the main mods so far-its running 19psi on stock turbos with steel wheels, big apexi fmic (125mm thick i think), power fc, stock fuel system, stock afm, big cold air intake with k/n filter, cam timing has been adjusted and a bunch of other supporting stuff like blasted intake manifold, oil cooler and catch cans etc etc...

it goes nicely but of course want more... from the tuners report/comments he says he has taken the engine to a point where the air flow meters and injectors are a problem if you wish to go for bigger turbos.

so, i want to get a pair of gt2860r or similar, turbos :D and want to make sure i have the other supporting stuff covered. the main question i have is about the airflow meters and what to do here? whats the problem with these and how best to overcome?

how many hp will the stock r33 gtr fuel pump handle and what size injectors should i go for keeping in mind my power goals?

do i need anything else apart from a tune once the above is completed?

cheers...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/156789-help-me-get-more-from-my-rb26/
Share on other sites

it's a simple (but expensive) step up from here as you are at (or near) the limit of a number of things. I would get the following:

a set of mild cams around 260degree 9.15mm lift

700cc injectors

nismo fuel pump

nismo or Z32 (VG30) air flow meters

some turbos. either R34 N1s, or HKS GT-SS or HKS GT2530 would be my pic, but the generic garret equivelant seems to be good too.

also upgrade the front part of your exhaust if not done already

that should see you somewhere between 300 and 340 wheel kw.

it's a simple (but expensive) step up from here as you are at (or near) the limit of a number of things. I would get the following:

a set of mild cams around 260degree 9.15mm lift

700cc injectors

nismo fuel pump

nismo or Z32 (VG30) air flow meters

some turbos. either R34 N1s, or HKS GT-SS or HKS GT2530 would be my pic, but the generic garret equivelant seems to be good too.

also upgrade the front part of your exhaust if not done already

that should see you somewhere between 300 and 340 wheel kw.

ah yes, the exhaust has been done already, turbo back 3.5inch...

so the z32 are best replacement for the stock afm`s? there is 2 of them remember? i have been doing some more reading and it seems that the voltage is the problem??? or is it the diameter???

was gonna hold off on the cams, thought id get there without em? will i really need em to go over 300awkw?

one other thing, i think the tune is very rich as i get alot of soot on the back of the car from the exhaust? is this normal? i know its safer, but can you still have a safe tune without the soot?

the problem with the afms is the calibration. not so much the physicaly size (unless you are running very big turbos, with a bit inlet).

yes I'm aware there is 2 afms. you need to reaplace your 2, with 2 new ones. personally I would chose the nismos as they are a Z32 sensor in an RB25 body which means they fit straight into your existing set-up. Z32s have a larger body so require some effort to fit them.

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...