Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I was under the impression that the stock cooler piping was 2.5 inch ID (63mm).

I got a piping kit for an fmic, and measured the piping to be 2.25 inch ID (~57mm)

I thought this might be the wrong kit, so i measured my stock 33 smic inlets, and the leftover pipes from the R34smic upgrade. They measure 2.25 inch ID.

So, what size cooler piping is normal for the fmic kit for R33? Has anyone bothered to measure? Or just assume, as I did, that its 2.5 inch?

the hot side is often smaller than std but the cooler side is larger. i know on the big sr20 kits (like on our car previous) the hot side is usually around 57mm and the cool side is 70 or 80mm depending on kit.

its the just jap type 2 kit. it's supposed to be tube and fin, but i have a feeling they gave me the wrong cooler. looks like bar and plate to me. and also measures 600x280. i'm currently waiting for a reply about that. here are pics of the cooler they gave me

the piping comes in a seperate box, and it looks to be the correct shape for R33. but the diameter threw me off. after measuring my stock pipes, i'm not sure what size its supposed to be now. has anyone actually measured theirs?

yeah the piping kit looks correct for r33. i havent tried fitting anything yet, but it's basically the same shape as the others ive seen.

i just spoke to just jap, and they told me the piping kit is 2.25 on the type 2 (greddy copy) in keeping with the stock piping size.

they also said the new type 2 coolers are all bar and plate. they found a tube and fin in stock for me to pick up.

ive always assumed tube and fin flow better, less restriction, but cool less than bar and plate. is this right? coz now i'm getting conflicting info.

Yeah thats the general consensus between the 2.

I opted for the bar and plate. I'm using the stock turbo, as if flow is going to be hugely affected on the low flow a stocker pushes. Plus I'd rather have the better cooling side of things. Up to you really.

ive always assumed tube and fin flow better, less restriction, but cool less than bar and plate. is this right? coz now i'm getting conflicting info.

Other way round. bar and plate is cheap to make and hence is used more here in these types of kits.... all the better cores are a tube and fin type design.

so tube and fin would be a better choice? coz thats what i was going with

nissan smic's and gtr coolers are tube and fin. as well as the hks etc.

Edited by Munkyb0y

:) yes i see

well i measured my stock cooler piping. the one that joins to the standard crossover pipe. it seems to be 2.25 inch.

so i guess the same size (2.25") fmic piping on a stock turbo setup is probably the way to go.

updated the link with pics of the tube and fin cooler from just jap.

http://tony.ikkon.com.au/fmic/ - (scroll down for tube and fin)

looks ok to me. what do you think?

Edited by Munkyb0y
  • 1 month later...

fitted the cooler. drives nice. no added lag. still as responsive. feels like it pulls a bit harder.

i'm thinking it'll benefit from another tune. what do you guys think?

here's how it turned out.

post-29392-1197430267_thumb.jpg post-29392-1197430284_thumb.jpg

thanks man :(

the reo bar was easy. i just cut 2 small wedges out of each side of the bottom section. after i sprayed it black, you wouldnt even notice it's been cut.

the front bar needed a bit more attention around the cooler piping, but all in all, it was just a matter of patience.

Edited by Munkyb0y

lol. depends on the bar too i guess. does yours have a huge opening for the cooler? also, i hung my cooler from a single bracket in the centre, off my radiator support. the ones with the 2 mounting points that bolt up to the reo, sit alot more forward, so would require alot more cutting of the reo bar.

i managed to squeeze a cold air intake pipe just above the cooler piping in the passenger side opening (it's the blue rectangle-ish thing). i wish there was more room, but thats all i've got to work with there.

better than nothing i guess.

post-29392-1197602578_thumb.jpg

Edited by Munkyb0y

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

    • There's plenty of OEM steering arms that are bolted on. Not in the same fashion/orientation as that one, to be sure, but still. Examples of what I'm thinking of would use holes like the ones that have the downward facing studs on the GTR uprights (down the bottom end, under the driveshaft opening, near the lower balljoint) and bolt a steering arm on using only 2 bolts that would be somewhat similarly in shear as these you're complainig about. I reckon old Holdens did that, and I've never seen a broken one of those.
    • Let's be honest, most of the people designing parts like the above, aren't engineers. Sometimes they come from disciplines that gives them more qualitative feel for design than quantitive, however, plenty of them have just picked up a license to Fusion and started making things. And that's the honest part about the majority of these guys making parts like that, they don't have huge R&D teams and heaps of time or experience working out the numbers on it. Shit, most smaller teams that do have real engineers still roll with "yeah, it should be okay, and does the job, let's make them and just see"...   The smaller guys like KiwiCNC, aren't the likes of Bosch etc with proper engineering procedures, and oversights, and sign off. As such, it's why they can produce a product to market a lot quicker, but it always comes back to, question it all.   I'm still not a fan of that bolt on piece. Why not just machine it all in one go? With the right design it's possible. The only reason I can see is if they want different heights/length for the tie rod to bolt to. And if they have the cncs themselves,they can easily offer that exact feature, and just machine it all in one go. 
    • The roof is wrapped
    • This is how I last did this when I had a master cylinder fail and introduce air. Bleed before first stage, go oh shit through first stage, bleed at end of first stage, go oh shit through second stage, bleed at end of second stage, go oh shit through third stage, bleed at end of third stage, go oh shit through fourth stage, bleed at lunch, go oh shit through fifth stage, bleed at end of fifth stage, go oh shit through sixth stage....you get the idea. It did come good in the end. My Topdon scan tool can bleed the HY51 and V37, but it doesn't have a consult connector and I don't have an R34 to check that on. I think finding a tool in an Australian workshop other than Nissan that can bleed an R34 will be like rocking horse poo. No way will a generic ODB tool do it.
    • Hmm. Perhaps not the same engineers. The OE Nissan engineers did not forsee a future with spacers pushing the tie rod force application further away from the steering arm and creating that torque. The failures are happening since the advent of those things, and some 30 years after they designed the uprights. So latent casting deficiencies, 30+ yrs of wear and tear, + unexpected usage could quite easily = unforeseen failure. Meanwhile, the engineers who are designing the billet CNC or fabricated uprights are also designing, for the same parts makers, the correction tie rod ends. And they are designing and building these with motorsport (or, at the very least, the meth addled antics of drifters) in mind. So I would hope (in fact, I would expect) that their design work included the offset of that steering force. Doesn't mean that it is not totally valid to ask the question of them, before committing $$.
×
×
  • Create New...