Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i couldnt imagine a stock car like mine having an engine go bang without any mods

sure general maintenance will be required but after all, it is an old car

then again

you would expect a rb26 to be a tough motor

hence maybe i will take out the boost restrictor

but i should probs do an exhaust for this

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201356-32gtr/page/2/#findComment-3583986
Share on other sites

i

you would expect a rb26 to be a tough motor

It is tough but detonation will kill any motor

Give it the right conditions (shit fuel, clogged injectors, 18 year old fuel pump, 40 degree + days) and youre tempting fate

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201356-32gtr/page/2/#findComment-3584068
Share on other sites

yeah the compression is pretty low, should be up to 160psi, and 120 is the low acceptable limit in the workshop manual.

but that assumes it was all done correctly:

engine warm

all plugs out

throttle open

good battery charge

and that your gauge is accurate.

generally, as long as the readings are fairly even (and those ones are) then the actual readings are less important.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201356-32gtr/page/2/#findComment-3584186
Share on other sites

Im with Duncan, compression numbers generally dont matter so long as they are all close. And they are, so i think its safe to assume your ok.

Its the same with dynos. Peak power doesnt mean a great deal as it varies from dyno to dyno. I tend to try stick to the one dyno and go for gains rather than peak.

For example, my old Integra Type R made 136fwkw with a cold air intake, stock everything else.

Later at a different dyno with the addition of Mugen 4-1 headers made 120fwkw... Then again, on the 2nd dyno shop with the addition of a Mugen Twinloop catback and de-cat it made 133fwkw.. gains FTW.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201356-32gtr/page/2/#findComment-3584944
Share on other sites

EDIT: That compression is shit too.

mate

i dont see what your basing this on

and im sure the proprietor of RE knows more about engine health.

along with the rest of the members on here who are actually writing useful information!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201356-32gtr/page/2/#findComment-3585504
Share on other sites

like some of the others have stated, get a full service done first (oils, timing belt, water pump etc) and put on a descent 3" cat back exhaust and high flow cat and pod air filters. these wont be putting too much strain on the engine (or turbos)

also how does ur intake plenum look? alot of paint flaking/missing ? or is it all completely black?

ps. congrats on the purchase, hopefully mine comes soon :|

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201356-32gtr/page/2/#findComment-3585568
Share on other sites

like some of the others have stated, get a full service done first (oils, timing belt, water pump etc) and put on a descent 3" cat back exhaust and high flow cat and pod air filters. these wont be putting too much strain on the engine (or turbos)

also how does ur intake plenum look? alot of paint flaking/missing ? or is it all completely black?

ps. congrats on the purchase, hopefully mine comes soon :|

yeah

that was something i was looking out for

the intake plenum has very minor paint flakes up near the back, as i said very minor tho

and no real indication to show it has been re painted

Edited by gtrzilla
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201356-32gtr/page/2/#findComment-3585803
Share on other sites

You don't sound convinced on mods. You obviously want a mild GT-R (which is still excellent!) so leave it at exhaust/intake/ECU and remove the boost restriction is my thought on that.

Otherwise i'd fork out some decent cash (like $1000+) on some heavy servicing because it's an old car. If you want to avoid a rebuild then spend the time/money to freshen up the engine, drivetrain fluids and other worn parts (oil/water pumps and things like brake rotors/lines, suspension, clutch, belts).

I'd spend big there before modding the car, if at all. The car will run better and do it for longer too.

Stronger car = safer mods

Have fun!

Edited by R338OY
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201356-32gtr/page/2/#findComment-3585844
Share on other sites

Another thing i could suggest is whilst doing the timing belt(and tensioners) is pull the oil pump off and loctite the bolts that hold the two halves together. I would do as you suggest and leave the boost down. When you want to turn it up, get some steel wheel turbos and a remap

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201356-32gtr/page/2/#findComment-3590190
Share on other sites

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


  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...