Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys/gals

I have just brought a 80mm throttle body, that I want to fit to my R33 GTS25 as part of an on going project. I realise that I will need to get a plate made up to fit it to the intake manifold, but am unsure what else I will need to get done to get it to work, keeping in mind that I am already running a after market ecu (GTS Link) so hopefully I won't have any issues with reprogramming the ecu.

Has any one tried putting a larger throttle body or enlarging the factory T/B on there N/A? and what sort of gains were achieved?

Cheers

Rach

search tags: q45 afm upgrade n/a rb25 rb30 throttle body

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/207108-q45-afm-anyone-run-one-on-an-na/
Share on other sites

Hey guys/gals

I have just brought a 80mm throttle body, that I want to fit to my R33 GTS25 as part of an on going project. I realise that I will need to get a plate made up to fit it to the intake manifold, but am unsure what else I will need to get done to get it to work, keeping in mind that I am already running a after market ecu (GTS Link) so hopefully I won't have any issues with  reprogramming the ecu.  

Has any one tried putting a larger throttle body or enlarging the factory T/B on there N/A? and what sort of gains were achieved?

Cheers

Rach

on my rb25de headed rb30e, i put a modified xf falcon t/b ( had it bored out 4mm making it 68 mm at the butterfly) . was an easy fit . just ported manifold a bit to suit the t/b . now i remember had to mess with the t/b switch a bit , give you details if you want . as for performance difference , i dont really know cos i never ran the engine before i had put in on .

lol nice

Well it looks like this hasn't been done too often, I will post up results when the T/B goes on

if you are going to put an 80mm throttle on the car, then it would make sense to make sure ALL the induction piping is, at minimum, 80mm or else i don't see the point

my mate with an NA 300zx put on ported throttle bodies when he got his heads ported. They made a nice difference, but he kept all the induction sizes the same so it made sense

interested to see the result... keep us posted

  • 2 years later...

im putting one on my car atm (actually in the middle of it, only on the net to find safc in/out settings) thats on a 30de, ill let you know how it goes.

it sucks heaps at idle though, so with any luck the air speed wont be too bad, on an n/a 25 i really cant imagine you needing anymore than a std rb25 afm

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...