Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have a 1998 R34 RB25DE and was wondering if a exhaust made for a RB25DET would work on my car.....thanx lots...and if anyone knows of an exhaust for my car send me a link...thanx

I have a 1998 R34 RB25DE and was wondering if a exhaust made for a RB25DET would work on my car.....thanx lots...and if anyone knows of an exhaust for my car send me a link...thanx

One thing I know for sure is, even though its gona fit to your NA, you will loose the volumetric vacuum/scavenging efficiency. ift is a 3inch pipe then its too big, maximum you should go is 2.5" have a look at the following posts...

Post 1

Post 2

hope this helps.....

also if i find a RB25DET Cat back and its a 99 will it work? i have a 98...i thought the only difference was the body kit...but im not sure...

2.5" or 2.75" MAX i would upgrade for exhaust..

not 3" too big!

unless you have a fully high flowing powerful NA that pushes over 150rwkw hehe

even then it'd have to be a high revving motor.

the commodore/ford V8s only run 2.5"

3" is never too big....................

in the end get what you what to put on your car and not what everyone else tells you too.

yeah...ur right...thanx man

3" is never too big....................

in the end get what you what to put on your car and not what everyone else tells you too.

cara you have a 3 inch on yours.. how loud is it exactly? do you feel like you loose way to much power?

but of course all that noise and no power gain... is it worth it...., no..

People here are giving advice on if a 3" is performance wise an upgrade, and the answer is no, many threads about it too...

but here if you just want a loud car ram a screwdriver through your muffler...

you're all forgetting that a power figure (although the standard) is just a mere maximal power figure.

100kw @ 4000rpm will be a better drive than 117kw @ 5000rpm. 17kw increase at 1000rpm later, i know i'd take the driveability over the peak power increase any day.

what about the other attributes, rpm? area under the curve? torque? etc. all the fact sheets for new cars provide a power figure in reference to which rpm it was measured at. 1000kw @ 20000rpm vs. 100kw @ 4000rpm plus the torque figure, you can do the maths.

if you look at all the drag racing guys - they don't care about power figures anymore. MPH at which they cross the traps is what they are interested in. there's so much discrepancy in dynos now days that they don't care if you have 200kw or 400kw.

and since i like to have the final word on things, i'd like for the rest of this thread to remain on topic. if you wish to continue this 3" kilowatt vs. response/torque debate, bring it up in one of the other threads. actually i'd rather no one did, because it'll be a repetition of what's been going back and forth already.

everyone has their preference. if you want a kilowatt number to go off and tell others go ahead, if you want response then that is also fine, if you want to back up those figures with some drag/track/circuit times even better. that way we can at least draw some relationships between power vs. track time.

cheers

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

    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
    • @GTSBoy yeah sorry i know thery are known for colors bud those DBA are too in colors 🙂 Green will be good enough for me  
×
×
  • Create New...