Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Motor is out, again, so this is a problem i have to look forward to again pretty soon.

You made it sound as if you had another major issue. At DECA you were saying that the car was only a bee's d*ck from being finished, and after reading the above line i thought you had just pulled it out again.

My car is all sweet :P

Went to my mate's place and did a comp test, once i returned to Melb, all is ok.

Dry test: 150psi +/- 2psi across all 6 cylinders

Wet test: 160psi across all cylinders.

Plugs were also nice and clean; proving that no oil had gone past the pistons and that my mechanic has come leaps and bounds with his tuning, as with past tunes it wouldn't be uncommon to find them fowled with too much fuel :).

I did find that the oil was over-filled by at least 5mm over the "H" mark on the dipstick. I also think the design of the catch-can is flawed and needs to be revised, as well as relocating the return line from the catch-can to the sump.

The oil issue only showed up at DECA, most probably due to the hand-brake turns and quick direction changes. I never had "blow-by" on the multiple dyno runs the car has had or on the various "spirited" cruises i have done. Either way my mind is at ease as i am now confident that the engine has been built properly and is sound.

I am sorry/disappointed that you never had a ride in it, or even drove it, as that was my intention; oh well there is always next DECA ;)

You made it sound as if you had another major issue. At DECA you were saying that the car was only a bee's d*ck from being finished, and after reading the above line i thought you had just pulled it out again.

My car is all sweet >_<

Went to my mate's place and did a comp test, once i returned to Melb, all is ok.

Dry test: 150psi +/- 2psi across all 6 cylinders

Wet test: 160psi across all cylinders.

Plugs were also nice and clean; proving that no oil had gone past the pistons and that my mechanic has come leaps and bounds with his tuning, as with past tunes it wouldn't be uncommon to find them fowled with too much fuel :P.

I did find that the oil was over-filled by at least 5mm over the "H" mark on the dipstick. I also think the design of the catch-can is flawed and needs to be revised, as well as relocating the return line from the catch-can to the sump.

The oil issue only showed up at DECA, most probably due to the hand-brake turns and quick direction changes. I never had "blow-by" on the multiple dyno runs the car has had or on the various "spirited" cruises i have done. Either way my mind is at ease as i am now confident that the engine has been built properly and is sound.

I am sorry/disappointed that you never had a ride in it, or even drove it, as that was my intention; oh well there is always next DECA ;)

Ah sorry for the confusion mate, since speaking to felix last it had a problem - it currently is a bees dick from driving :)

Next DECA, ill bring mine and you can have a go if you want :wave:

  • 1 year later...
What is the opinion of putting some 15mm or so spacers under the cross member? I know it will work just dont want to stuff up the geometry too much.
You really don't want to put spacers under the subframe - that will raise the roll centre which won't help handling.

Sorry to bring back an old thread but after reading the UK forums i reliased my T51r kit wont fit without hacking the bonnet frame (32 GTR)

How bad can the idea of spacing out the cross member be? Its a street car (living 90% of its time in the garage) with the odd race down the strip

Would spacing it out noticiably affect the handling? or is this refering more to a track car issue where every second counts?

After finally registering the car with the engine i'd prefer to keep it all legal/engineered

Thanks guys :happy:

  • 1 year later...

Sorry to bring back an old thread but after reading the UK forums i reliased my T51r kit wont fit without hacking the bonnet frame (32 GTR)

How bad can the idea of spacing out the cross member be? Its a street car (living 90% of its time in the garage) with the odd race down the strip

Would spacing it out noticiably affect the handling? or is this refering more to a track car issue where every second counts?

After finally registering the car with the engine i'd prefer to keep it all legal/engineered

Thanks guys :happy:

good question as i am thinking of doing the same

good question as i am thinking of doing the same

I am running a 10mm spacer between the rails and the k-frame without any suspension/alignment etc issues.

You will find that 10mm is about as thick as you can go otherwise there is not enough thread for the nut to wind on fully. Full dimensions etc for the spacers are in my build thread, or http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/333724-spacing-down-the-subframe-to-fit-an-rb30dett-in-an-r32-gtr/

If you replace your old sagging engine mounts with new ones, though, it may not be enough. Had I known I would have looked into what others are suggested re: using rb25 timing belt covers.

Also the twin turbo pipe will hit if you're retained stock TT plumbing, can be fixed with bench grinder.

i took the twin turbo boss of my pipe when i 1st fitted the engine 18mths ago - im surprised it still needs to come off though with spacers in place.

did u also slot the engine mounts where it bolts to the block? should be able to get another 10mm there (do u know the distance between the sump & cross member?)

Unfortunately I did a stupid thing and test fitted the motor and bonnet with my old flogged out engine mounts, then did the actual install after my new nismo mounts had arrived.

Even with the nismo mounts, I don't think I'd want the sump to go any closer to the x-member, really the clearance issue to me seemed to be the power steering hard lines. It was about as close as I would have been comfortable with having to lower that sucker bck into the bay. But I didn't slot the engine mounts or anything, I didn't want my motor sitting lower than it was.

Long term I will probably look into the rb25 cam cover solution by which time I'll be runnign a single turbo.

Easy fix to your problems, buy my bonnet, I've cut a section out of the reinforcement to allow room for RB30/26. Also have some rings I made to space up front strut brace so it doesn't hit rocker covers when revving up.

Cheers,

Daniel

Easy fix to your problems, buy my bonnet, I've cut a section out of the reinforcement to allow room for RB30/26. Also have some rings I made to space up front strut brace so it doesn't hit rocker covers when revving up.

Cheers,

Daniel

i cut my old bonnet & really dont want to do this again, i have an idea so i'll see if it works :)

I have a vented fiberglass bonnet that clears my 26/30 with a gt45 for sale if anyone doesn't want to hack one up.

price & pics please - pm me if u prefer

how much heavier would it be than the oem alloy bonnet?

  • 6 months later...

bit of an old thread i know but im having the same issue with my single set up hitting the bonnet on my 32 GTR

has anyone thought of or tried shaving down the top of the manifold so the turbo sits lower, or maybe shaving down the exhaust flange on the turbo?

how effective was the spacers? all i can see it doing is rasing the back up a bit so dunno how much better itll be towards the front where the turbo sits.

  • 2 weeks later...

Been away on this topic for a while but have recently came up with custom engine mounts that would be shorter !

Would that work ??

I have heard someone said .... By doing that I will ruin the drive line but since the drive shaft connecting the tranny and

Diff rotates on a knuckle .... It woul be ok to have some kinda of bent right ??

I've got a rb26/30 with a big single in a bnr32 and the bonnet was a major headache.

In the end, spaced out the bonnet frame with massive nuts (I think 10mm), cut the frames at the turbo and cambelt covers and even had to hammer out at the cambelt covers.

Absolutely no way to fit strut brace.

However with spacers, there is a good gap to allow hot air to escape from the engine bay.

I've got a rb26/30 with a big single in a bnr32 and the bonnet was a major headache.

In the end, spaced out the bonnet frame with massive nuts (I think 10mm), cut the frames at the turbo and cambelt covers and even had to hammer out at the cambelt covers.

Absolutely no way to fit strut brace.

However with spacers, there is a good gap to allow hot air to escape from the engine bay.

another forum member here did a similar thing (stevo, n1gtr).

although, how does the gap appear when u lift the bonnet? the good old torana's used to space up the rear of the bonnet as well for better ventilation back in the 80's

doesnt always work. on most cars the bottom of the windscreen is a high pressure point and air actually goes down into the engine bay, making airflow worse. no idea what it does on a 32 though.

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...