Jump to content
SAU Community

R34 Gtr Stock: What Awkw?

Bakes
 Share

Recommended Posts

SS8_Gohan Grand Master

SS8_Gohan

Posted
Posted

^ wow, possibly the most useless reply ever...

1) 206kw is the "stated" figure, ever noticed how many JDM cars have that as the power figure? heard of the 'gentlemen agreement'? That was the cap

2) GTR would be, i dunno, more 250-260kw at the fly

3) he was after AWKW!!!! not same bogus factory claim fly wheel number!!

to answer your question, i dunno :wub: but 180-190awkw sounds about right

Black Widow Veteran

Black Widow

Posted
Posted
^ wow, possibly the most useless reply ever...

1) 206kw is the "stated" figure, ever noticed how many JDM cars have that as the power figure? heard of the 'gentlemen agreement'? That was the cap

2) GTR would be, i dunno, more 250-260kw at the fly

3) he was after AWKW!!!! not same bogus factory claim fly wheel number!!

to answer your question, i dunno :wub: but 180-190awkw sounds about right

Actually no i haven't noticed that. i'll keep an eye out for that from now on tho.

I wasn't trying to make a useless reply. I posted what i thought was right. I obviously wasn't and i accept that.

thanks for all the stuff you put up there tho. i'll keep that in mind

SS8_Gohan Grand Master

SS8_Gohan

Posted
Posted

30% drive train loss is too low as an AWD setup, or, awkw reading will have more power lost through the drive train than a rwd car would.

there is no way a car weighing around 1600kg, can do what it does with just 227kw's.

250-260kw's or more at the fly would be my guess.

It's basically saying that an extra turbo, extra displacement (plus a whole raft of better components than a NEO RB25DET) only gains 21kw's? Not likely...

Unless you want to rip the engine out and dyno that, you won't know what the factory specs are. Someone may have done this already, i dunno... but yeah, more lost through the AWD than RWD

some_cs_student Veteran

some_cs_student

Posted
Posted
.92 bar i think off memory

I thought its closer to .9 BAR on 34's and .85 bar on R33's, anyway .92 bar sounds about right :blink:

30% drive train loss is too low as an AWD setup, or, awkw reading will have more power lost through the drive train than a rwd car would.

Debatable, there are thread on here that have done a RWD then an AWD dyno and lost 1KW.

Others have noticed big differences but its usually different dyno/different day so its not comparable.

I think the 175AWKW for an R34 sounds about right, when shopping around I'd seen higher than that though for stock R34's.

Snowman Grand Master

Snowman

Posted
Posted

I dyno'd a stock one when I was looking to buy mine a few years back and it made 178awkw's - so 175-180 is where they are at.

The funny thing is I know of 2 x NUR's that have been dyno'd stock and both have made under 160awkws..... So much for the ultimate.

babyskyline Grand Master

babyskyline

Posted
Posted
The funny thing is I know of 2 x NUR's that have been dyno'd stock and both have made under 160awkws..... So much for the ultimate.

Sux to be those guys :rofl: All that extra money to make less power stock.

I dyno'd a stock one when I was looking to buy mine a few years back and it made 178awkw's - so 175-180 is where they are at.

I always thought 34 GTR's would make a little more than the above quoted figures....

pixel8r Mentor

pixel8r

Posted
Posted (edited)

Not sure if this is a useful comparison but a stock AUTO stagea s2 has 206kw at the flywheel (probably accurate in this case) and roughly 120awkw. They also weigh around 1658kg.

So thats a loss of about 86kw. The losses dont increase by much as you increase the power so working by percentage doesn't give an accurate enough result...

At a very rough guess, I'd say make that ~70kw drivetrain loss given the GTR is manual and a bit lighter (AFAIK the GTR's are about 1500kg or thereabouts - feel free to correct me).

I've also heard of them getting around ~180awkw completely stock so that would put it at about 250kw at the flywheel. anything around 240-250kw should be accurate enough in my opinion.

And just for the record, the "Gentlemans agreement" in japan seems to have finally been lifted since we now have cars in japan like the R35 GTR and others smashing the 206kw limit to pieces.

Edited by pixel8r

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Murray_Calavera
      RB25DE NEO with Haltech ECU

      By Murray_Calavera · Posted

      You won't need to do that if your happy to learn to tune it yourself. You 100% do not need to do that. It is not part of the learning process. It's not like driving on track and 'finding the limit by stepping over the limit'. You should not ever accidently blow up an engine and you should have setup the ECU's engine protection to save you from yourself while you are learning anyway. Plenty of us have tuned their own cars, myself included. We still come here for advice/guidance/new ideas etc.  What have you been doing so far to learn how to tune?
    • GTSBoy
      RB25DE NEO with Haltech ECU

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Put the ECU's MAP line in your mouth. Blow as hard as you can. You should be able to see about 10 kPa, maybe 15 kPa positive pressure. Suck on it. You should be able to generate a decent vacuum to about the same level also. Note that this is only ~2 psi either way. If the MAP is reading -5 psi all the time, ignition on, engine running or not, driving around or not, then it is severely f**ked. Also, you SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING IT WITHOUT A LOAD REFERENCE. You will break the engine. Badly.
    • GTSBoy
      R34 25GT Engine Light 21

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Could be correct. Meter might be that far out. Compare against a known 5 ohm 1% resistor.
    • Haggerty
      RB25DE NEO with Haltech ECU

      By Haggerty · Posted

      @Murray_Calavera  If I were an expert I wouldn't be in here looking for assistance.  I am extremely computer literate, have above average understanding on how things should be working and how they should tie together.  If I need to go to a professional tuner so be it, but I'd much rather learn and do things myself even if it means looking for some guidance along the way and blowing up a few engines. @GTSBoy  I was hoping it would be as simple as a large vacuum leak somewhere but I'm unable to find anything, all lines seem to be well capped or going where they need to be, and when removed there is vacuum felt on the tube.  It would be odd for the Haltech built in MAP to be faulty, the GTT tune I imported had it enabled from the start, I incorrectly assumed it was reading a signal from the stock MAP, but that doesn't exist.  After running a vacuum hose to the ECU the signal doesn't change more than 0.2 in either direction.   I'll probably upload a video of my settings tomorrow, as it stands I'm able to daily drive, but getting stuttering when giving it gas from idle, so pulling away from lights is a slow process of revving it up and feathering the clutch until its moving, then it will accelerate fine.  It sounds like I need to get to the bottom of the manifold pressure issue, but the ignition timing section is most intimidating to me and will probably let a pro do that part.  Tomorrow I'll try a different vacuum line to T off of, with any luck I selected one that was already bypassed during the DBW swap.  (edit: I went out and did it right now, the line I had chosen did appear to have no vacuum on it, it used to go to the front of the intake, I've now completely blocked that one off at the bracket that holds several vacuum lines by the firewall.  I T'd into the vacuum line that goes from that bracket to the vacuum pump at the front of the car, but no change in the MAP readings).  Using the new vacuum line that has obvious vacuum on the hose, im still only getting readings between -6.0 and -5.2.  I'm wondering why the ECU was detecting -5.3 when nothing was connected to the MAP nipple and ECU MAP selected as the source. @feartherb26  I do have +T in the works but wanted to wait until Spring to start with that swap since this is my good winter AWD vehicle.  When removing the butterfly, did it leave a bunch of holes in the manifold that you needed to plug?  I thought about removing it but assumed it would be a mess.   I notice no difference when capping the vacuum line to it or letting it do its thing.  This whole thing has convinced me to just get a forward facing manifold when the time comes though.
    • CF.Panda
      R34 25GT Engine Light 21

      By CF.Panda · Posted

      Update: tested my spark plugs that are supposed to be 5ohms with a 10% deviation and one gave me a 0 ohms reading and the rest were 3.9ohm<, so one bad and the others on their way out.
×
×
  • Create New...