Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 321
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

omg the extractors are teh bomb... they make a sweet noise when I give it gas, having driven a stock GTS and mine, it makes a big difference. The engine revs a lot smoother too.

I even got the jap manual, the bill for purchase and fitting by a performance shop in japan, and a sticker for it, which was never attached.

I also got an HKS airbox... but I haven't tried any alternative CAI methods so I can't compare it to anything.

I'm gonna do some light mods to the car, what do you guys recommend to get the most out of the N/A?

extractors_manual_1.jpg

hi all... im relatively new to the Skyline world, having only just bought one ~6months ago, but like everyone else, am looking for more power... I only have an R32 GTS Type-S (RB20DE), so am not expecting miracles, but being beaten by any commodore is just embarrasing...

Having read all of the previous posts on Exhausts/extractors/CAIs etc, im wondering whether its worth the effort of staying NA. All the same, When i bought the car, she already had a 3" high flow system, of some japanese origin, but i think the headers are only factory (not a manifold though). The air box on the 32 is fed from under the headlight assembly anyway, so would a CAI or Pod filter help at all? You guys sound like you'd know more about this than me, so any help will be great.. Cheers, Phil

well in that case, can you tell me what badges yours has? coz some ...unmentionable... has gone to all the trouble of RIPPING ALL MINE OFF !!! bastard... anyways, it was before i got it, and i have never seen another one (i live in a small town) close enough to work out what im meant to have. All i can see is the outlines on the front arches where the GT badges were.

Originally posted by pstanbis

All the same, When i bought the car, she already had a 3" high flow system, of some japanese origin, but i think the headers are only factory (not a manifold though).

3" is way to big for a NA 2.0 litre, I've got a 2 1/2" exhaust system on my 2.5 litre and I wouldn't go any bigger. If you're going to keep the car NA, get a hold of some extractors (there's a group buy set up at the moment, to get Cobe's for around the $300 mark), and if you're going to slap on a pod filter, make sure you sheild it so it doesn't suck in the hot air from around the engine.

At the end of the day though, you're pretty limited with what you can get out of the 2.0 litre engine.

i would have to agree that 3" is probably a *Little* bit of overkill for 2 litres... but it's not like its a 2-stroke requiring a tuned back-pressure, is it? i dunno... all the same, i am also aware that theres not much to do with that small capacity, but at my age, there is no way i can insure a forced aspro car of ANY sort, (but lets face it, after owning a Skyline, what else would you have?) so im trying to make the best of what i've got.

The air intake is another matter, because im SURE you can't get too much air. And i fitted a pair of driving lights the other week, and found that behind the side intake of the GTR front bar (again, a waste on a GTS) is a gaping cavity with nothing in it. Would it be worth trying to tap the pod filter into this area, as it would then be drawing fully from the open air in front, which would obviously be the coldest. Anyone else tried this before? suggestions?

hey guys i got the same extractors as the one in the group buy

i found em here in sydney paid a little bit more than the group buy price though

just comparing the old headers to the new ones you could tell that the new ones would perform better but i wasnt expecting much difference from them but boy was i surprised

i have a 2.5 inch cat back exhaust, stock cat and the coby extractors i also have a cold air induction

once the extractors were installed i noticed straight away that the car sounded meaner and more open it also reved smoother and quicker i regaind alot of the low down power i lost when i put the exhaust on

so just lettting u guys know im very happy with em

hopefully u guys will be too

anf

yea i was so close to changing it to a 2.25" but i thought ill wait till the extractors go on then i would decide wat to do but it seems ok now

i tightened the accelerator cable too cause there was a sh*tload of slack

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...