Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • 5 weeks later...

Ok, update time.

The car continued to stall under hard braking in 2nd & 1st gears.

When I had the car serviced last week they said the idle was a bit low so they reset the Throttle position switch and cleaned out the butterfly.

The car now revs a bit more on start up and settles at about 850rpm (which is about 100rpm higher than it should be).

The car does not stall now under hard braking.

So problem solved.

Ok, update time.

The car continued to stall under hard braking in 2nd & 1st gears.

When I had the car serviced last week they said the idle was a bit low so they reset the Throttle position switch and cleaned out the butterfly.

The car now revs a bit more on start up and settles at about 850rpm (which is about 100rpm higher than it should be).

The car does not stall now under hard braking.

So problem solved.

Could the problem have been associated more so with the butterfly than the throttle switch?

As with V35's, warm idle should be at 650rpm.

I guess the main thing is that the stalling has gone, would like to pinpoint what the cause was in case others have this prob in the future.

Could the problem have been associated more so with the butterfly than the throttle switch?

As with V35's, warm idle should be at 650rpm.

I guess the main thing is that the stalling has gone, would like to pinpoint what the cause was in case others have this prob in the future.

Idle is meant to be 750 in Neutral on the M35 but as I said mine is a bit high at the moment. Would definatley like it to be lower but there is no adjustment, it is all controlled by the computer. AS it has been rest it "may" be learning again. I have only done about 200km since it was done so I will see how it is in a week. It is certainly using more fuel with this idle and wants to drive on a bit much for my liking. If it does not come down over the next week I will be going back to see if we can sort it.

Idle is meant to be 750 in Neutral on the M35 but as I said mine is a bit high at the moment. Would definatley like it to be lower but there is no adjustment, it is all controlled by the computer. AS it has been rest it "may" be learning again. I have only done about 200km since it was done so I will see how it is in a week. It is certainly using more fuel with this idle and wants to drive on a bit much for my liking. If it does not come down over the next week I will be going back to see if we can sort it.

What was it idling at when you were having the stalling probs?

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...