Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

+ 1

realistically this thread should have been originally posted in the forced induction thread me thinks.

or maybe even again, not posted at all and maybe the dude that posted this thread should just go see a mechanic or engine builder and sit down with them and talk to them about it. that way they will get a much better idea of what is involved as well as costs involved.

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

OK, to start with I hope the above figure is a turbo figure cause you will never see that from an n/a motor, I doubt you would see that with nitrous and I have a 26/30 n/a setup in my 31.

Of course it will be a turbo motor lol, sorry should of said that. Probably get it built then put twin GTRS's on it and that should bump up the power to make over 400. Gonna be costly tho :P

I remember reading quite some time ago that the atessa AWD system in the R33 GTS4's is *NOT* the same as that in a GTR... from what I remember reading it was slightly more simplistic in nature... ie. didn't have the full feature set that the GTR's did (sensors and what not). I may be wrong, but I do remember reading a fairly in depth article on it. In contrast, I know the R32 GTS4's is the same as the 32 GTR's...

gts-4, gtr have exact same system no doubt.

bottom line for this thread wont be giving you answers about turbo like a turbo forum, anyone trying to make 300kw+ for a non turbo is going to have to spend the stupidest amount of money on the car and yes making it a gts-t would help if you want to make it a bit of a drifter car but maybe moving the thread would save you the hassle rather than deleting it because you already know its going to have to be engineered if you use any other skyline engine other than a gts-4 one or do the internals either way let the turbo people wave there turbo magic on you.

ok i seeeeeeeeeee. :D

big turbo fixes stuff haha, still you mentioned drift and i doubt the engine will hold up with all that pressure. The money will need to be poured in, in the long run.

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



  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...