Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey mcdoof, offtopic but ur Signature looks like mine heh, you need to do an exhaust on the side view like on my one. I used the same base as you did.

Shiz Almost the Same Ur's Looks Like You Spent More Time But... Looks Good.

And Incase Everyone Didn't Notice It Was Sarcasm About The Car... Can't You People Sarcasm Written In Text.... HAHAHAHAHA

Shiz Almost the Same Ur's Looks Like You Spent More Time But... Looks Good.

And Incase Everyone Didn't Notice It Was Sarcasm About The Car... Can't You People Sarcasm Written In Text.... HAHAHAHAHA

This is the first time I have ever seen caps lock stuck on for only the first letter in each word :P

^

Comedian.

Porsche 959 - It only took Nissan 20 years to catch up.

Best Performance Engine '08

Porsche 3.6-litre turbo (911 Turbo, 911 GT2)

Hey 200, not related to the topic, but interested in your little blurb about Porsche's at the bottom of your posts. Now I am new to this forum so I suppose you've spoken about this before. I'm actually a bit of a Porsche afficianado (have many copies of British publications, GT-Purely Porsche and 911 & Porsche World in my study), but I was wondering in what context is Nissan 20 years behind the 959? Don't get me wrong i love the 959 (although the running costs I've read are simply staggering- provided you can find someone willing to lay their spanners on it), but I assume that this this is in the context of a 4wd twin-turbo sports car? or have I missed something?

I thought the 959 made production in 1985 and R32 GT-R made an appearance in 1989, that if I'm not mistaken is only four years not 20. Another really interesting bit of trivia, when Jeremy Clarkson drove the first R32 Skyline GT-R he made direct reference to the 959, something about "making the 959 look like it came out for the design studio of Freddy Flinstone". I was taken aback a little bit and I know JC embelishes a bit but there must be some truth to it. At the end of the day you could probably BUY an R32 GT-R for the cost of a major service on a 959, is it really that much better than the Nissan?.

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

    • It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about. Reliability of everything in a 34 drops MASSIVELY above the 300kw mark. Keeping everything going great at beyond that value will cost ten times the $. Clutches become shit, gearboxes (and engines/bottom ends) become consumable, traction becomes crap. The good news is looking legalish/actually being legal is slighly under the 300kw mark. I would make the assumption you want to ditch the stock plenum too and want to go a front facing unit of some description due to the cross flow. Do the bends on a return flow hurt? Not really. A couple of bends do make a difference but not nearly as much in a forced induction situation. Add 1psi of boost to overcome it. Nobody has ever gone and done a track session monitoring IAT then done a different session on a different intercooler and monitored IAT to see the difference here. All of the benefits here are likely in the "My engine is a forged consumable that I drive once a year because it needs a rebuild every year which takes 9 months of the year to complete" territory. It would be well worth deciding where you want to go and what you care about with this car.
    • By "reverse flow", do you mean "return flow"? Being the IC having a return pipe back behind the bumper reo, or similar? If so... I am currently making ~250 rwkW on a Neo at ~17-18 psi. With a return flow. There's nothing to indicate that it is costing me a lot of power at this level, and I would be surprised if I could not push it harder. True, I have not measured pressure drop across it or IAT changes, but the car does not seem upset about it in any way. I won't be bothering to look into it unless it starts giving trouble or doesn't respond to boost increases when I next put it on the dyno. FWIW, it was tuned with the boost controller off, so achieving ~15-16 psi on the wastegate spring alone, and it is noticeably quicker with the boost controller on and yielding a couple of extra pounds. Hence why I think it is doing OK. So, no, I would not arbitrarily say that return flows are restrictive. Yes, they are certainly restrictive if you're aiming for higher power levels. But I also think that the happy place for a street car is <300 rwkW anyway, so I'm not going to be aiming for power levels that would require me to change the inlet pipework. My car looks very stock, even though everything is different. The turbo and inlet pipes all look stock and run in the stock locations, The airbox looks stock (apart from the inlet being opened up). The turbo looks stock, because it's in the stock location, is the stock housings and can't really be seen anyway. It makes enough power to be good to drive, but won't raise eyebrows if I ever f**k up enough for the cops to lift the bonnet.
    • There is a guy who said he can weld me piping without having to cut chassis, maybe I do that ? Or do I just go reverse flow but isn’t reverse flow very limited once again? 
    • I haven’t yet cut the chassis, maybe I switch to a reverse flow. I’ve got the Intercooler mounted as I already had it but not cut yet. Might have to speak to an engineer 
    • Yes that’s another issue, I always have a front mount, plus will be turbo plus intake will big hasstle. I’ve been told if it looks stock they’re fine with it by a couple others who have done it ahahaha.    I know @Kinkstaah said the stock gtt airbox is limiting but I might just have to do that to avoid a defect so it atleast looks legit. Or an enclosed pod so it’s hidden away and feed air from the snorkel and below Intercooler holes like kinstaah mentioned. Hmm what to do 
×
×
  • Create New...