Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

i'm a p plater driving a R33 GTS-T and i wanna get abit more air in the turbo and wanna keep it sleeper looking cause i have been pulled over before but the cops just looked for a big FMIC and then they let me go (hehe dumb asses) and cause of this i wanna know if i can perhaps get another smic on the other side of my car and somehow get it working...i'm not expecting it to be as good as a FMIC but i just wanna know if it can be done.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/255710-is-it-possible/
Share on other sites

you're so bad...

HKS among others used to direct replacement coolers for the stock side mount.. keep your eyes open in the for sale thread and you might get lucky, they come up from time to time..

r34 GT-T coolers also have a thicker core and are a significant upgrade over the stock 33 item, with this cooler 12psi of boost through the stock turbo would be feasable & with a tune you'd be cracking the 200rwkw mark :)

Edited by aphid
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/255710-is-it-possible/#findComment-4409803
Share on other sites

Indeed possible.

The question is though will it cool as much as a FMIC?

Hard to say.

But this is the situation a larger, aftermarket FMIC should flow/cool better than two factory I/C's linked up

Also the piping would be shorter than using two FMIC's, one on either side of the car as you suggest.

So overall while you might possibly get some benefit, it might be offset by the fact you'll be adding even more piping to what is already long.

(if you went the FMIC route)

It’s a good idea, but I think cost vs gain vs stealth… its still not worth it.

I'd just upgrade to a R34 SMIC if your after something with the stock turbo, that’s probably the best and easiest option

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/255710-is-it-possible/#findComment-4409809
Share on other sites

one SMIC is more than enough, no need for two.

The r34 GTT smic is a direct bolt-on for the r33 and is about 50% larger than the r33 i think.

I currently have a ARC SMIC which is 50% larger than r34 smic and have no issues pushing 200kw atw. Going to push it to 230kw atw and see how the ol' smic will handle :happy:

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/255710-is-it-possible/#findComment-4410126
Share on other sites

i am taking my 34SMIC off on saturday to make way for further mods(including FMIC)... I also have the 34 Shroud to go with it, with it fitted, I found i got less heat soak, and the engine revved alot more smoothly/freely. The bonus is it is undetectable.

Let me know if you would like it via PM!

-Ryan

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/255710-is-it-possible/#findComment-4410489
Share on other sites

I was getting some maccas the other day and seen a old mate who is a cop, i was asking why the cops pull over imports and his mate who was a SGT said that they pick anything that has a stupid big radiator thing hanging out the front of the car, unlike your which doesn't, i didn't tell him Ive got mine painted matte black.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/255710-is-it-possible/#findComment-4410614
Share on other sites

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...