Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

pushead - I took off all my intake piping which was suprisingly clean, and gave it a bit more of a clean.

I then cleaned my afm and then took off the thottle body and cleaned that. Out of the lot the throttle body looked the worse (thin layer of very thick oil around it).

After putting it all back i found a noticible difference in throttle response and felt like it came on boost a bit smoother.

It will only cost u 1 bottle of carby cleaner. Would be interesting to see before and afters on a dyno of doing this.

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

yes it does... it always does... no matter what mods, tyre pressure, clutches all come into play.... put a decent clutch in a stock car and u will probably chop almost half a second off the time.

I made 140rwkw at BMT.

Mods:

* 3"dump/front

* 3" cat back (crappy cat is still the bottleneck)

* Bleed valve set at 0.7 bar (~10psi)

* K&N Panel filter in stock air box.

* Pineapples (prolly wont affect a power reading)

I couldnt give a rats ass what rwkw I've got. I ran a 13.83 @ 101mph last weekend which is similar to others with 180+rwkw.

nigasnt is 100% correct, rwkw dont mean squat!

thanks for all your input ppl. I was wondering ok, instead of measuring in rwkw but 1/4 mile times, did anyone measured their 0-100km/s? if so what results? reason why i asked is most street drags are 0-100km times, please also note i do not encourage anyone to street drag, but im sure we all have done it some stage :P:)

i think bmt dyno is lower (someones already prolly said what im saying b ut i cbf reading the whole thread)

so is racepace's dyno, best way to find out is either test on anotehr dyno or simply ask the guys at BMT if that's the average power they have seen on cars with your mods, they'd know best :P

This dyno is way low for sure!!

RiggaP said he ran a 13.8 or something with a dyno result of 141rwkw... For your car to run high 13's you have to be pushing about 180rwkw plus..

I had my r31 dynoed at Goodguys in bayswater and got 160rwkw @ 12psi and I know my car is probably good for low to mid 14's..

Take it to the track, see what sorta MPH you get

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

    • 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.
    • You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...