Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi all, Up for sale is my old R33, I have put it on here on behalf of the current owner, who has owned it for the past two years. He is selling it due to the lack of use as it just sits in the garage. Its to good to be kept away.

Its advertised on carsales so check out the specs there if interested.

Looking for around the $25000 mark.

450+Rwhp on 18 psi

It made 500Rwhp on 22psi

post-30261-1254731488.jpgpost-30261-1254731515.jpgpost-30261-1254731536.jpgpost-30261-1254731550.jpgpost-30261-1254731565.jpgpost-30261-1254731618.jpg

Location is Brisbane

Leave message or Pm

Edited by subzeroR33
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/290692-r33-gts-t/
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

    • I would be very confident that they are the same parts (the 2 different SKUs). It seems very clear that you can drop the cam in the 2-way opening, or in the other opening. If you arrange it in the other opening in the same way that you see any other 1-way diff, ie, with the flat of the cam up against the 1° side of the opening, then it would work as a 1-way. It can only spread the ramps when driving forwards - cannot spread the ramps on overrun. It would then appear obvious that if you put the cam into the opening "backwards", that you would get the angled flats of the cam working onto the "points" of the 1° side of the opening, which would give you ramp spread in both loading directions. I do wonder if the forward direction of the 1.5-way config is equivalent to the forward direction of the 2-way, seeing as the cams are flipped and the angled surfaces on those would need to be the same on each side - AND - clearly when installed in either the 2-way or 1-1ay configuration they are not intended to work exactly the same (the ramp angles on the 2-way are 10° different between forward and backward, and the ramp doesn't exist in the 1-way config). 'twere me, I think I would rather actually have a set of rings that offered the 2-way with two different sets of ramp angles, say the 55/45 of the existing design and maybe a 45/37.5 combo for a less aggressive effect), AND another set of rings with a dedicated 1.5-way opening and a dedicated 1-way opening. The 1.5-way opening would actually have the steeper angle on the overdrive side that causes it to be less pushy than the forward drive angle, like you see in many other diffs. But really - if this Nismo thing is thought out properly and all those surfaces work on each other the way that they need to, who am I to argue?
    • I would be very confident that they are the same parts (the 2 different SKUs). It seems very clear that you can drop the cam in the 2-way opening, or in the other opening. If you arrange it in the other opening in the same way that you see any other 1-way diff, ie, with the flat of the cam up against the 1° side of the opening, then it would work as a 1-way. It can only spread the ramps when driving forwards - cannot spread the ramps on overrun. It would then appear obvious that if you put the cam into the opening "backwards", that you would get the angled flats of the cam working onto the "points" of the 1° side of the opening, which would give you ramp spread in both loading directions. I do wonder if the forward direction of the 1.5-way config is equivalent to the forward direction of the 2-way, seeing as the cams are flipped and the angled surfaces on those would need to be the same on each side - AND - clearly when installed in either the 2-way or 1-1ay configuration they are not intended to work exactly the same (the ramp angles on the 2-way are 10° different between forward and backward, and the ramp doesn't exist in the 1-way config). 'twere me, I think I would rather actually have a set of rings that offered the 2-way with two different sets of ramp angles, say the 55/45 of the existing design and maybe a 45/37.5 combo for a less aggressive effect), AND another set of rings with a dedicated 1.5-way opening and a dedicated 1-way opening. The 1.5-way opening would actually have the steeper angle on the overdrive side that causes it to be less pushy than the forward drive angle, like you see in many other diffs. But really - if this Nismo thing is thought out properly and all those surfaces work on each other the way that they need to, who am I to argue?
    • Yuh, but that one is NLA. There might be an equivalent, but I haven't looked.
    • If you hadn't bought a stand alone one already, nismo make a bolt on adjustable FPR https://www.efisolutions.com.au/nismo-fuel-pressure-regulator-sr-rb-s13-180sx-r32
    • I know and understand they are principally the same. They both cause lock under decel, but the 1.5 nomenclature implies "half" or less locking force, or it allows for more slip or a speed differential between both wheels. Right now the driving manners with the 2 way is pretty rough on transient to full off throttle in the backroads. In other words letting off the throttle too rough is not forgiving, great for drifting, tougher for controlled grip driving.      Yeah, I have watched that video a couple times, I am more so just looking for the confirmation that both part numbers offer the same ramp architecture and are just different settings from the factory.     38420-RSS15-B5  38420-RSS20-B5
×
×
  • Create New...