Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Another possible mod, a bit back yarder though.

a really basic water injection setup, that comes on when on WOT or near to.

ive seen a CA20e that could take another 5 deg of timing with water injection, basically a metal nozzle just in front of the throttle body. needs to be fairly misty, no droplets.

much used on turb setups too. but yeah this old gazelle hammered on the gravel and went heaps better with water!

I will see if I get to that stage...

At the moment I have a Cresida AFM to fit up, which is about 25% bigger than standard, but I would need to modify the standard air box to make it fit, and then the pipe to the Throttle Body would fit either. (Outside diameter of the Cresida AFM is 80mm standard is about 73mm. So ia have asked the guy that sold me the AFM to put the whole airbox and inlet pipe aside for me.

Next step would be to upsize the Throttle Body and Injectors...

I keep coming back to the difference between the Std TB size and what we always used inthe webbers.

Std TB = 42mm diameter I think, so 42/2 *42/2 * 3.14 = 1384 mm2

Webbers = 6 x 36mm chokes = 36/2*36/2*3.14*6 = 6104 mm2 = more than 4 times the air flow...

Now I am not going to claim that the lack of breathing is the only reason the 240Z screems, and the MR30 doesn't, the extra 600kg might also have something to do with it, but I reckon there has to be something to make real gains...

Don't want to waste too much time trying to wring power out of the standard engine/EFI when it is only a matter of time before I get you over to help me drop in an RB30 - and then the RB25head and TURBO :thumbsup: ...

Cheers,

Darryl

RB30 could be done in a day i reckon.

plus its probably cheaper than any mod to the L24e too!

To what gain in a Khanacross car that lives in the dirt & mud?

L24E rated @ 94kW & RB30E rated @ 114kW

A lot of effort for 20kW and probably only about 12 by the time it gets to the wheels.

If it was me, I would be looking at lower diff ratios, rather than more HP, maybe an 4.9:1 or similar like the front diff on an 720 ute. On dirt, your friendly arc welder would be better than an LSD and or L20ET gearbox, as it has lower ratio 1, 2, 3.

The good part about gearing is, nobody is ever going to know, as the bits look the same to the eye.

Cheers, D

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...