Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Search is you friend roo..... Get yourself an EL (I think) falcon one, fit the nissan plug and done :)

I've heard that ... but is it 100%?

And can the falcon pins come out of the falcon plug and go into the (recycled) nissan plug? I know you can't solder them.

don't assume it will be 370cc exactly, prob affected by fuel pressure, worn and gunked injectors etc. After calibrating my ecutalk, best done on long trips, my injector value was 340cc.

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...t&p=4158559

I paid 78$ for a bosch OZA395-E2 oxy sensor, to suit 33GTST, it fitted my 32. check if plug is same for the neo at a local bursons?

nah its not the same, you'd still have to rewire it. the RB25 neo plug is a different plug to R32 RB20, so if a R33 one suits a R32, than i'd say the R33 one wont suit the neo.

Edited by QWK32
  • 3 months later...

Yep, I have had my injectors out, and replaced them with a set of aftermarket top feed R34 GTT injectors. And still using the stock fuel rail. You can tell that they are top feeds without removing them, with the neo engine cover off you can easily see the first few injectors if you want to see for yourself.

No, even though they are top feeds they are a different body shape/style than the GTR ones. They look the same as ford XR6 Turbo injectors, I think some people even use XR6 ones as an upgrade. I don't know what CC they are though.

Have a seach of the forum, there is a R34 Injector thread somewhere with a bit of good info in it (same engine as S2). From memory there was even a S2 injector thread started in the stagea forum a little while ago.

If your looking at injectors online I'd look at R34 GTT ones as the listings will probably be more accurate by the sounds of it.

No, even though they are top feeds they are a different body shape/style than the GTR ones. They look the same as ford XR6 Turbo injectors, I think some people even use XR6 ones as an upgrade. I don't know what CC they are though.

Have a seach of the forum, there is a R34 Injector thread somewhere with a bit of good info in it (same engine as S2). From memory there was even a S2 injector thread started in the stagea forum a little while ago.

If your looking at injectors online I'd look at R34 GTT ones as the listings will probably be more accurate by the sounds of it.

Vq's run the the same injectors, I fitted the XR6t Deka 610cc ones which are a bit longer but work great. Cost around $500.

Vq's run the the same injectors, I fitted the XR6t Deka 610cc ones which are a bit longer but work great. Cost around $500.

that makes sense, the ones I'm running are Deastchwerks injectors, even though they list them as RB25 NEO injectors they look like 350z (vq?) injectors but use a 9mm spacer to lengthen them to suit the NEO fuel rail. I was looking at the Deka ones too but I would have had to change the electrical plug on the wiring loom to use them.

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...