Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

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.

Plug is the easy part, they are around 10mm longer and hit the plenum on the vq so I had to fit a plenum spacer. Should be easier on the rb's

QWK32: interesting... going off nengun again... they reckon (for hks injectors anyways) that r34 gtt is same part number as r32/33/34 gtr

chuckie:im looking thru your posts now

thanks!

i dont understand how they can have them listed all as the same thing. especially since GTR injectors are low impedance and RB25 Neo's are high impedance. heres a pic i dug up of the different shapes of RB injectors, they are nismo ones but show the shapes/types the same as the stock ones are. S2 NEO stagea's are the same as R34 NEO, purple ones down the bottom. stock S2 ones look exactly the same only blue. S1 is the same as R33.

post-34711-1271914996_thumb.jpg

Plug is the easy part, they are around 10mm longer and hit the plenum on the vq so I had to fit a plenum spacer. Should be easier on the rb's

yeah apart from needing to change plugs they would be a direct fit. at the time the us dollar was crap so i could get the deatschwerks which are a direct fit no mod injector for the same as the Deka kits were going for.

Edited by QWK32

I have done a fair bit of research in the few weeks on these as I need some 650cc or so

The seimens deka 3/4 length only comes in upto 550cc

The full length ones go over 1000cc

Either can be used, just need to space the fuel rail to suit, plus the plugs are different

Approx $70-75 each plus plugs

full length are used in BA-BF XR6 turbo and I think LS1

3/4 length are from FG XR6 turbo and holden lS2 and LS3

The more expensive options

Biggest nismo are 480cc, I just sold mine to bigger

Blitz used to sell 525cc, I use to use these as well

I think Sard make some

ok so do the 'cheap' injectors offer good quality spray pattern or is it better to go the expensive route n get say sards if you need bigger?

how much power does each cc injector support?

i know there is a bit of difference between setups but what is the norm for say nismo 480cc, etc etc

thanks!

ok so do the 'cheap' injectors offer good quality spray pattern or is it better to go the expensive route n get say sards if you need bigger?

how much power does each cc injector support?

i know there is a bit of difference between setups but what is the norm for say nismo 480cc, etc etc

thanks!

My deka's are 610's and 4 hole spray pattern, same as Nismo. I have no issues at all running E85 through them constantly. Around 250kw with plenty of headroom. Theres no way I was going to spend $1500 on injectors.

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...