Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys

im thinking of buying a d jetro for my rb26, just wondering if anyone has installed there nipples while leaving the plenum ect... on? apexi recommend installing them after the throttle bodys, i really dont want to pull off my plenum and throttle bodies, is it possible to leave everything on and do it?

cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/304774-installing-a-d-jetro-on-a-rb26/
Share on other sites

hey guys

im thinking of buying a d jetro for my rb26, just wondering if anyone has installed there nipples while leaving the plenum ect... on? apexi recommend installing them after the throttle bodys, i really dont want to pull off my plenum and throttle bodies, is it possible to leave everything on and do it?

cheers

I wouldn't leave the plenum section on and try and install the Nipples, You wouldn't risk drilling the holes when its on! Imagine the shavings in there :D

You are gonna have to remove the plenum section 1000% if you go ahead with it...

I have had two D-Jetro computers installed and thats the way they have been done :bunny:

like tony said you should 100% NOT drill the 3rd and 4th runner while still fitted to the car. There is no way you can drill and tap those two holes without getting swarf in the engine.

I have previously been a big fan of doing it properly and installing the 2 nipples in runners 3 and 4 post throttle body as apexi reccomend. some people do the dodge and use one of the post throttle body vacuum lines coming off the little vacuum box and just tee it into 2 feeds for the 2 map sensors. I had previously seen people have problems with that, but lately 1 or 2 have seemed to still work quite well doing it that way.

personally I'd rather do it properly, the downside of course is it's a pretty hefty labour bill to remove and replace throttle bodys etc just to drill and tap 2 holes for the nipples. talk to the bloke tuning it and see what he wants.

check the documentation or ask their local support

there are known compatibility issues with individual throttle bodies and map sensor based ECU's

i believe thats why apexi make you install it in the exact spot on the plenum and not just anyold where

thanks for the replys guys

what if i got a haltech e11v2, where would i tap into? im pretty sure they only have one map sensor? (correct me if im wrong?

thanks

the haltech will work fine off the vacuum balance rail (factory boost gauge port @ the back)

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...