Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey matt, the pistons did have to machined to clear the oil squirters.... which should have already been done. Took extra time having to be machined and re-balanced. Know that they are in all my worries have gone. There is absolutely no piston slap when cold, my catch can has almost no oil since the first start-up and now I`ve travelled 2200km's. I did a compression test and found dead even across the lot. Only slight hick up was a oil leak which turned out to be coming from the half moon seal at the rear of the valve cover.

I removed the pistons with the block still in the car. Very easy for anyone wondering.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/30615-rebuild-photos/#findComment-626756
Share on other sites

9krpm - not sure about getting special prices on other OS pistons, but Matt got the pistons from a guy we found on Ebay. He'd bought them (they were still brand new in box) and then no longer needed to use them so sold them off.

Might just pay to check out a few of the performance part websites and see what prices everyone has to offer - we did that and they do vary a fair bit ;)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/30615-rebuild-photos/#findComment-634542
Share on other sites

9k, Yes the main reason I went for the OS pistons was from what I have learnt regarding piston expansion under temp. The pistons I bought were of the low silicon type (OS sell both types). I can't remember the exact number of grade. They were $2700 compared to $1800 for the lower grade. I can confirm they indeed have absolutely no piston slap when cold. As I said to Matt(whatshisname) they had to be modifed and then rebalanced to allow clearance for the oil squirters, glad I didn't pay full price.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/30615-rebuild-photos/#findComment-635526
Share on other sites

Been down to Unique Autosports. They have seen 330rwkw with the standard injectors and an Adjustable Fuel reg. Funny how people do things totally different from state to state. In SA I was told not to bother as anything over 260rwkw is not achievable with a fuel reg. Hopefully it will be tuned for Uniques next track day =) Yip Yar

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/30615-rebuild-photos/#findComment-641277
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 feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...