Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

This is interesting. I have no powerduct, but I did run for a few months with the little panel on the airbox removed. Not sure how much difference the powerduct would make vs not having anything there. The airbox sits so close to the front that I figured the only difference would be that it might suck in hot air when I wasn't moving, but in theory that should be better for fuel economy, not worse.

Recently I put the little plastic panel back on and realised the difference it made. With the panel back on again, I now have much better low-end response, smoother power delivery and the car feels noticeably faster. Fuel economy also seems to have improved a little, but not by enough to make any great claims about it. The main difference was in the ability to build boost at low revs...it seems having the airbox closed is good for building boost pressure early.

Top end performance was definitely improved with the panel removed, so I may have had a heavier right foot more often...

hmm... I put a Powerduct on last weekend and noticed an improvement in responsiveness almost straight away (my CAI has been disconnected until I make a new one that fits with the front bar). The difference was like trying to suck air in with your hand over your mouth (closed airbox and only stock funnel) as opposed to just breathing normally (with Powerduct).

Didn't really notice any additional sound although it may be a bit difficult to hear over my turbo and exhaust :banana:

The engine does seem to have a bit more of a sense of urgency about it with the duct on.

To each their own I guess, but the thinking that turbo cars need as much air to the intake as possible would make you think that the Powerduct would be more a positive than a negative for our cars, no?

I don't see either how by limiting air intake it could make the turbo spool any earlier.

It is hard to imaging how it could help low down power but perhaps it is like the opposite of a restrictive exhaust on a NA car where that helps torque.

From memory it is just a small difference anyway but I kept mine off as I liked the feeling it made to the power delivery at the top end.

Cheers

Andy

I dont understand why mine felt faster when I put the little panel back on. I cant explain it. But it definitely does seem faster or at least more responsive off the line now. It doesn't make sense...

There must be a reason why Nissan included the powerduct with all n/a versions of these engines and not with the turbo version.

emissions

I dont understand why mine felt faster when I put the little panel back on. I cant explain it. But it definitely does seem faster or at least more responsive off the line now. It doesn't make sense...

There must be a reason why Nissan included the powerduct with all n/a versions of these engines and not with the turbo version.

  • 1 year later...

going to reactivate this thread.. hoping someone has worked out something to fix the fuel gauge.. mine is shocking can jump a quarter of a tank between starts.. i am on gas though like to keep at least a 1/3 in the tank.. though every few days it says i am near empty..

anyone got a fix?

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

    • Yes I can see how that would put you off HFM, especially with the price of good quality brake fluid. From what I understand it as you say the BM50 is the standard BMC for a R32 GTR, I must admit I would like to go far a Genuine Nissan BM57, but lack of cash prevents that at present. With the price being so close between the genuine BM50 and BM57 a BM57 New it seems a better choice as you gain that 1/16 bore size with the BM57, I would be interested in how much difference you feel with the BM57 fitted. I am going to take SteveL's advice in the short term and see how much actually comes out of that proportioning valve vent and save up for the Genuine Nissan part. Thanks for clarifying the HFM failure
    • Thanks mate. I just got the post inspection 1/2 done from state roads when the starter motor packed up, either that or the car alarm system is having trouble.  OEM part number 23300-AA112.
    • Hi, I though I was coming to an end in finding a replacement starter motor for a rb25de neo. I came across a starter motor from Taarks and a message below stating: Direct fit. 11 Tooth count. All below part numbers have been superseded to 11 teeth. Can some body shed some light on going from 8 teeth to 11 teeth apart from 36-month / 25,000 km warranty for passenger vehicles to 12 Month Warranty. Compatible with the following Nissan part numbers: 23300-20P00 23300-20P01 23300-20P05 23300-20P10 23300-20P11 23300-AA111 23300-AA112 23300-AA300 23300-08U10 23300-08U11 23300-08U15  
    • Low battery? Maybe check capacity? I know first-hand, on BMWs if your battery drops below 80% capacity, it starts causing strange issues.
    • 8.5 +37 = should fit rear, but I think it'll hit on front. What you want is low 30s/high 20's front, mid 30's rear. That 17" screenshot you posted looks good, I'd run it on my R32 (but that's long dead now). For tyre sizes, my rule of thumb is: 8': 235, 9": 255. But that's just my opinion. Nismo sizes: 18x8.5+35/18x9.5+38 is a good starting point.
×
×
  • Create New...