Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

with the Extreme TSC (my 32 gtr also came with one which i havnt played with yet)

silly question,

im assuming when toggled to 4wd its not active at all and the usual system does what it does.

when ON, can someone confirm exactly what the gain is doing.

on the box, 0 = (standard) 10=(max front torque)

which it clearly not. 0 just = skiddies which is not standard

does 10 = standard as in as much 4wd a standard = grip

and 5 meaning half way so my gauge would only read %25 front torque? or does 10 give me more FWD torque than usual.

0 shouldn't equal rwd skids if its fitted correctly. I have an extremeTSC fitted to my 32 and my understanding is on 0 the attessa functions as normal. As you dial up the gain, it amplifies the signal to the attessa computer which results in more power being sent to the front wheels.

I understand its only in the R32 manual to put it into rearwheel drive and that is when its rolling just turn the key on and off (like a crash start) and it goes into RWD. I did this 2 days ago in my 32 to drop some lines. Great fun with 370kw....

Yeah there are different ways to go about it. The Full Race ETS computer does it all and can stop the system from priming or open the valve and deprime on the fly and vice versa. Which is neat, no need to stop and reset. Basically gives u complete control. However if you still have the A-LSD, when you cut power to the attessa to give you Rwd, you will also be cutting power to the diff, give u a single pegger.

I wouldn't worry about transfer damage. Myself and plenty of others have been running systems like this for years with no adverse affects. Even the Nissan manual explains how to put R33/34 into Rwd for dyno etc

Single pegger doesn't sound good.

What does the Nissan manual say in regards to getting it into Rwd?

It's been ages since I've done it so someone else can confirm. But it something like this:

Unplug the attessa plug above your right leg ( sitting in drivers set ) the one used for bleeding attessa,

Turn ignition on and within 10 seconds push the brake pedal at least 5 times,

Awd light should flash continuously and you are Rwd. Attessa valve should open and not prime system.

Like I said it been awhile so hopefully someone will confirm.

But it will be the same deal if you have A-LSD, will take out the diff also as they both work off the same pump unit.

  • Like 1
  • 4 weeks later...

with the Extreme TSC (my 32 gtr also came with one which i havnt played with yet)

silly question,

im assuming when toggled to 4wd its not active at all and the usual system does what it does.

when ON, can someone confirm exactly what the gain is doing.

on the box, 0 = (standard) 10=(max front torque)

which it clearly not. 0 just = skiddies which is not standard

does 10 = standard as in as much 4wd a standard = grip

and 5 meaning half way so my gauge would only read %25 front torque? or does 10 give me more FWD torque than usual.

I also have one of these that i got with the car. Think of the 2wd 4wd switch as like an on off switch when on 2wd the dial will do nothing at all and car will be rwd (mine still rotates front wheels if all 4 wheels are in the air, but torque gauge reads zero and wheels can be stopped by hand)

You can switch from 4wd to 2wd on the fly but not back again (have to turn off ignition to engage 4wd)

With switch on and dial set to 0 which my understanding was this was supposed to be standard (as in no controller fitted) car is fairly tail happy and it allows you to get fairly sideways before front torque pulls you back, as i understood it this sounded pretty consistent with standard r32 behaviour.

I usually leave mine at 0, if I'm pushing it abit and want less rear step out i turn it upto 3 or 4 if it's really wet i might have it on 6. I have never felt the need to go higher than that.

I know other systems (ruzik, hks etc) are much more comprehensive but the extreme tcs works pretty well for me, makes a massive difference especially in the wet.

  • 4 weeks later...

Anyone have anymore experience with the HKS ETC?

I'm currently running the extreme TCS (came with the car) but a good friend of mine is giving me his HKS ETC.

I would assume from what I've heard the HKS gear is better??

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Anyone have anymore experience with the HKS ETC?

I'm currently running the extreme TCS (came with the car) but a good friend of mine is giving me his HKS ETC.

I would assume from what I've heard the HKS gear is better??

Joey,

I have the HKS ETC and EDA in my car (my car used to belong to JMW on pg 1 of this post.)

I haven't used any other TSC, so I can't provide a comparison.

But I can confirm it gives full control of front torque in quite fine adjustments, with manual and auto modes as described in the gtroc link in JMW's post.

My understanding is that front torque can be locked at a desired level (or lack of) for all road speeds, automatically controlled by the ETC and EDA with a specified ceiling torque split value, or left as the standard attesa system would adjust.

Cheers,

Adam

Hi Adam

Thanks for the reply mate.

From what your saying the big advantage of the hks unit is that the front can be locked at a desired torque for any road speed. I'm guessing this makes a big difference for launching/drag racing.

Did you have problems with wear on the transfer case?

Cheers

Yeah that's right. Full override to a constant setting for any road speed, a drag race mode that uses the EDA to adjust front torque with speed, or normal mode that leaves the attessa system alone (i think).

The off setting seems to do the job most of the time. Hard to tell if that is any different to normal atessa having not driven a 33 gtr with the same power but normal attesa controller.

From what i understand, when on the unit overrides the stock settings with its own control system, more then amplifying/bending the sensor signals like some of the other devices mentioned seem to do.

To be honest I don't actually use it very much as I haven't run the car down the strip and i don't see any benefit to locking the torque split full time for most of my street/hills driving. IMO using the locked or EDA settings would make a big difference to launching (I think the EDA mode is more aggressive in increasing torque split to the front wheels), but i think if it was used often it would probably shorten the life of the drivetrain.

  • 2 weeks later...

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 know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...