Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

But I agree these forums are getting meaner, that or the population of stupid threads is on the rise. People tend to be snapping at people in the first post these days. It used to be after 20 replies or so!

Yes, this is what I think the cause is. But it could be that now I just happen to notice them more rather than before

Yep, and we were called wankers by the old guys. :blink:

So we shut our traps, listened up and accepted good advice without compounding our youthful stupidity by backchatting. :(

I agree about the bullying it needs to be looked at but it comes from frustration of long termers that this topic has been discussed to death and a simple search will answer nearly any question you can think of. If noobs need more info, adding a question to the old thread makes more sense than opening another which adds to the burden of further searches.

^^

I like this guy!

There is an interesting article by the guys at nizpro basically saying that factory BOV's are emission devices, and i tend to agree. MAP sensor'd supras dont have BOV's, and i dont think it wwas toyota trying to save $2, then they reverted back to AFM and bov, coincidence i think not.

There is an interesting article by the guys at nizpro basically saying that factory BOV's are emission devices, and i tend to agree. MAP sensor'd supras dont have BOV's, and i dont think it wwas toyota trying to save $2, then they reverted back to AFM and bov, coincidence i think not.

agree.

"grabs popcorn and sits back".....

please continue

adds vinegar and some salt

mmmmmmmmmm

I bought an R31 with an RB20DET in it, 1 bar boost (tailed off to 10psi at redline, shitty bleeder) on the stock turbo. The guy before me never ran a BOV, and it had massive compressor flutter. I ran it with no BOV for another 3 years daily driven daily boosted. The turbo was still fine, I had to do the manifold bolts and put an R33 turbo on there. The stock one was still in good condition when I pulled it off.

The whole "blocking your bov off causes damage" is bullshit. Genuine compressor surge at WOT will quickly kill a turbo but when the throttle shuts there is no exhaust gas, the turbo is not loaded. It's fine. "No BOV kills turbos" is only an argument that BOV manufacturers want to push. If you just spent $4k on a fresh twin turbo setup for your GTR then a BOV is cheap insurance because having it definitely won't hurt, not having it... mayyyyyyybe reduce the life a little but I've never seen one of these threads where someone posted "I had a stock turbo good tune it was only running 10psi and the turbo let go after I blocked the BOV off". Not once has that happened, but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

Why do manufactuers fit BOVs? Because people get really confused when they change gears and their car makes mysterious whooshing noises.

I'm out.

its called COMPRESSOR SURGE or AIR REVERSION . are you 15 years old or just talk like it?

it doesnt "work"

toyota supras do so have a factory blow off valve.

they also only have one internal wastegate on a twin turbo engine if you really want something to argue about

and i agree with what kinks said

my gtr makes those flutter noises and it has stock bov's and stock intake setup, boost restrictor is removed if that makes a difference. on WOT it spikes to 1.13 if thats normal because i dont understand those gauge readings.

this is very similar to what my induction noise is, wish my exhaust sounded like this though.

can i fit a mines front pipe and block off my blow of valve...good sound (you tube)and hectic pssss sounds +++++++++1 ...

i looked at prices of mines front pipes, it made me cry :P

thats very similar to my induction noise though and i dont have blocked off bov's, well i dont think i do, i thought my mechanics would of told me during its full service, i might have to ask them.

Yep, and we were called wankers by the old guys. :)

So we shut our traps, listened up and accepted good advice without compounding our youthful stupidity by backchatting. :P

I agree about the bullying it needs to be looked at but it comes from frustration of long termers that this topic has been discussed to death and a simple search will answer nearly any question you can think of. If noobs need more info, adding a question to the old thread makes more sense than opening another which adds to the burden of further searches.

well how about we just close the forum then and make this site just a fact sheet as all the questions that are going to be asked have been !! so then maybe all you know all's dont have to deal with the personal agony and pain caused buy new skyline owners asking questions because they dont all ready know everything!!!!.

or even better if your sick of the questions dont read the thred and just stay on your grt pages and argue oer who knows more !!!

if it annoys or hurts you done read it and leave it to us blokes that are happy to try help !

seriously sick of some people on this site

two schools of thought here-

1. appeal to the "omg- check out the hektic dose sound, uleh" crowd

OR

2. realise that off-throtltle compressor reversion is a poor state of affairs*

*to the smart-arse mofo's- yes, i'm aware that some degree of back-off flutter will be inevitable on cars with an uber-massive a turbo system

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • 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...