Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

g-day dan ive had the na rb20 in my 32 for a while now almost off the p plater law and was hopefully keen to slap a turbo on it.

besides all the main parts and pieces i was hopein you could help me out with wat little things i would need to make it possible? cheers :)

A guy I know literally threw on the factory turbo, ECU, injectors, fuel pump, fuel reg, exhaust and intercooler setup and it was good to go, seems the older the gen car, the better they run with just the essential gear swapped.

He was getting a 13.9 straight off

  • 3 weeks later...

G'day Guys, I'm looking at doing this to my R33 GTS, however I am a P Plater in qld :S...Say someone were to accidentally try and turbo my car what would they need? Also say the po po found out, would it be hard to take back out/tune?

Cheers Jake

G'day Guys, I'm looking at doing this to my R33 GTS, however I am a P Plater in qld :S...Say someone were to accidentally try and turbo my car what would they need? Also say the po po found out, would it be hard to take back out/tune?

Cheers Jake

they would need money...

if the popo found out tell them it got turboed by accident...

ya goose.

G'day Guys, I'm looking at doing this to my R33 GTS, however I am a P Plater in qld :S...Say someone were to accidentally try and turbo my car what would they need? Also say the po po found out, would it be hard to take back out/tune?

Cheers Jake

LoL.

keep all your stock gear handy :blush:

  • 3 weeks later...

I'm just going to throw this out there as it wasnt mentioned (and had a bit of a conversation with N-DAWG about it via PM).

Has anyone.... other than me attempted to get this done (i am as mechanically useful as a rabbit).. with the stock ECU? And in this example, I mean the GTT ECU.

Given Victoria's very stringent laws regarding ECU - What have the victorians doing this done to get around this problem?

Has anyone tried this - Or in my case, been forced to try this? Or is everyone else out there running a copgyback and hiding the thing?

I'm just going to throw this out there as it wasnt mentioned (and had a bit of a conversation with N-DAWG about it via PM).

Has anyone.... other than me attempted to get this done (i am as mechanically useful as a rabbit).. with the stock ECU? And in this example, I mean the GTT ECU.

Given Victoria's very stringent laws regarding ECU - What have the victorians doing this done to get around this problem?

Has anyone tried this - Or in my case, been forced to try this? Or is everyone else out there running a copgyback and hiding the thing?

I initially did it using the stock N/A (R33 GTS) ECU with a GReddy eManage hooked up only to compensate for the larger injectors initially... a SAFC would have done just as well... then just wound the timing back a couple of degrees to fix the knock and it went fine. I eventually got the whole motor rebuilt with the smaller turbo pistons so now I'm running a stock GTST ECU with no aftermarket management (rebuild warranty and all that... gonna wait it out then whack the eManage back on and get it tuned) and it goes quite well... I guess as well as a fairly new stockish 33 would have (though with a FMIC, bigger zorst, boost controller, etc).

I initially did it using the stock N/A (R33 GTS) ECU with a GReddy eManage hooked up only to compensate for the larger injectors initially... a SAFC would have done just as well... then just wound the timing back a couple of degrees to fix the knock and it went fine. I eventually got the whole motor rebuilt with the smaller turbo pistons so now I'm running a stock GTST ECU with no aftermarket management (rebuild warranty and all that... gonna wait it out then whack the eManage back on and get it tuned) and it goes quite well... I guess as well as a fairly new stockish 33 would have (though with a FMIC, bigger zorst, boost controller, etc).

That's all well and good - How is it running with the GTS-T ECU? The issue (so I am told) is at least on my R34 is that there's no boost sensor, so the GTT ECU goes a bit haywire as it understandably cannot detect any boost.

In addition I've been told in order to get it all setup reasonably okay, a loom from a R34 GTT would need to be sourced to get this all running.

However, havent heard anyone comment about this in the thread, hence my questions as to whether this is a R34 issue, or specifically only an issue with the stock GTT ECU (to stay legal), or whether its just incorrect information and the original loom can be used.

I'm not about to say anything against Ray & Co at RE Customs, so I doubt its the latter but found it interesting noone else had mentioned this issue about looms, and was curious as to why it's such an issue for lucky me.. and given the car has been there for about 5 weeks now waiting on a Loom I figured I'd ask the question, but I'm sure it's because I'm being a difficult prick and want the car to be legal to avoid getting done on it later, and having to make it legal anyway in the future.

That's all well and good - How is it running with the GTS-T ECU? The issue (so I am told) is at least on my R34 is that there's no boost sensor, so the GTT ECU goes a bit haywire as it understandably cannot detect any boost.

I'm lucky there... the R33's don't have a boost sensor! (Okay, they do, but it's only purpose is for the gauge on the dash... doesn't hook into the ECU at all)

On the R34s I believe this is a problem as the ECU does indeed 'see' boost (or a lack of it without the proper boost sensor and loom). You'd be better to stick with the N/A ECU and then just get some sort of basic air-flow signal adjustment (i.e. SAFC or the like) to compensate for the larger injectors. Wind the timing back a couple of degrees to prevent pinging and you should be fine.

...You'd be better to stick with the N/A ECU and then just get some sort of basic air-flow signal adjustment ...

...which leads me into the question regarding aftermarket ECU's and Managment with the aim of being 100% legal and whether anyone has done it before :wave:

...which leads me into the question regarding aftermarket ECU's and Managment with the aim of being 100% legal and whether anyone has done it before :wave:

Hmmm... 100% legal might be difficult (or expensive)... but if you are stealthy enough with your install of the SAFC or whatever it would be incredibly hard for anyone to pin you for it...

  • 4 weeks later...

Hey guys, just curious what you have done with your brakes. Have you done a 5 stud conversion with brake upgrade? If not how do the N/A brakes handle with the extra power. I normally down gear to slow down and only brake for complete stops - could i get away with the N/A brakes?

Hey guys, just curious what you have done with your brakes. Have you done a 5 stud conversion with brake upgrade? If not how do the N/A brakes handle with the extra power. I normally down gear to slow down and only brake for complete stops - could i get away with the N/A brakes?

My 33 already had a 5-stud conversion, so I didn't have to worry about it, but if you're only driving on the street, N/A brakes will be fine. Really, N/A vs. turbo brakes will only come into play when brake fade starts to kick in... i.e. on a track where you're leaning on them HARD corner after corner, but on the street I doubt this would be a problem. Sure your acceleration is improved, but that doesn't really mean you're going to be driving any FASTER... there's still speed limits, etc, so the stock N/A brakes should be fine.

I upgraded mine to R33 GTSt brakes. I did find the N/A brakes were more responsive and had a better initial feel, even after changing booster/cylinder to match the GTSt brakes... possibly something do do with the amount of fluid going through the calipers? or maybe simply the lower weight of the rotating parts?

I know when Dori done his conversion, particularly at the higher boost, he found that the N/A brakes were in need of serious upgrading.

You may get away with simply upgrading to slotted rotors, street/track suitable pads, braided lines (mainly if your brake lines are old) and a Master Cylinder Stopper to reduce firewall flex under heavy braking (also dependant on how bad the firewall flex is).

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...