Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Nice times. Did you do any runs without NOS?

Not last night mate. I'm waiting for the time when i run out half track and spew fuel out the back :) Best run without gas was 13.471 @ 104.56 (2.2 60').

2rismo, what kind of nos setup are you running

It's a butchered kit that i threw together. Mostly NOS. Wet.

coz it defeates the purpose of this thread title about the fastest time with stock turbo i recon.

If you read the first post it will all become clear.... Jeez, some people.... You just miss the point completely...!!!!!

Anyway good effort, u must be running atleast a 100hp shot of nos

Wrong.

Adrian

IMHO I think the reason you're getting a bit of flack is due to the thread title itself, it contains no reference to nitrous assistance. Whack a 'nitrous assisted' in the thread title to make it clear perhaps?

Some people may read the thread title and skim through the posts and think your full of shite as your comparing stock turbo + nitrous vs. stock turbo no nitrous. It's a bit of an "apples vs. oranges" situation.

The question was:

What is the quickest ET / MPH that an R32/R33/R34 GTS-T/GTT has run with the std turbo intact and untouched?
IMHO I think the reason you're getting a bit of flack is due to the thread title itself, it contains no reference to nitrous assistance. Whack a 'nitrous assisted' in the thread title to make it clear perhaps?

It doesn't need to, the question was 'stock turbo'. Adrian is using a stock turbo so where is the problem?

I'm personally not a huge fan of Nitrous simply because I want my car to be able to do the same on the street as it does on the track but hell a full 1 second gain just from adding 50hp of NOS is something i'd highly enjoy doing even if it is just for that 12.5sec every Wed nite.

Everybody:

If you read the first paragraph of the first post it will ALL BECOME CLEAR!!!

It is in English, isn't it? Look. I have been researching the whole nitrous oxide use thing for years now. Along the way, I have come across NUMEROUS suggestions that it is 'better' or 'more worthwhile' or 'not cheating, you cheating bastard' to upgrade the turbo on my/any car. What I'm trying to show is that this is that nitrous oxide use IS a valid, effective AND relatively cheap method of making more power and going quicker.

I am not big-noting myself by comparing my 12.5 run or any other runs for that matter with anyone elses. I mean, some people have gone high 12's with no gas!!!

The point is this, I have spent significantly less than what I would have in upgrading the turbo to get similar results. End of story. I hope it is a bit clearer now.

Adrian

Dear oh dear, you guys are taking this faaar too seriously :) Chill out fellas.

I couldn't agree more, nitrous is a great low cost way to make solid hp gains. It's not exactly anything that wasn't already well known. Some people think it's cheating, once again nothing new there either!

I personally think nitrous is a great little addition. However, the cost/hassle of going for a bigger turbo (plus the other upgrades this requires) is worth it for the permanent hp gains achieved. Gains that can be used 24/7.

Edit: From memory Adrian posted $100 for a 10lb bottle refill. Which lasts 200secs at 50hp. That's a lot of 12sec passes!

On a totally different issue, does anyone know what the fine is for using NOS on the street?

I've got a theory thats its cheaper than the fine for running without a Cat....10rwhp vs 100rwhp....

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...