Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Not really worth the cost with other options out there but each to their own.

Yes, If money is your concern then this build really isn't for you.

Went for a decent drive then down the freeway around a few open roads. lots of change of speeds from 60 to 110+... very happy with how this has turned out.

Edited by Beregron

Yes, If money is your concern then this build really isn't for you.

Went for a decent drive then down the freeway around a few open roads. lots of change of speeds from 60 to 110+... very happy with how this has turned out.

Money is always going to come into play with any conversion/modification.

But the way that i see it is that we are all on the hunt for more power or performance, if we weren't then we would leave it stock. I'm happy for someone to correct me, but by doing this conversion, replacing the auto transmission to a manual, and going RWD, you will end up with less power loss through the transmission and in theory you will be getting better wheel KW than before without touching the motor. Especially down low when you are cruising around town where the majority of the power is used day to day.

Yes it may be expensive, but I have seen people spending huge amount of dollars for small power gains.

Edited by DrLui

Some people have half of that value tied up in just a turbo changeover...

It's all relative.

Good on you Beau; go your own way mate, I bet it's going to be awesome.

  • Like 4

Good stuff Beau, thanks to you and your mech for the read! :thumbsup:

Yeah no dramas at all.

If this can help people then that's what it's all about. I know i'm going to enjoy it :)

These kind of write ups are needed more. Most places dont like doing this to have the work come to them. They dont realise that even though they have written up, owners are still going to go to them knowing that owners will get what they want. Unlike a tuning shop in qld that hides all from potential customers.

  • Like 2

Thank you Beau for sharing our link :) We are hoping our guide/parts list will help the next person/workshop wanting to do this conversion.

We did the write up as it was occasionally frustrating throughout the build having very little information. We wanted to keep Beau's bill to a minimum and not buy a large amount of trial parts that couldn't be used. This is why it took longer than a normal manual conversion as we needed to look into every part first.

Yes, this conversion isn't the cheapest one out there however it is something Beau wanted to spend his hard earned money on :) The labour cost of this conversion was the cheapest part of the job. The parts were the biggest cost factor. Which is another reason we decided to give out a parts list, so those wanting to tackle the conversion can start a parts corner in their garage!
Note: the parts we used/suggest may not be the only options, with more research/trial fits there might be other models that will also work.

We have to say a thank you to Beau as without him doing this conversion, we wouldn't have a list to share :)

  • Like 10

Today i got the following done

- took 350z seats out and gave them a good scrub.

- As the passenger side seat pressure sensor is hardwired on m35s, i installed a airbag plug for easy removal next time i have to remove the seats.

- Installed the brake cut mod at the auto gear lever so when in park it closes the pressure switch.

- I picked up a front drivers door to replace mine from someone running into it a while ago. Just needs a respray as the paint is not the best but atleast its straight

- I also sourced the orange interior panels and centre console to go with my 350z seats and to upgrade to the aircon vents being in the rear of the centre console for rear passengers. (You will see in the pic i got a rear boot roof panel not hacked to bits)

Tomorrow i will be installing the drivers door and replacing the top steering column cover due to old boost gauge install.

Edited by joshm35
  • Like 1

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...