Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys,

I have briefly searched the forum to try and find out the limits of a stock r34 gtt Airbox. I remember R31Nismoid mentioning he can get over 300awkw out of his r33 GTR with his stock airbox. I'm currently in the process building my 34 with a GTX3076R and Tomei Cams 260. Trying to keep the car stock looking as possible but obtaining that 300rwkw. Can anyone provide any insight if the airbox can handle 300rwkw with a decent filter.

There is also a thread I have been trying to look for!!! It is a DIY making your own snorkal. I saw it once and can not find it again. If someone can kindly post that link up for me would be much appreciated :)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/366144-stock-r34-airbox-power-limits/
Share on other sites

GTR and GT-t not quite the same dude far as I am aware.

I'm not up with GT-t airboxes, but do they have the side feed from the guard like GTRs? (GTR items will do well over 300rwkw)

There are a few guys on 280rwkw with stock R33 GTS-t airboxes so your GT-t airbox in theory should be ok.

Some have made over 300 but i believe that wasn't on PUMP fuel, E85 was used.

Guess it wouldn't be a bad idea to actually try and do some back to back

Thanks R31Nismoid for the quick post,

It has got the snorkal setup coming from the nose, comparing my mates R33 GTR Airbox to my stock box the GTR is around 20% larger.

Once I finish the car and take it to the dyno I will post up my results.

Edited by simons987

With the R34 GTT and R33 GTS-T's you need to replace the rubber hose between the airbox and the front of the turbo. This will suck shut over around 230rwkw and limit power greatly. With a metal custom pipe the factory airbox is not a bad thing, I know of people making 250rwkw on 98 fuel and 280rwkw on E85 with a stock airbox but metal pipe. The only problem is that the metal pipe has to custom and is quite a tricky angle. Because it is a fixed airbox it has to fit in the right spot at the right angle. Its different to a pod as obviously it can sit anywhere.

Another guy on here has the top half of an airbox and snorkel and a pod sitting underneath it.

Are you looking at it from a looking standard for cops point of view or dont care? I would only go to the effort if your worried about cops. Otherwise I think its a lot of effort. I have heard of people saying 10rwkw loss around 280rwkw but dont have proof.

when mine was on the dyno for comparison sake it made 251 with the box and the mod i did (see below) and then made 256 with no lid on at all.

another mod that ppl do is to drill a hole in the bottom of the airbox and run a pipe down through the vacant cooler pipe hole (assuming you have your return pipe over the radiator) with a pod on the end of it.

The general figure i hear is that the standard box max's out at about 250rwkw.

post-27276-0-47631200-1306836533_thumb.jpeg

Thanks for the feedback guys

That rubber pipe did my head in lol on my old turbo setup I ran into that problem. After I replaced the pipe I didnt have any problems. Pipe bending and fabrications work isn't a problem. I have all the gear at home for fab work.

Yeh I'm in a really bad area sunshine. Theres a blitz that goes on once a week at least around the area. Having a stock stealth looking setup will improve my chances for not getting done. :)

Wow only a 6kw gain when removing the pod, that kind of information brings my confidents up I won't get any choking when doing the dyno.

I am thinking about customizing the airbox in either 1 of 2 ways

1. The top part of the filter where the snorkal is located, the piece the snorkal fits into I will cut that out and customize it to take up the whole left section of the box. Then I will create a custom Snorkal to suck up all the air from the nose.

2. The old intercooler hole on the far right side I will run a pipe going up into a custom bottom end of the airbox. I will then install a pod inside the box and have both snorkal and piping at the bottom bringing in air.

I'm more inclined doing the first as it requires less customizing to the box. With an oil based airfilter the CFM of air shouldn't be a problem.

Edited by simons987
  • 2 years later...

Thought I'd dig this up and see what the outcome was.

I'm finding the big differance compared the the GTR airbox is that the snorkel on the GTT feeds the top half of the airbox, while the GTR feeds the lower half - making it way easier to open up the GTR airbox and get it flowing better.

Any airbox mod to the GTT has to be done to the top half, which will look a bit more obvious / possibly not work as well.

Looking at my airbox, the inlet is tucked right into the corner, with lots of plastic ribs close to the location of the airflow meter. Anyhow, if you guys had any decent results with the stock box I'd be keen to hear

Thought I'd dig this up and see what the outcome was.

I'm finding the big differance compared the the GTR airbox is that the snorkel on the GTT feeds the top half of the airbox, while the GTR feeds the lower half - making it way easier to open up the GTR airbox and get it flowing better.

Any airbox mod to the GTT has to be done to the top half, which will look a bit more obvious / possibly not work as well.

Looking at my airbox, the inlet is tucked right into the corner, with lots of plastic ribs close to the location of the airflow meter. Anyhow, if you guys had any decent results with the stock box I'd be keen to hear

You are probably best just to ditch it and run an alloy box like i have, really depends what turbo and piping you have to deal with as to how much hassle it will all be?

You are probably best just to ditch it and run an alloy box like i have, really depends what turbo and piping you have to deal with as to how much hassle it will all be?

Yeah I'll have to check out your build thread! You pop up allot when it comes to GTT mods :D

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

    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...