Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

The r32 gtr has always appealed to me as a timeless shape, so when a cheap one came up i thought it'd be a good base for a restoration into a clean quick street car. Since Powertune built my r34 gtr with great results, i was more than happy to leave this one in their hands too.

Engine internals are unknown at this stage but i think i will end up getting it pulled down eventually. The wheels came with the car but won't be staying on for much longer.

With this current tune the turbo is nearly maxed out. Boost is from 4100 to 8500. The car is not finished so stay tuned.

Precision 6265 (700hp) twin scroll ball bearing turbo

Powertune fuel rail

Powertune Billet Tiwn in-tank fuel pump setup

Powertune 1650cc injectors

2x Tial 38mm Wastegates

Wiggins Clamps

Aeromotive Fuel Regulator

Earls fittings and lines

Battery Isolator

Custom oil catch / coolant over flow / water reservoir tank

Custom intercooler pipes

Custom Power Steering Tank

Varex Exhaust

OS Giken Quad plate clutch

Koyo Radiator

Electric Fan

8 pot ATTKD front calipers

6 pot ATTKD rear calipers

BM57 Master cylinder

Haltech Platinum Pro ECU

Haltech e-flex sensor

Haltech EGT sensors

Haltech expansion boxes

Haltech Boost solenoid

Hard race engine mounts

Hard race camber arms

R34 gtr vspec2 front seats

R34 gtr getrag gearbox

Nismo floor mats

Nismo titanium gearshift

Garage Defend cf cooling panel

Japanese LED Tail lights/blinkers

Japanese LED front Blinkers

Japanese LED Reverse lights

Car was tuned on 60% ethanol on 440kw@24psi

img0303hk.jpg

img0286if.jpg

img0283h.jpg

img0284rdq.jpg

img0285gl.jpg

img0232fx.jpg

img0289un.jpg

img0298zc.jpg

img0299fm.jpg

After all the camber was pulled out

img0306ty.jpg

img0307b.jpg

:D

Nice result.

Is that the ball bearing or journal bearing 6265?

its the ball bearing version

Nice looks good!! What wheels are u gonna put on it?

not sure yet, but i'd like 18's instead of 19's

:thumbsup:

always loved the look of this gtr with those wheels

:thumbsup:

Edited by AH_HUH
  • 3 weeks later...

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...