Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 886
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Il post up a new thread with all the issues I had since the hypergear installation and what I did to fix them

Edit, il post it in here first and if there is a problem with what I say I can fix it before I create a reference thread.

Edited by lilcrash

Problems/issues installing a hypergear atr43ss-1 turbo.

1. Fouls on heat sheild on manifold - cut piece out to clear housing, dint the heat shield or use 10mm flange spacer.

2. Rear housing is 20mm longer - move all exhaust mounts forward 20mm

3. Water lines don't line up - get custom made lines

4. Oil drain on awkward angle - custom made oil drain

5. No boost reference nipple in turbo - weld on into one of your custom pipes

6. Needs custom intake - make custom intake

I doubt its the headgasket. Do a comp and leakdown test. U have been running 25psi. I would be a little concerned whether the tune was safe for that amount of boost. May be alright.

Clean all cooler pipes and catch can etc. Try running with catch can not connected to the turbo intake pipe. Run it into another can or bottle etc and monitor whther its still spewing out oil

I'm doing a comp test tonight, if it isn't head gasket i think it's deffinately rings. I clean up all I could reach, and have now swapped the intakes over until I can resolve this oil issue. I was steadily accelerating holding the throttle at 18/20psi when I started to smell the oil again. It only hit 25 psi 3/4times I don't feel it's safe at that level.

Ok turns out my engine is just rooted.

91,167,167,168,167,167. That was engine still hot, many burns on my fingers :(, poured oil into cyl 1 and it came up to 130psi. So yeah head gasket?

Air shouldn't be going past the piston rings..

You've Got some serious issues.

And when runnin that my boost, why the hell aren't you running a proper electronic boost controller?

Skimping on one of the most critical parts?

Can't be a head gasket if oil brought the compression up that much from 90psi.

I'd say that cylinder is about to grenade so I wouldn't even start the car anymore.

And if this is a standard engine, why the hell are you running 25psi of boost?

Seriously...

Are you getting paid to troll? Cause the more you reply you just add more and more f**kin

stupid comments...

First it was the tune, then the actuator, oil blowing out the ass end, headgasket...

Wats next? The chain slips on the sprocket? or it wont go into lo 4x4?

Take the f**kin thing to a mech and get them to solve it cause clearly you cant even let

alone describe your problems.

And the oil spraying could be because of the current problem could it not?

Boost issue still isn't completely resolved but clearly something has gone wrong somewhere. And as for the tune well that has absolutely nothing to do with me.

Yeah your oil problem could be as dramatic as it is because of Cyl 1.

Sounds like a cooked piston fr those symptoms (busted ring lands, crown) and that would let combustion pressure into the oil system.

Well there you have it. Get a 2nd hand motor and fix it. Consider taking it to a mechanic.

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...