Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 49
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Black BLACK!

Haha. Gtr -> rwd, easy

Gtt-> gtr, so not worth the hassle.

And why do you personally not like awd? Or did you drive a evo and think "nah awd is not for me".

Gtr is a different type of awd. Just saying.

mate, dont get too worked up about the whole thing

without being too harsh on the OP, lets be 100% honest with our selves here, we ALL know that this guy IS NOT going too spend the money on converting his gt-t into a gtr look-a-like. Nor is he going to buy a r34 gtr, just to turn it rwd.

this is an internet based forum where ALOT of people say things they really dont mean.

Now i could be completely wrong, and OP has thousands and thousands of dollars spare to spend on modifying a 12 year old gt-t in such an extreme way, for no real apparent gain, then good luck.

GTR to rwd is easy enough, drop front driveshafts, hack front diff off sump, remove attessa computers etc and chuck in an RB25 box. But I don't see the point.

Have you driven an R and then come to the decision that you don't like the AWD or have you just gone, "Yep the GTT is rwd I like it" and not done any research into how the R actually handles.

I haven't driven a 34R but I have driven a 33R and whilst the 4wd and rwd feel completely different it is a great handling package. Feels a bit heavier in the front but it feels a lot more balanced and smooth. If you want your GT-T to run an rb26 then do that and save the coin on everything else. otherwise drive an R if you haven't already and see if you really do dislike the AWD as much as you think you do.

Another thing to consider, as well as the guards being pumped out and the suspension being mostly the same you will have to swap rear hubs from loop type suspension to fork type and LCA's etc are different to provide you with the added 20mm rear track. Front track however is the same.

soooooooooo yes, no, i need a black or white answer

I like this guy.

With such a great title, I was expecting a thread subtitle along the lines of "just ran over a homeless guy - should I call the cops?" or "I just caught my sister in bed with my mom"...very disappointed...

Ok great stuff here, and also, the money situation isnt a concern, also if i was to stick to the GT-t and i got all original GTR body kit, side skirts bonnet rear left and right quarter pannels front and rear bumper the lot, would it be a hassle to fit onto the gt-t, thank you for your patience people, i greatly appreciate it

Ok great stuff here, and also, the money situation isnt a concern, also if i was to stick to the GT-t and i got all original GTR body kit, side skirts bonnet rear left and right quarter pannels front and rear bumper the lot, would it be a hassle to fit onto the gt-t, thank you for your patience people, i greatly appreciate it

I smell a troll..

I answered the question a few posts back with reference to a R32. same idea.

Ok great stuff here, and also, the money situation isnt a concern, also if i was to stick to the GT-t and i got all original GTR body kit, side skirts bonnet rear left and right quarter pannels front and rear bumper the lot, would it be a hassle to fit onto the gt-t, thank you for your patience people, i greatly appreciate it

also if money is not a concern -buy a R35. that will pull the chicks and get you thrown in jail at the same time.

if you were doing a resto like I am then I could POSSIBLY see your point. at the moment I see a kid and dreams.

put up or shut up :)

also if money is not a concern -buy a R35. that will pull the chicks and get you thrown in jail at the same time.

if you were doing a resto like I am then I could POSSIBLY see your point. at the moment I see a kid and dreams.

put up or shut up :)

THIS

/Thread.

Yes, the AWD system can be disabled. I wouldn't waste the time, effort and money doing such a costly conversion.

>Buy R34 GTR

>Disable the AWD system

>??????

>Profit!

Edited by JDM34

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

    • Thanks for the reply mate. Well I really hope its a hose then not engine out job
    • But.... the reason I want to run a 60 weight is so at 125C it has the same viscosity as a 40 weight at 100C. That's the whole reason. If the viscosity changes that much to drop oil pressure from 73psi to 36psi then that's another reason I should be running an oil that mimics the 40 weight at 100C. I have datalogs from the dyno with the oil pressure hitting 73psi at full throttle/high RPM. At the dyno the oil temp was around 100-105C. The pump has a 70psi internal relief spring. It will never go/can't go above 70psi. The GM recommendation of 6psi per 1000rpm is well under that... The oil sensor for logging in LS's is at the valley plate at the back of  the block/rear of where the heads are near the firewall. It's also where the knock sensors are which are notable for 'false knock'. I'm hoping I just didn't have enough oil up top causing some chatter instead of rods being sad (big hopium/copium I know) LS's definitely heat up the oil more than RB's do, the stock vettes for example will hit 300F(150C) in a lap or two and happily track for years and years. This is the same oil cooler that I had when I was in RB land, being the Setrab 25 row oil cooler HEL thing. I did think about putting a fan in there to pull air out more, though I don't know if that will actually help in huge load situations with lots of speed. I think when I had the auto cooler. The leak is where the block runs to the oil cooler lines, the OEM/Dash oil pressure sender is connected at that junction and is what broke. I'm actually quite curious to see how much oil in total capacity is actually left in the engine. As it currently stands I'm waiting on that bush to adapt the sender to it. The sump is still full (?) of oil and the lines and accusump have been drained, but the filter and block are off. I suspect there's maybe less than 1/2 the total capacity there should be in there. I have noticed in the past that topping up oil has improved oil pressure, as reported by the dash sensor. This is all extremely sketchy hence wanting to get it sorted out lol.
    • I neglected to respond to this previously. Get it up to 100 psi, and then you'll be OK.
    • I agree with everything else, except (and I'm rethinking this as it wasn't setup how my brain first though) if the sensor is at the end of a hose which is how it has been recommended to isolate it from vibrations, then if that line had a small hole in, I could foresee potentially (not a fluid dynamic specialist) the ability for it to see a lower pressure at the sensor. But thinking through, said sensor was in the actual block, HOWEVER it was also the sensor itself that broke, so oil pressure may not have been fully reaching the sensor still. So I'm still in my same theory.   However, I 100% would be saying COOL THE OIL DOWN if it's at 125c. That would be an epic concern of mine.   Im now thinking as you did Brad that the knock detection is likely due to the bearings giving a bit more noise as pressure dropped away. Kinkstah, drop your oil, and get a sample of it (as you're draining it) and send it off for analysis.
    • I myself AM TOTALLY UNPREPARED TO BELIEVE that the load is higher on the track than on the dyno. If it is not happening on the dyno, I cannot see it happening on the track. The difference you are seeing is because it is hot on the track, and I am pretty sure your tuner is not belting the crap out of it on teh dyno when it starts to get hot. The only way that being hot on the track can lead to real ping, that I can think of, is if you are getting more oil (from mist in the inlet tract, or going up past the oil control rings) reducing the effective octane rating of the fuel and causing ping that way. Yeah, nah. Look at this graph which I will helpfully show you zoomed back in. As an engineer, I look at the difference in viscocity at (in your case, 125°C) and say "they're all the same number". Even though those lines are not completely collapsed down onto each other, the oil grades you are talking about (40, 50 and 60) are teh top three lines (150, 220 and 320) and as far as I am concerned, there is not enough difference between them at that temperature to be meaningful. The viscosity of 60 at 125°C is teh same as 40 at 100°C. You should not operate it under high load at high temperature. That is purely because the only way they can achieve their emissions numbers is with thin-arse oil in it, so they have to tell you to put thin oil in it for the street. They know that no-one can drive the car & engine hard enough on the street to reach the operating regime that demands the actual correct oil that the engine needs on the track. And so they tell you to put that oil in for the track. Find a way to get more air into it, or, more likely, out of it. Or add a water spray for when it's hot. Or something.   As to the leak --- a small leak that cannot cause near catastrophic volume loss in a few seconds cannot cause a low pressure condition in the engine. If the leak is large enough to drop oil pressure, then you will only get one or two shots at it before the sump is drained.
×
×
  • Create New...