Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Took a few pics of the clutch last night

Flywheel

clutchflywheel.jpg

One of the plates

clutchplate.jpg

Cover

clutchcover.jpg

Done ATLEST 250 7000 RPM + launches. Feels the same as the day I took ownership of the car. It's going straight back in. Very very surprised at the condition of the plates.

Took a few pics of the clutch last night

Done ATLEST 250 7000 RPM + launches. Feels the same as the day I took ownership of the car. It's going straight back in. Very very surprised at the condition of the plates.

Another reason why i am so happy i spent the money on one of these clutches comp spec ftw

Paul, good to see that u stuck with the 2.8. The 3ltr will ruin your gtr due to the mods required with cutting and drilling and stuffing around, you have such a nice example r33...if your car was clapped out then I'd say go to a 3ltr.

Unfortunately when u get the horsepower bug, things break (as per Ian's comment earlier).

Im not a big fan of polished ports.

Heated Air = increased viscosity = extra drag through a smooth port. this has been proven.

I have had my Rb26 head flowed to its maximum ablity without any polishing

Yes it has!

When you look at the list of high powered engines this guy has developed in the last 15 years in Japan from the Drag33 to time attack engines down to current GTR35, you know he has got a little bit of knowledge of what he's doing, plus he's got the runs on the board having built literally 100's of race engines and high performance cars.

End of the day its the complete package that makes everything come together to give a car that has buckets of torque, great power delivery on low boost and isnt going to go bang.

Also you might want to have a real good look at a few other top Japanese engine builders like Jun etc and see what they do.

Are they doing it or have they done it wrong ??

These guys were pushing the boundries of the RB before most owners here were out of wetting their beds.

Its easy to say yes this is proven and thats proven but how many of you guys have built engines and own cars like these guys in Japan have built and still do.

Have you guys actually been and seen what the Jap top tuners build ???

For example in Australia how many 9 sec cars are there..Japan 10 years ago they were being pumped out left right and centre.

Nowdays hardly any and thats due to economic differences e.g Japan is going down the tube big time so nobody has the coin anymore.

Sadly the RB in Japan today is a dinasaur, alike to the old golden Holden 308 , yes parts are still available and the odd build still happens but this is due to just being for bread and butter money. The focus now and the in future is well and truly the GTR35.

At the end of the day you have to look at what Pauls building here. This is not a knuckledragger engine, its being built for all round high performance and high response so he can take it out to the circuit and go very quick but still enjoy a Sunday drive but have all sorts of anger under the loud pedal.

He might have a little bit of knowledge but if those inlet ports are polished (which they kind of look like they are) there are deficiencies in how that inlet port will perform... that is the bottom line, it is FACT! Whether he has built 10 engines or 100 means nothing. Plus the fact that this head also has +1.5mm inlet valves is a whole other issue...

I don't think it is right to continue this on Piggaz's thread, apologies mate. Marcus send me a PM or email if you like.

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

    • 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.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...