Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So my turbo is going, going, soon to be gone...

I have a 2003 M35 Stagea, 120xxx km's. Stock - except for some mad-as wheel nuts!

My mechanic has told me that to rebuild the turbo will be around the 2.5k mark based on the following:

  • Engine removal (as the turbo cannot be reached any other way)
  • Rebuild the turbo (as a replacement from Nissan will be too expensive)
  • Refit the new turbo
  • Replace Engine

So my question to all you fellow Stag drivers is this:

Is the price/quote correct & must the engine be removed to replace/rebuild the standard turbo?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/401832-rebuild-or-replace-m35-turbo/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 55
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Lol... find a new mechanic.

Where do you live? There are people in melb and Sydney who will quite happily help you out, and combined I would have to say have removed and/or refitted/ replaced upwards of 15 turbos, at a guess.

Its not an engine out.

Hypergear along with some other companies can rebuild the turbo.

So my turbo is going, going, soon to be gone...

I have a 2003 M35 Stagea, 120xxx km's. Stock - except for some mad-as wheel nuts!

My mechanic has told me that to rebuild the turbo will be around the 2.5k mark based on the following:

  • Engine removal (as the turbo cannot be reached any other way)
  • Rebuild the turbo (as a replacement from Nissan will be too expensive)
  • Refit the new turbo
  • Replace Engine

So my question to all you fellow Stag drivers is this:

Is the price/quote correct & must the engine be removed to replace/rebuild the standard turbo?

You don't need the engine out....makes it a little easier but there is no need! Hypergear can rebuild a turbo to your from $880 being the cheapest. I can pull it in and out for under $900. Not including oil and oil filter or any other damage parts.

I'm in NSW

Scott's the same price but in Vic I think

Hi All,

Thanks for the feedback.. Im in VIC - South East.

The mechanic Ive used has been always reliable for my previous R32 and now my M35...

Will get in contact with Scott nm35.

Also - any ideas what causes the turbo to fail? Ive never owned a car that hasn't been turbocharged and this is the first turbo to fail... At 120xxx km's I would have thought this is a little early for failure of what I would consider a fairly major part..

Edited by WTBN

It's a replacement part at 100k km I've heard.

Your car might well have more than what's on the clock. Biggest killer is lack of oil, due to blocked oil restriction banjo. Scotty will sort you out, your in good hands

You got to 120k? Lucky you. Mine was done at about 75K mark and was engine out job. Mechanic couldn't remove the bolts otherwise even with special tool he bought for the job. Cost an arm and a leg but has performed well since. Was reconned by an outfit in Nelson, SI. The stock unit is lightweight.

I hope the mechanics you use are cleaning out the banjo bolt or drilling it out larger, otherwise you could have another failure down the track. There is no way a legitimate 75k turbo will have failed if the oil supply hasn't blocked somehow.

Engine out? lol. Bugger that, unless you blow a head gasket. :(

What did yours end up costing in total STAG250? I have a feeling the mechanic's quote (2.5k) above was very low for an engine out job...

My advice is to be careful where you go...

I got ripped off hard for what I thought was an engine out high-flow rebuild, turns out they just f**ked around getting it in and out with the engine remaining in car. This all by a northern beaches franchise of a widespread automotive mechanic company recommend by my warranty company who then tried to take them for a walk (approaching $5k) and shot himself in the foot saying it was my fault it broke... I ended up forking out more than $3K, and that was after a payout of approx $1200 (1/3rd of what it should have been). I believe it was a sierra 2 rebuild, but when I asked for info on what they actually put in I got donuts! The receipt said "turbo up spec rebuild $(bullsh*t).00" Also no info if they drilled the banjo out or not...

My advice would be to shop around, needless to say I'm a rather bitter about my experience... still haven't fully recovered financially, if I could go back I wouldn't have wasted my time and money dealing with this workshop and warranty cr*p and gone straight to Jetwreck for a no BS, cheaper alternative from someone that actually knows a thing or two about this car. I'd probably know exactly what work was done and equipment went into the car too...

Edited by NickM91

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...