Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...

0nly badge it needs is on that says "F**K YEAH"

Haha cheers mate, may detract from the look I am after ;)

I take my hat off to you sir...phenomenal effort.

Thanks a million Scott!

Well done on a great build.

Now every other GTR looks filthy compared to this.

Much appreciated Phil, unfortunately bnr32's are well and truly showing their age in most cases. But look what endless hard work and a significant amount of money can achieve!!

So not much has been happening of late. Latest jobs have been on the interior/electronics. Repositioned the defi display to be to view it easier. Also, got it setup properly re speed and rpm display. Input maximum rpm parameter and the shift lights working. Lastly, got warning values input for oil and water temp and oil pressure.

DSC_0911.JPG

DSC_0917.JPG

Have finally started looking at ruzic controller install. It will be going in the glovebox with an extension harness so driver can adjust as needed from the drivers seat.

BeeR is going to be mounted as pictured for ease of adjustibility and just looks dumb anywhere else! Wiring will run up into side of centre console

DSC_0909.JPG

DSC_0910.JPG

The thought of a Bee*R on this thing makes me sad :(

Whyyy Robbie? :(

Thanks for the input Martin. Have you used a BeeR personally? What were your findings?

Why? RPM control when on track and possible use of the launch control function if it proves to be useful...

Echo sentiment

Your thoughts Richard?

Edited by $$slowmedown

It's your personal choice of how the interior looks and tech gadgets based on what you intend to do with your GTR.

placement for ease of use/vision I understand. Wasn't really my place to comment.

But having already opened my mouth.

- my personal opinion is to keep gadgetry minimal, functional, fit for purpose, base on frequency of use, and out of sight (as much as is possible).

some are done well and some aren't. Bit worried - that is all.

I like the clean interior of the R32 GTR.

  • Like 1

My comment was based on the reputation of the Bee*R limiters to do damage. Whilst I don't have any first hand experience with them, I do understand how they work. And it's not good.

In case you're interested or unaware, the Bee*R limiters work by grounding the coils rather than cutting signal completely. So when you hit the desired RPM, the Bee*R sends PWM pulses to the ground side of the coil and it doesn't fire. However PWM signals aren't just an on/off voltage, they are a pulse with varying duration, and in the case of ignition, the coil pack fires when it reaches the END of the pulse not the start. So when the revs drop below the desired limit again, the Bee*R stops sending the pulses to the ground side, and the coil packs can fire again. But because it has actually delayed the pulse, the spark can now occur at the wrong point in the cycle, and effectively results in detonation the same way advancing your timing too far would. In addition, if the yellow gain knob is set too harshly (which everyone does because the faster it cuts the cooler it sounds), you get a very aggressive accel/decel, which is no good for your oil pump or valvetrain.

I can see why these things were popular when they first came out, as the idea of an ignition cut vs fuel cut sounds much healthier for the engine. However I think it was done the wrong way, and it should be cutting the signal completely via a relay, so that the cut only ever starts as a spark happens and only ever ends as a spark happens, thus cutting the cycle completely. However modern ECU's like Haltech, Link, Adaptronic etc. have all sorted out a way of making fuel cuts quite safe, as they allow a percentage of fuel/ignition to be trimmed before the hard cut, at very very fine intervals.

  • Like 2
  • 4 weeks later...

Cheers for the input guys, appreciated as always.

Have been flat out getting this thing finished off over the last few weeks. Will get an update up asap!!

For now I found these :teehee:

DSC05364.JPG

DSC05330.JPG

DSC05331.JPG

DSC05311.JPG

DSC05333.JPG

DSC05335.JPG

  • Like 6

The detail of this build is ridiculous. I would love to see it in the flesh.

Well done mate congrats! :worship:

Cheers Steven :D

I don't even know what to say any more. I love this car.
Also great pics again

Thanks again mate, hoping to get some professional shots done someday soon!

Starting to forget what has happened over the last few weeks so better get something up or will never happen!

Hopefully one of the last lot Nissan orders came a while ago

New wiper arms with PIAA blades fitted up

DSC_0986.JPG

Door trims back off to fit up the new interior window trim pieces

DSC_0990.JPG

DSC_0994.JPG

And forgot to get the after shot but all pretty boring stuff really, just finishing off the details!

Next up got the new rear quarter glass in (old glass was temp fitted) along with the new door opening trim that screws up to the body (again had to remove the old ones out along with the rubbers, a delicate job!!)

Also removed the Nismo option 3 piece body kit and got it fitted up properly with all new Nissan OEM clips/scrivets/screws etc and some quality 3M VHB double sided tape.

Will get photos up of the finished product just forgot at the time :/

Have also had the car back to paint shop for final detailing, had it corner weighted/wheel alignment done and new window tinting as been done. Will get details up soon...

One of the last things to do is fit up the original badges....can you anyone help me out with this?

I am chasing a car in original paint with ALL original badges so I can put mine side by side and measure up the placement of the badges accurately. Would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers

Edited by $$slowmedown
  • Like 1

Finally popping wheelies lol! Car going onto scales to get a base and see how everything was sitting.

DSC03168.JPG

Numbers came out as follows:

TOTAL WEIGHT (with driver 76 kg + approx. 70 L fuel = approx. 54 kg)

3,465 lb = 1,571 kg

CURB WEIGHT (less driver & fuel)

1,441 kg

CORNER WEIGHTS (WITH DRIVER)

LF = 980 lb RF = 1017 lb

LR = 710 lb RR = 757 lb

PERCENTAGES (WITH DRIVER)

FRONT = 57.63 %

REAR = 42.33%

LEFT WEIGHT = 48.77 %

CROSS WEIGHT = 49.84 %

Overall pretty happy with how numbers turned out! These were the numbers as the car sat with no adjustments needed as well.

Would of preferred it was lighter but it is what is now. Happy to hear thoughts on these or even better if you have numbers to compare?!!

Next up was wheel alignment:

DSC03172.JPG

DSC03173.JPG

DSC03179.JPG

DSC03178.JPG

DSC03186.JPG

DSC03181.JPG

All went pretty smoothly. Got it set up for a comfortable street ride that is easy on the tyres.

There was a problem with the front upper arms. More to the point with the brand new Whiteline bush kits for these....

With everything all tightened up there is a noticeable amount of slop in the bushes where the upper arms bolt up to the body. So much so that the camber could not be reliably measured/adjusted.

My mechanic got a chance to pull them off the car yesterday and straight away noticed that the problem is a design fault with the Whiteline bushes, I believe it seems to be the metal pin that sits inside is to short so when tighted up the outer bushes can't 'crush' onto it. Has anyone else experienced this issue?

All the other Whiteline gear has been fine so far...it just seems to be these upper arm bushing kits...

Any feedback/thoughts/experience would be appreciated

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...