Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey not sure if this is a topic but I desperately need help.

Ill try to keep it short but basically have a '94 R33 coupe series 1 with a sunroof :) only had her for a few months, bought from a lebanese guy....this is both me nd my partners dream car...so we cleaned her up, black bonnet, sound system etc. he did not look after her at all. We had a good run then problem after problem started.

PROBLEM #

1. Rocket cover leaking - fixed it

2. Hicas light only comes on once the car has been started then turned off for a short period of time. If let for roughly an hour it stays off (still not fixed)

3. Clutch started to squeak nd a tiny plastic bit just fell to the floor inside the car one day (still squeaking but clutch works perfect althought a bit sticky)

4. Driving nicely nd heard this noise like say a dragon flys wings right near ur ear. Tow trucked it home, pulled it all apart harmonica balancer is a bit thrashed out nd the 2 keys that hold it it place nd the crank pulley pretty much weren't there. Aparentl a ceased aircon system can cause it? Replaced those, put her all back together (first didn't even want to start timing woz out, lined all the notches up nd she started) now took her for a run bit sluggish but she still drove, boost leak? Fixed all of them (who ever came up with the 6piece intercooler pipe system should be shot!) cool she ran better nd better with every tweak. Got home turned her off nd there woz with weird bubbling noise coming from the back of the motor my partner thought it woz bottom end but we never bled the radiator system so I thought mayb airbubles. But the tapping/knocking noise is still their i figured it woz the harmonica balancer against the timing case since it looks a bit wonky wen she idles but as the revs pick up the straightens out, it's not a whole heap but just enough for u to notice. Good old YouTube nd partner reckons the noise is definitely death knock. I'm hoping its no or ill cry problem after problem can anyone shed some light coz I'm lost nd I really do not want to get rid of her or spend 3-4k on a rebuild! :'(

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/416557-really-need-help/
Share on other sites

So you had it properly flow tested and made sure its up to the task by a professional?

Because they wear out and their flow rate slows down meaning they run the car but under full load they don't supply enough fuel, which leans the engine out and the bearings get hammered and you get a death knock

So you had it properly flow tested and made sure its up to the task by a professional?

Because they wear out and their flow rate slows down meaning they run the car but under full load they don't supply enough fuel, which leans the engine out and the bearings get hammered and you get a death knock

well no, but im 100% sure its fine coz she guzzles fuel fine (badly needs a tune) lucky to get 250 from a full tank....took her to the mechanics this morning and its coming from the timing cover near the bottom not the actualy engine which just confuses me that bit more

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...