Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Noticed a big difference ?

big difference, but also noticeable shudder when shift. if you want smooth shift, then keep stock one. got AT check light on once for 0.5s when reduce speed and stop car for waiting red light

The main reason I'm fitting one is that I hope it will downshift quicker when trying to overtake because car is quite laggy so it would make it nicer to drive because stock auto just adds delay...

From what I've read it won't make a difference to downshifts, as that has to do with an ECU/TCU signal or something

From what I've read it won't make a difference to downshifts, as that has to do with an ECU/TCU signal or something

Yeah, that's what I read too, thought somehow the shift would be firmer still even though the downshift signal isn't instantaneous, just hoping :)

Edited by valf

It will be firmer, but it won't increase the response. Only your foot can do that, it's how you stab the pedal that makes all the difference I have found.

Should be interesting taking standalone control of some of the gearbox functions using the Link ecu, I suspect it may not require a shift kit once we set up the map properly. It's a fair bit of stuffing around but it will be well worth it, my gearbox is slipping and slurring into gear at the drags, hoping this should sort it out.

  • Like 1

as Scotty said, it will be firmer. for me, only problem is when in heavy traffic in "D" with low speed, then do brake - acc - brake - acc, you can feel some vibration/shudder when shift up/down.

AT check light only happened once but it disappear immediately after installed about 2-3 days, but now it is more smooth. i think TCU needs some time to adapt transgo kit?

  • 11 months later...
43 minutes ago, blade511 said:

Is this for RWD only ? Forgive my ignorance, but I'd be super keen to do the upgrade if it works on 4WD.. otherwise, what options are their ?

I believe there is an application for every VQ out there so yes it works on 4WD.

  • 4 years later...

Sorted;

What’s the difference between a SHIFT KIT® and a Reprogramming Kit?
DESIGNED FOR DURABILITY: SHIFT KIT® valve body repair kits
TransGo SHIFT KIT® valve body repair kits correct, prevent and reduce multiple transmission problems such as shift irregularities and durability issues. These kits are used by professional transmission and valve body technicians and are designed for normal everyday use and light duty towing.

ENGINEERED FOR PERFORMANCE: Reprogramming Kit™ valve body performance kits
TransGo Reprogramming Kit™ valve body performance kits are made for specific applications. If you have a hard working truck that tows or haul heavy loads, look under ‘Installation Icons’ tab for the tow/haul icon.  If you have a high performance vehicle, look for the performance icon. These performance valve body kits also include additional features such as;

Gear Command™:  Allows full control of downshifting and will hold any gear to any RPM. Retains automatic up shifts in the drive position. Certain units allow manual up shifts on driver command.
Manual Shift Control: This feature fully converts the valve body to manual/stick shift operation – no automatic shifts. Most Manual Shift Control kits also allow you the ability to easily convert back to automatic.
Tuneless: Patent-pending internal calibration technology “tuneless” allows install without the need for additional transmission tuning software or programmers.
In summary: If you are looking to retain shift comfort but want added durability, use a TransGo SHIFT KIT® valve body repair kit. For performance shifts without sacrificing durability use TransGo Reprogramming Kit™ valve body performance kits.

Haha wow, still confused about the kit. I ordered the cheaper one from Summit which has already arrived. Emailed TransGo while it was in transit and this was their response;

Quote

We only offer a reprogramming kit for the RE5-RO5A.  It will provide firm, crisp shift that are not harsh – I believe you will be happy with it.  Our product address shift feel, manual shifting will be the same as it is currently.

They only list one kit on their site for the RE5R05A | TransGo

Checking my box, it does say for Turbo/supercharged applications and the instructions list RE5RO5A so was confused about the zero and the oh

I guess this kit is fine and may just be old stock from Summit? (I got the last one)

n8qWXQD.jpg

  • Confused 1

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...