Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

ok iv put a stock 25det into a r32 when driveing around works mint revs up does what a 25det does,

but when drifting usen hard revs it misfire cuts power drops revs to 6000rpm

any body know the proplem dosent feel like a coil or afm proplem feels like a fuel cut

i have no speedo hooked up some one told me it could be the proplem going into a over rev fault code

has any one got experience with this its the 2nd 25 to 32 that has done this both with no speedo's fix the last one with a tune

any help will be appreciated

iv still got to hook up a consult port and i brought a greddy intelligent infometer i hope this could help me find the proplem

at the moment my plan of attack is to loop the neutral switch put in a 25 speed senser run the output to the ecu

i dont want to get a tune because motor is getting pulled out in afew weeks to make room for a 250rwkw sr20det

You cannot run the speed sensor direct to the ECU. The speed sensor outputs an AC signal at +/-1V or thereabouts. The speedo head converts that to a 0-5V square wave signal, which is what the ECU is looking for.

The very simple solution, as it always has been, it to fit a bloody speedo.

No. Don't piss about. Just get an R33 speedo out of a wreck, wire it to the box and the ECU, tuck it up under the dash and be happy.

As for Paul, the R34 ECU definitely has a bunch of zero speed protections built in. Looking at the stock manual bin file in Nistune, max RPM with zero speed is 4500. Map TP with zero speed is 96. It is fair to bet that Nissan had similar protections in the R33 ECU too, it's just that we can't go look inside so easily.

I don't think they do have no problems. I think they run into the exact problem you have. If you use a PowerFC or other ECU then no problem.

With respect to cutting pin 53......there may be a difference between having no signal there at all (not even the circuit connected) and having it connected but not pulsing. The ECU may be able to tell the difference. I don't know with R33 ECUs particularly, because they are useless in all regards I've never been in a car that has one!

If you want to use a cable drive speedo with R33 box in R32 you're going to need to use the Navara drive mod to make it work. I did it to mine, it's not hard, although the speedo cable ends up with a nasty short radius curve in it down near the box/chassis rail afterwards.

Edited by GTSBoy

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...