Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey all :)

I have a problem with my skyline. Only occasionally I will start it and begin to drive.. then when I'm accelerating it seems to lose power and slightly "bunny hop" the bunny hops are not aggressive. it just doesn't seem to be able to get to higher revs. It does happen when it's cold but by the time it's warmed up it still has the problem.as I said it only does it every now and again. Does anyone have any idea what could be wrong?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/428944-intermittent-problem-with-r32-gtst/
Share on other sites

No mods except for a coke can in the blow off valve (bought like that) :P

Don't know the service history from previous owner. Has had a complete full service. Was happening before I recently got it serviced.. mechanic changed the fuel filter and spark plugs (thinking they were the cause) but problem still persists

It happens at any revs. It happens whenever I accelerate

  • 1 year later...

Found this thread and am bumping it because I have a similar problem. I'll describe it in more detail though.

This happens occasionally, and only early in any drive if it does. Not like right out of my garage but 1 or 2 minutes in. I will probably happen at a frequency of about once every 3 times i drive the car.

Once it happens it will happen until i let it sit out of boost for a while and it will be ok. I even did 5 runs at autocross after this, problem did not crop up.

How violent it is depends on how much throttle i'm using. If I hold it down as i'm trying to accelerate and not let it if it reminds me as if someone who is just learning to driving a manual is driving the car. Off-boost it doesn't do this. It only does it at RPMs in which the turbo is building or holding pressure.

Same recommendations? I don't have another AFM to try otherwise I would but I could install my powerfc and put in a Z32 AFM.

I had an r32 gtst back in 2004 which would do that, the car would lurch back and forth violently under acceleration. Turned out to be a really dirty fuel filter, wasn't allowing sufficient fuel to the rail so the car was suffering fuel starvation. Upon reflection I'm surprised I didn't destroy the engine, must have been running ultra lean during those periods.

I had an r32 gtst back in 2004 which would do that, the car would lurch back and forth violently under acceleration. Turned out to be a really dirty fuel filter, wasn't allowing sufficient fuel to the rail so the car was suffering fuel starvation. Upon reflection I'm surprised I didn't destroy the engine, must have been running ultra lean during those periods.

Did it do this all the time or only occasionally like it's doing for me?

I would think if it were a fuel filter it wouldn't just stop and be fine for hours.

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 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...