Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I got lucky today and found a 125a alternator that looks like a Hitachi and a noticeably wider in the outer metal section between the ally casings . I found it by mistake in a wrecker 92 Maxima with an early VG30 in it . Usually the 110a ones turn up on 97 98 A32 Maximas with VQ30s in them .

The mounting ears are the same with the front tensioner one on centre so to speak . RB alternators being on the drivers side have the top ear slightly towards the engine so need to mod the top bracket to suit the Maxima alts . Maxima VQs don't tension the drive belt by moving the alternatorand and depending on the year and VG/VQ engine can be above or below the AC compressor . I scored a slotted tensioner bracket from an early bottom mount car and another from some top mount Nissan , transverse KA I think . I also got the threaded adjuster block and bolts off some Nissan that tensions by hinging the alternator RB style .

These later alternators have a different connection to the early large spade type . I only have one good plug and I'll have to see what my car has standard .

$45 for a second hand 125a alt sounds good to me , cheers A .

Edited by discopotato03

Yeah I have a string of alternators off various Jap things now starting with an LR165 off a Vortex and the Z32 LR180 that replaced it .

I scored a genuine Hitachi LR1110 (110a) which had been freshened up for the R33 , then stumbled on the 125a one which I pretty sure is a rebuilt Hitachi LR11125 in Maxima casings .

You see the odd copy of Hitachi alts and you can tell by there being no Hitachi stickers and the plating on the nuts and bolts is silver not that gold appearance .

Anyway we split the cases off the 125 and washed it all up yesterday arvo . All looks pretty good though the back bearing is a bit tired .

I honestly think 110a is plenty to have in a car that has 80 standard particularly a 90s Skyline without all the luxo elec pork .

One of my failings is I can't resist rare upspec bits particularly when the bite is virtually trivial .

Must stop collect alternators , cheers A .

Yeah well it works out to around $155 cleaned tested and with new NTC (OE) bearings if the reg rectifier and brushes are good . That's with the help of a mate and the workshop with $50 their way because I don't use people .

The RH9 one has the better front case tensioner mount position but even having to make or mod the bracket it's heaps cheaper and any Maximer alt with the right pulley and socket goes bolt plug . $155 vs 6-900 , the plain lookin one wins .

I'm reluctant to think there is anything special in the RH9 one and if there is it could be higher speed bearings - and lairy paint .

Of course a bright blue pully and stator is worth at least a second in the quarter ... 100% !

A .

Edited by discopotato03
  • 5 weeks later...

Any one heard that the I30 160amp are straight bolt-on affair ? a chap in UK said it was straight bolt on on his r32.

I'm trying to buy one from mechman or DC power in the state.. but none are willing to take a R32 case and rebuilt it or make a custom one.. obviously they must think the market is not there and they wont sell enough for them to make it worth it.

  • 2 months later...

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...