Jump to content
SAU Community

R33 Bov

33wishes

By 33wishes,
in Engines & Forced Induction

 Share

Recommended Posts

hardsteppa Grand Master

hardsteppa

Posted
Posted

I tried turbosmart kompact, its way smaller inside than stock bov and gave me turbo flutter. Thought it was shite, snd ditched it, put stock back on. Small hole is 'slight leak' making the on/off of bov smoother but less responsive. Plug it up as scotty says, better from a performance point of view.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/451747-r33-bov/#findComment-7444024
Share on other sites
scotty nm35 Grand Master

scotty nm35

Posted
Posted

Smaller inside? Mine doesn't flutter, even on 40 psi.

The springs are replaceable, and they come slightly on the tight side from the factory. If your setup flutters slightly you could just ask them for a softer spring.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/451747-r33-bov/#findComment-7444031
Share on other sites
RBrennan25 Grand Master

RBrennan25

Posted
Posted

not stock about 400hp @wls , I was getting a whistle noise on full boost.like a leak. I since have blocked the mentioned whole , and now whistle is gone, but bov now sounds different.

I'm actually getting the same thing, any chance of getting a photo of the aforementioned hole?
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/451747-r33-bov/#findComment-7444821
Share on other sites
Ben C34 Grand Master

Ben C34

Posted
Posted

I'm actually getting the same thing, any chance of getting a photo of the aforementioned hole?

Take off your bov. Look at it.

If you can't see the hole give up on everything.

You can't block.the hole with the bov on the car.

As the hole is a little larger than m5 tapping size you can simply cut slots in a bolt to make a tap if you don't have a tap handy.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/451747-r33-bov/#findComment-7444853
Share on other sites

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kapr
      RB20DE NEO smallbox clutch.

      By Kapr · Posted

      For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...