Jump to content
SAU Community

Open Source Rb Trigger Kit


murrayis

Recommended Posts

I plan on testing the balance of the balancer however with the same amount of material being removed on all sides it should not too be much out of the original balance.

I would be interested in the results from this, modifying the factory balancer could save $700+

I have the ross 32-2 teeth setup with the standard CAS for phasing

There are plenty of kits floating around the world ATM, but it is always good to see someone else's approach to this issue

You just use the input that would normally read the crank angle output from the factory CAS, it just has to be programable

Are you saying the factory cas can be retained and the signal just has to be modified so it can be interpreted?

..

I'm not sold on the design of the cam trigger finger, but everything else looks great

Edited by BlackBox
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll let you know once i've found someone to balance it for me.

The factory CAS could be used in theory just as a reference. The factory CAS disk has 360 outer slots and from memory a single inner ring for the reference.

Me either at this stage. I'm happy with just using a steel bolt on the adjustable CAM gear however I thought people would like something universal without the need for a aftermarket cam gear however I guess in the scheme of things having to spend $300 on a pair of gears isn't a bit deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you saying the factory cas can be retained and the signal just has to be modified so it can be interpreted?

..

I'm not sold on the design of the cam trigger finger, but everything else looks great

Nah I didn't have to touch the stock Cas just pick up the crank signal at the ECU plug and run a new wire to the crank trigger then change the settings in the cam/phase settings to read the 6 different sized slots in the ECU, it has an event counter it phases from

The new design cam wheel looks heaps better

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah I didn't have to touch the stock Cas just pick up the crank signal at the ECU plug and run a new wire to the crank trigger then change the settings in the cam/phase settings to read the 6 different sized slots in the ECU, it has an event counter it phases from

The new design cam wheel looks heaps better

Thats what always had me wondering why people were putting a new sensor on the cam, factory one already has it for cam position phasing, just dont use the signal from the 360 outer slots and run a wire like you did from the crank trigger.

Makes life so much simpler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If somebody could describe how to do this in a bit more detail I would be extremely appreciative, (pm if necessary don't want to deviate too much more)

The FC can't do this, I would be a little suprised if even the top Haltech could do it, interested to know if it can for sure

Easiest way with the FC is get a 36-2 trigger wheel with the missing teeth @ 85deg after TDC and the convertor box from Ross to convert the trigger wheel signal to what the FC will read, can also be used with stock and Nistune ECUs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That makes no sense

The ECU only works as well as the hard wear giving it reference

I understand that but I have read many posts sayin that it's a problem only with the newer ECU, because of the optical sensor and the speed of the new ecu's..

The concencus of the recent discussion (in another thread not far from here) was that older, slower ECUs are not seeeing (all) the timing fluctuations that the newer faster ones are. There may be some placebo involved iin that findiing, because the comparisons may not be sufficiently scientific (ie, same car, same timing belt, same CAS, just the ECU changed). But it is distinctly possible that it is true.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For sure, bromance with common shit box interests.
    • People like Johnny Dose Bro might be laughing at my post because I accidentally added 100mm to my numbers. 350-355 is indeed the lower limit. 450 is off-road Skyline spec.
    • What is the "compromise" that you think will happen? Are you thinking that something will get damaged? The only things you have to be concerned about with spherical jointed suspension arms are; Arguments with the constabulary wrt their legality (they are likely to be illegal for road use without an engineering certificatation, and that may not be possible to obtain). A lot more NVH transmitted through to the passengers (which is hardly a concern for those with a preference for good handling, anyway). Greatly increased inspection and maintenance requirements (see above points, both).   It is extremely necessary to ask what car you are talking about. Your discussion on strut tops, for example, would be completely wrong for an R chassis, but be correct for an S chassis. R32s have specific problems that R33/4 do not have. Etc. I have hardened rubber bushes on upper rear control arms and traction rods. Adjustable length so as to be able to set both camber and bump steer. You cannot contemplate doing just the control arms and not the traction arms. And whatever bushing you have in one you should have in the other so that they have similar characteristics. Otherwise you can get increased oddness of behaviour as one bushing flexes and the other doesn't, changing the alignment between them. I have stock lower rear arms with urethane bushes. I may make changes here, these are are driven by the R32's geometry problems, so I won't discuss them here unless it proves necessary. I have spherical joints in the front caster rods. I have experienced absolutely no negatives and only positives from doing so. They are massively better than any other option. I have sphericals in the FUCAs, but this is driven largely by the (again) R32 specific problems with the motion of those arms. I just have to deal with the increased maintenance required. Given how much better the front end behaves with the sphericals in there.....I'd probably be tempted to go away from my preference (which is not to have sphericals on a road car, for 2 of the 3 reasons in the bulleted list above), just to gain those improvements. And so my preference for not using sphericals (in general) on a road car should be obvious. I use them judiciously, though, as required to solve particular problems.
    • Aren't we already on one? SAU unforgettable bromance.
    • Easiest way to know is to break out the multimeter and measure it when cold, then measure all the resistances again once it gets hot enough to misfire. Both the original ignitor and the J Replace version. Factory service manual will have the spec for the terminal measurements.
×
×
  • Create New...