Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey Guys,

I bought an R32 GTS-T that has had a RB25 box put in it sometime in the past.

Now I have done some reading and know that you need to convert the electronic speedo to a mechanical one in order for it to work in the car. I'm assuming that this has been done in my car since the speedo is working, however the speedo is out by about 25kph at 100kph. I'm just wondering what you guys think is causing this?

My uneducated guesses are;

The Diff?

Maybe something to do with the mechanical speedo conversation?

Also the car has a GTR dash cluster (could this make a difference?).

Are any of my guesses close? where should I start? I would like to get the speedo as close as possible (doesn't have to be perfect).

Cheers in advanced,

Stuart

Here's the list of things that can affect it.

R32 GTSt diff ratio is 4.3:1. RB25 turbo diff ratios are 4.11:1. Difference of 4.5% which is not enough to explain your error.

R32 GTR diff ratio is 4.11:1, like the RB25 diffs, so that could/should get rid of the 4.5% error above anyway.

BUT....and here's the big but.....The GTR speedo expects to be turned at a particular speed by its speedo cable. That speed is dependent on the number of gears on the drive in the box and the end of the cable. The R32 GTSt works the same way, but it is entirely possible that there is a ~20-25% difference in the cable speed required to work the 2 different speedos, because the 2 different boxes (32GTSt and 32GTR) are not in any way related to each other.

So, I reckon that your easiest test (not that it's all that easy) is to try a GTSt cluster in the car and see if the speedo reads correct (or actually, maybe about 4.5% wrong rather than 25%).

I don't know anyone else who has transplanted a GTR cluster into a GTSt to know if there is that big a difference in the cable speed required for a given road speed, but I'd be willing to believe that there is and that many people who have done it either haven't realised or just live with it!

FWIW, if you do the Navara sender based mech speedo conversion (like I did in my R32) for the RB25 turbo box, then you can get nearly zero% speedo error. Mine is accurate to within 1km/h across the whole normal range (say up to about 130 km/h).

  • Like 1

BUT....and here's the big but.....The GTR speedo expects to be turned at a particular speed by its speedo cable. That speed is dependent on the number of gears on the drive in the box and the end of the cable. The R32 GTSt works the same way, but it is entirely possible that there is a ~20-25% difference in the cable speed required to work the 2 different speedos, because the 2 different boxes (32GTSt and 32GTR) are not in any way related to each other.

Awesome, this was basically my train of thought however I didn't know enough to make any real conclusions. It's good to know that I should be able to rule out the diff/box.

I will see if I can get my hand on a GTS-T cluster, I'd rather a GTS-T cluster anyway, while the red and silver dials are nice, the "Front Torque" dial is useless and just makes the car seem "ricey".

When I get my hands on one I will post the results up here and let you know.

Cheers!

You need to do more research.

I'd say the drive pinion has the wrong tooth count, something for you to check.

You can't just buy any GTSt instrument cluster as there's at least 2-variations through the years.

You'll need to verify your model car and buy the one that suits.

25kph wrong is a biggie.

Are you sure the previous owner didn't remove the needles and replace them incorrectly. (the white faced dial syndrome)

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...