Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So they have been kicking around for a year or two in some cars and looks like a few of us have taken the plunge and made a purchase so just wondering what information is out there.

6 speed sequential that fits inside the standard GTR 5 speed case and bolts straight in. Got a nice load cell and rotary position sensor so you can set up closed loop flat shifts with a decent ECU. Gear ratios seems very sensible and friendly at 2.706 / 1.894 / 1.471 / 1.184 / 1.000 / 0.812 but have no options. Big 26-spline input shaft so requires a new clutch and rated at over 1000hp. Fair bit cheaper than a Holinger (with all the extras you need), Albins (which needs to have floor cut) and around the same price as an OS88 but with a lot more tech.

Seems they have run into a few issues along the way but have been quickly fixed under warranty and new versions have been introduced to fix. Claims of 38ms shifts (probably more like 50ms) is still crazy fast if set up correctly.

Who is running one? How easy was the ECU set up for flat shift? Anyone keen to share some experience or settings?

ppg%20sequential.JPG

 

Edited by SimonR32
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/473151-ppg-6-speed-sequential-for-gtr/
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Griffin said:

How much are they? ( I've heard the saying re if you need to ask you can't afford).

How user friendly street wise are they?

All said and done (if you get them to assemble it which was $1,700 alone), it’s about $23,500. That includes supplying your own case, shipping from SA to Sydney.

Not cheap by any means.

  • Confused 1
1 hour ago, sneakey pete said:

Is that a drive away price?
eg clutch, wiring tuning ecu around it etc? Or just the cost of a completed box?

No clutch.

No installation.

No tuning.

You get that.

0E157731-7EBC-4C10-B668-B13633D9B34B.jpeg

20 hours ago, Piggaz said:

All said and done (if you get them to assemble it which was $1,700 alone), it’s about $23,500. That includes supplying your own case, shipping from SA to Sydney.

Not cheap by any means.

I swear they have just jumped in price on High-Octane website?

 

9 minutes ago, SimonR32 said:

I swear they have just jumped in price on High-Octane website?

 

I bought mine when they dropped the price to $19,800. That doesn’t include the housing, shipping or assembly. It has gone back upto the “normal” price again.

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...

So they definitely (in my case anyway) don't bolt straight into stock housing. There is 3 places that need clearancing, 2 for the selector forks and 1 for 6th gear. In saying that, a die grinder and flapper wheel makes it reasonably easy and not too time consuming.

20180128_120341.jpg

20180128_120332.jpg

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

For some info on setup you could try b2r motorsports in Ingleburn nsw, they have a fairly big build r32gtr with the ppg in it. Set up very nicely with a link ecu. they ve spent a lot of time getting it right. And it works very well. B2R Motorsports fb page has some videos of it.

  • 4 weeks 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...