Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

if u talking the differences between 32 eccs and the nics, then there are a few:

i wouldnt know them all, but as rhino said the turbo is the biggest change.

also the eccs has a much bigger plenum with a 6 intake port head, while the nics has a 12 port head.

eccs has a bov on the pipe just b4 the tb

eccs has bigger injectors

the throttle bodies seem different - the eccs having the cable on the opposite side to the nics

also different radiator hoses and a few other minor things...

comparing the 31 nics to the 31 eccs (still red top), there are less obvious changes - the main one being the bigger plenum combined with the old 12 port head.

to answer your question, the 32 eccs is much better in regards to tuning potential. it is a better base engine to start with - and also a/m parts are much more common.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/4819-nics-and-eccs/#findComment-74962
Share on other sites

Guest nismogtsx

Ive done a heap of research online as my sister in law can read japanese.. So anyway to the point.. The japs use the old Red top NICS in their more high-end performance cars....

As stated "top secret" used a NICS R31 red top in their record breaking R32 which ran an 8.92 over in japan.... A record that still stands today as the fastest RWD R32 in the world...

Its had the tomei 2.4litre treatment and every other thing under the sun... But yeah they chose this motor due to its larger water jacket.... and larger oil wells in the top half of the motor...

Making this motor cooler and smoother under high end treatment... Less likely to blow up as they put it...

Also the NICS 12 port manifold flows better than the 6 port ECCS... Proven fact.. However for mild performance say 200rwkw most will go fo the ECCS 6 port as it does improve the KW's but when you go highend (300rwkw) then they went back to the 12 port... Due to better flow at high turbo rpm...

So thats why i changed my ECCS for a NICS... I have improved the power on the NICS to the point where we were able to pull 230rwkw's from less than 8 grand....

My car is going in for some fairly major work in three weeks....

PLANS, Stroke to 2.4 (if parts are aviable)

Otherwise 2.2 (allready have parts)

5 speed R33 manual gearbox (R32 not strong enough)

Larger FMIC (going to 720x400x77)

Turbo is going to be rebuilt again, this time with a different front housing... Gonna use a VL turbo front housing (dont ask why, just am, gonna try something new...)

Thats about it... but we aim for 250rwkw all day everyday...

Hopeing to strike the 300rwkw for the first time....

That will then enter the Nissan record books as the most powerfull GTS-X in Australia....

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/4819-nics-and-eccs/#findComment-76196
Share on other sites

Guest nismogtsx

It has a red top RB20det motor NICS from an HR31

It has been stroked to 2.4 litres

Some form of custom turbo (does not say exactlly, just says that it is a twin cermaic bush turbo...) Id imagine its large..

Tomei internals.. ie. oversized pistons, cams, rods, crank, all internals anyway...

Custom 2 speed top shifting gearbox (from what i can imagine its similar to a modified powerglide....

Solid diff with mini tubs...

Anyway it dyno's at 560rwkw.....

Still is one of their shops cars.....

I will go to top secret one of these days.. When i get holidays i plan on traveling to Japan to see what i can bring back cheap....

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/4819-nics-and-eccs/#findComment-76461
Share on other sites

Guest nismogtsx

Which one...

No. 24

The one titled "The new chaser is out"

Also with 3 litre GTR combat ready....

Or

No. 25

The one titled "The secret is out, top secret GTR built in Australia"

With an Evo 7 double test

Cause i went down to the newagent and he said that NO.25 came in today... So you might be talking about No.24... Or are you talking about 25... Please let me know cause he wont let me read them so i need to buy it and i dont want two....

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/4819-nics-and-eccs/#findComment-79411
Share on other sites

HPI basicly say the NICS is infirior to the ECCS due to the 12 port head so there is probably confusion here to nismogtsx statements, but nismogtsx does state they are better over 300rwkw the problem being not many R31's are going near that, so the ECCS is the better engine to the average bear and even better the Silver top RB20det ECCS. But as HPI say dont dispear from simple changes you can get a descent showing from them...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/4819-nics-and-eccs/#findComment-79657
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


  • 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...