Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

Just wondering if anyone knows if there’s a difference between the turbo and N/A gearboxes for R34’s? From my current understanding the gt’s have a tcu, where the gtt’s box is controlled through the ecu, is there any actual difference in the box? Also because theres a tcu does that open up your auto aftermarket ecu options?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/484895-r34-na-vs-turbo-automatic-gearbox/
Share on other sites

Yes the box is different. The auto shop that pulled both of them apart from me back in the day was surprised how different they were internally.

The pinout diagram for the TCU lines up with the pinout diagram for the GTT Ecu. It's not so much 'different' as much as it is integrated into the GTT ECU.

The only auto mod you make on a NA auto box is you take it out and leave it out. It will not stand up to any power, even if you build it.

Swapping to GTT gear is going to require extensive knowledge and study of the wiring diagrams. If you are paying someone to do this, it is not that feasible/cost effective.

There is a reason 100% of people go manual.

Don't want to go manual? Can't afford the conversion to go manual? Can't drive manual and don't want to learn? Sell the car.

This is the ballad of the NA Auto Skyline.

  • Like 1
2 hours ago, Kinkstaah said:

Yes the box is different. The auto shop that pulled both of them apart from me back in the day was surprised how different they were internally.

The pinout diagram for the TCU lines up with the pinout diagram for the GTT Ecu. It's not so much 'different' as much as it is integrated into the GTT ECU.

The only auto mod you make on a NA auto box is you take it out and leave it out. It will not stand up to any power, even if you build it.

Swapping to GTT gear is going to require extensive knowledge and study of the wiring diagrams. If you are paying someone to do this, it is not that feasible/cost effective.

There is a reason 100% of people go manual.

Don't want to go manual? Can't afford the conversion to go manual? Can't drive manual and don't want to learn? Sell the car.

This is the ballad of the NA Auto Skyline.

Yeah man, i’m planning on manual swapping, just wanted to make sure that i was happy with the decision 

37 minutes ago, Batchy186 said:

Yeah man, i’m planning on manual swapping, just wanted to make sure that i was happy with the decision 

Unless you're putting a wet clutch DCT or a ZF6HP or ZF8HP manual is the way to go. Automatics that don't have the lockup clutch running in all forward gears and modern shift logic are just really frustrating on something nominally meant to be high performance.

On 8/31/2023 at 10:46 AM, Batchy186 said:

Yeah man, i’m planning on manual swapping, just wanted to make sure that i was happy with the decision 

Nobody ever regrets it...

There's probably some merit to go off the deep end and end up with a BMW DCT or ZF8 as above, but it's not really a viable path forward unless you bought the car with this kind of knowledge in your head from previous car endeavors and had the skills, money, and patience to pull it off.

Given R34 N/A's are usually bought by young folks just buying their first performance car... this is statistically unlikely

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

    • 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. 
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...