Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

On 03/04/2024 at 9:29 AM, NINJA GTR said:

 

Thanks for the response here.

Would getting a blow off valve (HKS SSQ) and recirculating it fix this issue?

yes, I think you want somebody to say yes to buy them ill be that guy - click buy it now, now.

On 03/04/2024 at 9:07 AM, NINJA GTR said:

If I'm cruising uphill

Our engines don't like being below 2,000rpm. So downshift and keep the revs above 3,000rpm (where you have positive boost). Need to adjust your driving style a little compared to say 3800 EcoTech Buick/Holden engine ;)

16 hours ago, niZmO_Man said:

Our engines don't like being below 2,000rpm

Hmm. Something to be said for having a Neo25 in a lighter R32. 1500-2000rpm is a fine place to be. Will pull away from 1000rpm in 5th with judicious use of the throttle.

What the blowoff valve’s are doing is completely normal only change them if you want to throw away some money 

-7s are a great bolt on option and with a good exhaust, cams and fuel system on e85 makes for a very fun car 

  • Like 1
On 4/4/2024 at 4:18 AM, joshuaho96 said:

Let's just skip the middleman here and convince BMW to make a mirrored version of their B58 that is somehow direct fit for RB applications.

Ye, Toyota finally settled by the 2JZ vs RB25/26 feud by having BMW run in with a steel chair :p

  • Haha 1
On 06/04/2024 at 2:10 PM, GTSBoy said:

Hmm. Something to be said for having a Neo25 in a lighter R32. 1500-2000rpm is a fine place to be. Will pull away from 1000rpm in 5th with judicious use of the throttle.

I miss my old stock R32 GTS-t, but I tell you, the full factory RB20DET silvertop (including exhaust) was a bit of a struggle until you want past 2,000rpm (coming from an Aus-del R31 with RB30E).

With my GT-R, anything below 2,000rpm is a clutch-in scenario.
With my limited experience with NEO6, I can say anything below 2,000 rpm is a struggle (seems to be a common theme with turbo engines).

Even with my BMW B48 (F45 FWD 2-series hatch), anything below 1,500rpm is a struggle, so keep those revs up!

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...