Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Ive got a 95 GTR and when the car squats I feel the car kick out in the rear.  Its not tires getting loose but rather a toe issue.  The car might just need to be aligned but when jacking the car up and shaking the wheel there is a very slight perceptible movement.  I am going to replace the rear tie rods but trying to figure out what I need to replace. 

Do I need to do just the ball joints or should I also do the outer and inner tie rods?  

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/485731-r33-hicas-refresh/
Share on other sites

If it is the HICAS that is loose, then it will be the outer ball joints on the tie rods, not the tie rods themselves that need to be replaced.

If I was having to do that job, I would be doing the next logical step and binning the entire HICAS shitstorm, which banishes those stupid ball joints and all the rest of the stupid HICAS along with it.

 

Well crap, I figured Id get that answer and I had thought for the electronic HICAS people would keep it.  I have a Z32 that I have removed it completely from.  Ill need to give it some more thought but you guys have set me on the right track.

8 hours ago, Team7 said:

and I had thought for the electronic HICAS people would keep it

The hydraulic part of the R/Z32 era HICAS is not the bad part. It's the brains of the operation that is the problem. Just not clever enough to do what it is supposed to do without trying to throw you off the road when you're driving above 7/10ths. And of course, the additional unnecessary wear points in the rear end.

40 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

The hydraulic part of the R/Z32 era HICAS is not the bad part. It's the brains of the operation that is the problem. Just not clever enough to do what it is supposed to do without trying to throw you off the road when you're driving above 7/10ths. And of course, the additional unnecessary wear points in the rear end.

So from what I have been reading it seems like if you eliminate the HICAS through either a block plate or other means it causes the steering to become heavy, somewhere between no power steering.  Has this been resolved outside of swapping in a different steering rack?  

It's not true.

The HICAS CU is the module that controls the assistance of the front rack (as well as doing what it does with the rear steer). The solution when ripping out all the HICAS stuff? Just leave the HICAS CU in place. It will still do the speed sensitive front steer assistance.

At least....it does on R32. I can't promise it will on R33. But I can't see why they would change the system that much - the brains are basically the same - it's just the rack changed to electric actuation.

On the R32, because my HICAS was faulty (aftermarket steering wheel had no position sensor, so the HICAS CU would go into a spaz state at >80 km/h and activate the isolation solenoid to the rear rack, which was not working properly and caused the rear rack to steer which caused me to need to wind in a half a turn of lock to keep the car on the road, which is just f**king stupid), I simply pulled one of the connectors out of the back of the HICAS CU. I can't remember any more if it was the smaller or larger connector, but whichever it was - the power steering remained normal and the HICAS stopped panicking and there was no HICAS light on the dash (because the light is fed from the connector I pulled out!). You have to leave one of the connectors and not the other. On the R32 that is. On an R33, it might instead be necessary to pull a wire or two out of a connector instead. You'd need to look at the wiring diagram to see.

Then, after driving like that for years I just swapped out the whole HICAS subframe for one that was non-HICAS, along with the non-HICAS toe control arms (which gets rid of the the tie rods and ball joints in favour of normal bushes - which are now steel spherical joints on my car), and deleted the hydraulic equipment and replaced the PS pump with an R34 one (which was easy because it was attached to the Neo that I put in the engine bay). 25 years after the first HICAS fault, it is still otherwise normal.

Edited by GTSBoy

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

    • Get an inspection camera up there. 
    • Yeah, but look at the margin in viscosity between the 40 and the 60 at 125°C. It is not very large. It is the difference between 7 and 11 cP. Compare that to the viscosity at only 90°C. The viscosity axis is logarithmic. The numbers at 90 are ~15 and ~35. That is about half for the 40 wt oil and <half for the 60. You give up viscosity EXPONENTIALLY as temperature rises. Literally. That is why I declare thicker oil to be a bandaid, and a brittle one at that. Keep the oil temperature under about 110°C and you should be better off.   Having said all of that, which remains true as a general principle, if you have indeed lost enough oil from the sump that the pump was seeing slightly aerated oil, then all bets are off. That would of course cause oil pressure to collapse. And 35 psi is a collapse given what you were doing to the engine. Especially if the oil was that hot and viscosity had also collapsed. And I would put money on rod or main bearings being the source of the any noise that registered as knock. Hydraulic lifters should be able to cope with the hotter oil and lower pressure enough to prvent too much high frequency noise, although I am willing to admit it could be the source.
    • Thanks for the reply mate. Well I really hope its a hose then not engine out job
    • But.... the reason I want to run a 60 weight is so at 125C it has the same viscosity as a 40 weight at 100C. That's the whole reason. If the viscosity changes that much to drop oil pressure from 73psi to 36psi then that's another reason I should be running an oil that mimics the 40 weight at 100C. I have datalogs from the dyno with the oil pressure hitting 73psi at full throttle/high RPM. At the dyno the oil temp was around 100-105C. The pump has a 70psi internal relief spring. It will never go/can't go above 70psi. The GM recommendation of 6psi per 1000rpm is well under that... The oil sensor for logging in LS's is at the valley plate at the back of  the block/rear of where the heads are near the firewall. It's also where the knock sensors are which are notable for 'false knock'. I'm hoping I just didn't have enough oil up top causing some chatter instead of rods being sad (big hopium/copium I know) LS's definitely heat up the oil more than RB's do, the stock vettes for example will hit 300F(150C) in a lap or two and happily track for years and years. This is the same oil cooler that I had when I was in RB land, being the Setrab 25 row oil cooler HEL thing. I did think about putting a fan in there to pull air out more, though I don't know if that will actually help in huge load situations with lots of speed. I think when I had the auto cooler. The leak is where the block runs to the oil cooler lines, the OEM/Dash oil pressure sender is connected at that junction and is what broke. I'm actually quite curious to see how much oil in total capacity is actually left in the engine. As it currently stands I'm waiting on that bush to adapt the sender to it. The sump is still full (?) of oil and the lines and accusump have been drained, but the filter and block are off. I suspect there's maybe less than 1/2 the total capacity there should be in there. I have noticed in the past that topping up oil has improved oil pressure, as reported by the dash sensor. This is all extremely sketchy hence wanting to get it sorted out lol.
×
×
  • Create New...