Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Slouch ??? SLOUCH !!

Gees , first ya call it a jaffey jalopy and now you say it's a slouch.:)

This is obviously a relative term cos it will still hose a 33gtst fat spec.

hehehe.

Told ya , put the std box in with K+N , no blowoff booooshhhh but no hot air either.

Cheers

( KISS )

Ken

PS Thats not actually a kiss mike , it's stands for keep it simple stupid.

PPS I didn't mean to say your stupid it's just a figure....... ohhh never mind:lol:

Fair call Ken - should've just asked you in the first place:uh-huh:

Can't live without the sound of the pods though - so I'm gonna have to do something about it:p

Thanks,

Mike.

BTW - I didn't literally mean slouch - still goes very well methinks:D

Just another satisfied customer at the end of the day;)

Hi guys, this what I did to make a master for my first CAI. I bought one from www.uniqueautosports.com.au. cost $95. I used it to make a carboard master and then sold it (looking brand new) for $80. Best $15 I ever spent.

Originally posted by turbomad

OK this is not a GTR but the principle is the same, built it from aluminium, powder coated it and also use a bit of 90mm PVC pipe to feed some cold air in from the lower bumper.

Nice job!

I was thinking of taking the air in near the bonnet like the factory airbox though - that way I don't need to poke any extra holes.

i used to have one but i got a pair of Z32's and different sized pods so the one i have now is good for paperweight. when i finally get my piping sorted, i'll try again. meggala sez you can get some stuff from clarke rubber. i had a look at that stuff and its quite ok... so durable flexible stuff with an aluminium side... other than that, i may just use some left over aluminium i got and make another from that... other stuff i was considering is maybe modify the std airbox so it looks stock.... etc..

damn its hard! at the end of it all, it just got too messy... sure it was partitioned off but it looked unfinished... it looks like you sandwiched the partition with the adapter and the afm? what size is it turbomad? looks nice and neat!

Yes the AFM is held to the partition by the adapter, the length is basically the entire distance from the strut tower to the front of the car and the width was determined by where the AFM ended off the intake pipe/rubber hose thing.

hey mike,

I got a meter of that heat sheild foam from clark rubber, it would be easy to cut to fit the area and you could then use it as a template for a metal one after. In the mean time it would do the job very well indeed. about $23 a meter.

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...