Ben D

Anyone who wants to make serious horsepower needs a serious fuel system. The Weldon 2345A is about as serious an electric fuel pump you can get, it flows 230 gph at 45 psi (thats 14.5 L/min) and 210gph (13.3 L/min) at 80 psi fuel pressure at 14 volts, enough to support 2000 hp on gasoline and 1000 hp on methanol. I have one of these which is only 3 meetings old (build date 27 Feb 2006), its as new, but I want to sell as I'm upgrading to an even larger mechanical pump. This is what it looks like Cost new is around $1800 AUD retail, will sell for $1450 ono. You'll also need a pretty big fuel pressure regulator to control that puppy. I have the big magnafuel MP9950 twin port EFI regulator with adjustable fuel pressure (currently set at 50psi) , 1:1 boost compensation and it will control one or two fuel rails, complete with 2 x -6 AN port fittings . Price new over $300 AUD (with fittings), will sell for $250 AUD ono. This is what it looks like: more info on these parts at http://www.weldonracing.com/product.phtml?...and_-10_outlet) http://www.magnumforceracing.com/magnaflow...lregulators.asp anyone interested please PM me or e-mail [email protected]. The parts are in Brisbane

FOR SALE. Nissan S12 RSX, genuine factory fitted FJ20 Turbo, 1984, Japan only model. Has run best quarter mile 9.12 @ 154 MPH (Fastest S12 in world) with 1.33 to 60 ft. Factory IRS with shimmed mechanical R200 LSD, custom 40 spline 4340 stub axles, 300ZX half shafts, carbon fibre 3.5 inch driveshaft (brand new, 0 runs), RB25 DET 5 speed manual gearbox, (excellent condition with 5 runs only), carbon fibre bonnet (3kg), 40 litre fuel cell, 26 x 11.5 x 16 ET streets, weld front runners, genuine 240 kmh speedo, mild steel cage and current ANDRA tech expires Sept 2008. Spares include steel RSX bonnet, electric window motors, 2 supra turbo wheels, front radial tyres (185/65R15, new), and set of rear trailing arms from 200ZR with 12 inch vented discs. Can sell with custom single axle braked car trailer (rego until 12 2007) but will sell less engine, fuel system and ECU. Car is unregistered but easily registerable (has all glass etc.) Reason for sale: Making room for new drag project. Price. $8000 for car, extra $1000 for trailer. Add your own FJ20T to make a very fast toy for road, circuit or drags. Phone Ben on (07) 34088443, 0403773592 or [email protected]. Car is in Brisbane, Australia.

This seems to imply that a lack of power would be the issue if the heat treatments car was tuned on petrol. I do not think this would be the case. The formula one cars of the 80s were restricted to petrol too but still were able to run upwards of 60 psi boost on petrols with high toluene percentages. On the other hand, the HKS car does not comply with the safety rules required of ANDRA/NZDRA - from memory it only had a bolt in roll cage and a non OEM firewall, amongst lots of other things which required special dispensation for it to race in Australia. It would be quite a bit lighter than the heat treatments car because of this. The HKS racing fuel it ran would also not be legal for ANDRA/NZDRA sanctioned events. My guess is they would have brewed special toluene rich fuels to use in that car whenever it ran. So indeed the playing field is not level, but in my opinion it is slanted in favour of the japanese car which does not have to meet the stringent fuel and safety regulations required here (or in the US for that matter). That is why the efforts of the heat treatments team are even more impressive, and why my guess is you'll never see the HKS car run outside Japan other than for exibition events, as its simply not legal for sanctioned drag racing in most countries. Another way of thinking is "bugger the rules" - the record we are talking about is fastest 4WD on the planet over the quarter mile, there are no real rules except for the need to meet the relevant safety regulations of the sanctioning bodies which run the tracks...... In any case, at this level of tune, power is not the issue, theres usually plenty of that available, its getting the car down the track which is the hard part, which dictates that track conditions and the tuning skills of the team are the most important variables. My information suggests that the boost levels used in the heat treatments car are still relatively low, so since its eligible to race a sanctioned drag racing tracks , it will tend to have better track conditions to play with as they grapple with the power, so I reckon the HKS people (while not necessarily being "scared"), have lost the crown of fastest 4WD on the planet, and probably will find it very hard to get it back, if they try at all.

I'll just borrow a set of 255/50/R16s and see how they go. Haven't run radials at the drags for a while, but used them on the street in NZ. I expect to have to kill the launch a bit, but thats fine as it was dragging its bumper on the ground last time out.

Its clear that those people who think willowbank has crap facilities have not raced in New Zealand. Speaking of NZ, I expect 7.50s from Reece McGregors heat treatments skyline. Isn't that enough for most dyed in the wool skyline fans to look forward to ? I will be strapping a set of radials on my car and a hood lining and running SRWD.

Man SKA, 96 km on the E - light, thats nerves of steel. I fill mine back up once it gets there and we've never put more than 58 litres in the thing, ever.

yes, they are pretty bad on city driving, can only get around 450-470 k a tank with stop start stuff (12.3 -12.8 L/100), but 9.95 L/100 out of a tank on the highway I'm very happy with. Its like a "normal" car, but with all the prestige that comes with a Stag. PS tyre pressures are 42 psi all round too - heavy beasts benefit from more pressure for both handling and economy.

No, it has door trims, just alloy ones, not OEM. Must be when you take the headlining out when you add the rollcage. All that extra 2 kg of weight in the roof must be what does it, though I thought that the metal in the cage would off set that somewhat.... Might be the tyre pressure difference between fronts and backs then ? I never run really low tyre pressures (less than 15 psi) so maybe thats it.

I've had the DFA in the car for a year now, and it still pops when you pull back into second gear on the overrun (that is probably the 3 inch exhaust working there). In any case, just reporting in that I got to drive the thing (an old series 1 stag with auto) for a full tank on the highway, down to the goldcoast and back, then up to the sunshine coast and back to Brisbane, then back up to Bribie last week. With the mods as mentioned in post 58 of this thread, it went 583 km before the light went on. When I filled it back up, it took 58 Litres of BP ultimate. Result ! thats 9.95 L per 100 km. whohoooo, into the 9's ! The thing is tuned lean at cruise (15.5: 1 air fuel ratio) using the DFA and a wide band O2 sensor, no need to take it to a dyno shop for the tune, with the wide band in the car, you tune it as you drive. I know its supposed to cruise at 14.7: 1 in closed loop, but there must be a limit to the amount of trim the computer pulls back into the cruise mixture over time, so if you monitor the fuel ratios every month or so with the wide band, you can see at the start the computer tries to put fuel back in, but after pulling fuel out again the second or third time, the computer must run out of trim in the cruise load zones, thus I can happily cruise at 15.5 to even 16:1 and get an additional 8-10% fuel economy. It is a little doughy at cruise, but the additional ignition advance which comes in at the same time when tuning with the DFA helps there. The clincher has been the revised valve body in the auto, which helps it hold onto the lockup on the converter longer, and also the fact that it seems to get 5- 8% better fuel economy when running on BP ultimate compared when it runs on optimax. Dunno why, obviously ultimate is a different fuel composition, but it certainly gets better mileage on BP ultimate. Anyways boys, try to beat that on the highway and get yours into the 9's.....

BTW, I've run quite a few 9 sec passes at around 145 mph using a crossply rear and radial front, and never had a problem - its legal to do so in NZ, where the tracks are dodgy (being polite, some are downright crap). Ovrer in Australia, I was forced by the rules to run front runners, and have noticed absolutely SFA difference in the ride stability compared to the radial front/crossply rears. My theory is with the independent rear suspension, stability in the big end is much better than something with a live axle. Ben D S12 Gazelle RSX, 9.38 and 153.9 mph, 1.33 to 60 ft, stock IRS and 5 speed manual

I'd suggest the quickest GTS-T award might be closer to this mark http://www.dragtimes.com/Nissan-Skyline-Timeslip-8760.html 8.625 @ 161, 1.39 to 60 ft, half track 5.58 at 130 mph, maintaining the IRS with a powerglide , a shot of gas and a RB26 all cheating when you go to the auto and add gas.... Just jokin.. Good on ya Hiroki Matsumoto

Check out post 58 of this thread - that is what I've done to get consistent 10/11 L/100km out of our old series 1 stagea with the auto. Sounds like the from what SKA is saying, manual is good for an additional 5% economy, at least. Sell those shares in BP and start investing in some more bits ! I'd do the Jaycar DFA first, (its only $70 odd bucks) then go from there.

I have had both in my car (S12 gazelle) and the RB20 DET box was fine for drag racing up to around 500 wheel HP, when the output shaft broke. This was the weakest link in my experience, as its the same diameter as all the early series gearboxes, while I note the RB25 box I have now has a much larger output shaft. The input shafts on either box seem to be strong enough in my opinion (the car 60 fts in 1.33 sec, so its not like i'm taking it easy), but you can break anything if you abuse it for long enough or are determined to break it. I have had no troubles with the RB25 box down to low 9 sec passes with 730 wheel HP, until the last meet where the ignition interrupt for the flat change was switched off, I was trying to flat change with the limiter set at 8500 rpm, and hence damaged the synchro on the 3rd to 4th shift. The car was still driveable, but the 3 little springs fell out of the 3/4 synchro assembly and got munched up - I'm now looking for replacements for them (they're hard to find - can anyone help me with locating a new set of these little buggers ?). Ben

One thing to keep in mind looking at this thread, is we've got at least two types of stageas being compared - series 1 versions (which I have) and series 2 versions (neo engine?) , then also possibly some later model ones with the VQ series engine ? If there are people comparing fuel consumption of the VQ series engine with the RB, I reckon the VQ will win hands down, as anyone who has owned a Maxima will attest, they are fantastic engines and very efficient. Unfortunately, I have an early model, series 1 stagea, and was initially appalled at the fuel economy of the stock vehicle. Now after 18 months or so of ownership, we're consistently getting 520 to 540 km out of a tank (55-58 L fill). Mostly commuting, and running around in short to medium trips, rarely in peak hour traffic. If you want to know what I put this down to, it includes (in order of merit) Jaycar Digital fuel adjuster -- don't leave home without it, worth about 10% improvement Revised valve body for the auto from the guys in Adelaide, worth about a 10% improvement I reckon behaviour - light foot and drive around with converter locked up in overdrive as much as possible 3 inch free flow exhaust and K&N panel filter - let her breathe Iridium spark plugs - they extend the lean misfire limit allowing me to tune the DFA leaner at cruise. keep tyre pressures above 35 psi (heavy car) These are the mods that have got us from the original 15-17 L/100 km when we bought the car, to the now manageable and repeatable 10 - 11 L/100 km. In fact, we now get the same fuel economy towing my gazelle and trailer (total 1500 kg) than we did with the original stock car in an unladen state ! Not bad for a series 1 RS4 auto....... In fact, I haven't been on a long run since the valve body upgrade in the auto, which has made such a dramatic improvement in performance and economy, that I reckon next time we go for a long drive, a high 9 L per 100 km will be on the cards for sure.

Looks like this news may have escaped this forum, forgive me if it has turned up in another post and I didn't see it, but heres a video I found of Reece McGregors last pass of the season in NZ, run around a month or so ago in Auckland, which went 7.81 @ 177 mph. http://www.kiwidragracing.com/multimedia/0...cGregor_781.mpg A nice clean run, still time to be made here and there, but it sounds nice. I heard that a tune up from Speedtechs Andre Simon had something to do with the additional power. Not surprising when you consider that Andre has an 4G63 powered EVO lancer which has run 8.23 and 179.5 mph. My guess is that if Speedtech is now onboard, the HKS cars' record will be claimed sometime next year, and that record for worlds fastest 4WD will go to NZ. Who would bet against it ?? Ben D

Did my belt recently at 98,000 KM. Checked ignition timing before I took everything apart, the timing was around 20 degrees BTDC at 700 rpm (as SK said, probably the factory setting for the auto). Did the belt (took out radiator and starter motor, used a stop on the flexplate ring gear so I could loosen the front crank pulley with hand tools (no rattle guns here and used a bearing puller to get the pulley off). All the bearings, tensioners etc were perfect, as was water pump, just put the new belt in (kept the stock cam gears), tied everything back up, and reset the timing with an additional 2 degrees advance (22 BTDC at 700 rpm). The car has picked up response, midrange power and also fuel economy. I put it down to the slightly increased valve overlap going back to a new cam belt (even with stock cam wheels), and the extra couple of degrees ignition advance, which I can run together with a jaycar fuel adjuster because I run this puppy on 98 RON and only at 8 psi boost. Last tank, got 450 km from 47 L (still 1/4 tank left), thats 10.4 km/L. Better than buying shares in BP or mobil. Moral: for stageas with >85 K km, do your cambelt and pick up the hidden performance benefits !

SK - great thread, especially interesting for someone who's stagea is approaching 94,000 k's. One thing, doesnt retarding the exhaust cam increase valve overlap ? I usually advance the exhaust cam if I want reduced overlap (without affecting midrange as much as retarding the inlet), such as when you're approaching the choke flow limit of the turbine and exhaust gas pressure exceeds boost pressure. In a 4 stroke IC motor, the first valve to open after TDC is the exhaust, followed by the inlet, so if the exhaust valve timing is retarded, this must increase overlap unless the inlet is retarded too. Hi Rob, by retarding the exhaust camshaft timing I am aiming for more mid range, but I can get a bit of top end as well. There is also some faster spooling to gained as well. What it achieves is more complete combustion, before the exhaust valves open. Plus you get slightly higher combustion pressure, for more torque. You don't get something for nothing though, it also means you get less overlap, the inlet valve isn't open at the same time as the exhaust valve for as long. This means the incoming inlet charge (air and fuel) doesn't help push the exhaust out. This is why it works well with a bit of extra boost (above standard) as that offsets the shorter "push" time. It's not quite a win/win, but there isn't much downside:cheers: <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

To align a twin plate you can get away with using one from virtually any nissan car powered by L series, Z series, RB series, FJ 20 engines - they all appear to be the same spline except for some of the aftermarket input shafts you can buy for GTR's for hollinger gearboxes. Personally I use an old L series input shaft to align my twin plates for both FJ and RB series gearboxes. Have a look for some old 180 bs, 200bs or blobirds - they'll be the cheapest.

Yes, I ran around for a few days with the wideband on (I had another O2 sensor boss welded onto the split dump so I could run the stock O2 sensor as well as the wide band). With the DFA switched off it indeed runs at closed loop at cruise and idle, but runs rich on boost (as rich as 10.5:1) and also during throttle transients. With the DFA switched on (with its output running through the diode, remember, before it enters the ECU) it leans it off at cruise and idle, right through the rev range in fact. I can get a stable cruise at 16:1 and , would you believe, a stable idle too at that A/F ratio (once the stepper motor catches up), it begins to run rough at idle around 17: 1. A testimony to the combustion chamber design I think. Set up like this, you need to switch off the DFA for cold starts (and briefly for hot starts too). I placed the switch on one of those blank inserts on the dash to the right of the steering wheel, so its near the keys and hence easy to switch on and off as required during cold or hot starts. My guess is that the ECU can only trim so much fuel in or out to achieve stochiometric at closed loop. I'm not making any of this up, I simply tuned as I always do, determined a baseline, gathered appropriate data using a reliable tool (a calibrated wide band O2) , then modified A/F ratios to suit the tuning aim at hand using the DFA. I was pleasantly surprised to see how much control the DFA gave me over fuelling set up as I have it. If you have access to a wide band and put an extra O2 boss in your dump pipe it might be worth checking what you car is doing on the road with the DFA - you might be surprised as if you got near 500 km out of a tank, you might be leaner than 14.7:1 at cruise too. If we can replicate this on another car, it may well be information worth having, though I'm sure some people won't want to revert to a manual "choke" switch on their stagea, even if turning the choke off gives them 20 hp.....

sorry, its a 1997 RS4, I guess series 1

Sorry for the delay in replying - for some reason I forgot to hit the notify of reply button. If you have the jaycar unit switched so you can turn it on and off, you can run leaner at idle and cruise because it needs less fuel when it is warm. I run the normal ECU programme when it is a cold or hot start, then switch over to the jaycar unit after a minute or so on a hot start, or after the temp gauge reads 1/4 of operating temperature for a hot start. Essentially, I use the stock ECU now only as a choke (they do tend to run like they have the choke on, don't they...) Chances are my fuel settings once the car is warmed up are leaner than, say, Sydneykid is using at idle and cruise, thus the additional fuel savings, though it seemed to like the exhaust too ... You get a 3 way on/off toggle switch and run the signal wire which comes from the airflow meter to the middle pole of the switch. On one side of the switch run the wire to the Jaycar unit (for this example, a blue coloured wire). On the remaining side of the switch run the wire back to the ECU input (for this example, a green coloured wire). This gives you the ability to bypass the jaycar unit when you want (ie. on a cold or hot start)... However of course the output from the jaycar unit (lets say this wire is red) also has to connect to the ECU input. The jaycar output must splice into the green coloured wire and thats where you get your backfeed and that is why you need a diode in the red wire (signal output from the jaycar unit) before it gets spliced back into the green wire (ECU input). There is around 0.5 V drop through a diode, so if you've already leaned it out using the jaycar unit, you'll have to put some fuel back in to compensate for the diode. Its worth the effort though with the extra fuel saving at idle and cruise, where you can go leaner than 14.7:1 A/F ratio without hurting the motor. With more stop start around town driving on the next tank, we got "only" 520 km out of 57 L, still 10.9L/100 km. The main problem no matter what we do is these things weigh a tonne and accelerating that mass uses fuel.

Ok, not really into the 10 sec bracket, but solidly into the 10L/100 km zone, a worthy goal for all stagea owners. Here's the data from my trip to willowbank a couple of weeks ago. Fill up with 98 octane then drive to track, do 4 passes for best of 15.19 at 91.1 mph, then drive home again (sunshine coast), a few days tootling around town then down to Brisbane again, fill up with 57 litres, travelled 533 km. Thats 10.69 L/100 km. The car shows around 175 awkw on the 91.1 mph pass, given it weighs 1800 kg with me and the tow bar. 60fts piss poor 2.3 sec due to auto, the thing would run 14's if it were manual. Couldnt stall it up any more as it would drag you through the lights. Mods, jaycar digital fuel adjuster, K&N panel filter in stock airbox, aquarium bleed valve and 8 psi boost (spikes to 10 psi on gear changes), split dump, high flow cat and 3 inch mild steel exhaust. Tuned A/F ratios on the road using a wide band. It cruises happily at 15.5:1 AF ratio and I have 12.5: 1 on boost until around 5800 rpm, after which it richens up into the 11.5:1 area. Total cost of mods approx $700 (got the 3" cat back exhaust cheap off Lone). I rigged up the digital fuel adjuster so I can turn it on and off while driving , which requires inserting a diode into the output signal line to stop the ECU getting feedback when the DFA is turned off. Did one run with the DFA turned off at the drags for a 15.8 at 88 mph. My calcs suggest the Jaycar unit improves fuel economy around 12% and gives 20 hp (approx + 9% ) at the wheels. Neat stuff

I have a stagea series 1 RS4 and last time I was in New Zealand I made a point of having a drive of a Legnum VR4, for comparative purposes. Both cars were autos and both were stock, so the comparison is valid. The legnum made the stagea feel like a slug, handled better and in all honesty would be really worth seriously considering if you're in the market for a stagea. Problem is, for those living in Australia, sounds like compliance may be a bit far away. The tune up potential of the stagea is obvious, probably more potential than the legnum, but one thing must be said about particularly the series 1 stageas (I have a 1997 model), is they certainly need a tuneup to keep up with a stock legnum VR4. There are certainly heaps of Legnum VR4s over in NZ, I dropped into 2 Auckland car dealers to test drive one and saw 8 of them... Hopefully the later model stageas are better , because they were certainly behind the 8 ball against the mitsubishi product with the earlier model stageas.

Umm, yep, pretty much exactly the same thread. Sorry about that, but I contend time to stick up some exhaust details in the parts section ? Bolt on R33/34GTS-T downpipe to cat, cat back exhaust is Stagea specific, but some bolt on kits available from HKS etc.. If you get the lot done for under $1 K in mild steel and $1200 in stainless you're doing very well. That seems to sum it up.