saliya

Who is your engineer in NSW? PM me if you don't want to post here. I have done the ring around and there's nobody I found that would test a variable exhaust at anything other than fully open. To the OP: it's super unlikely that you'll get done for 92dB vs 90dB. You can get that much variation from temperature and surroundings on the day (lower temp = louder; harder surroundings = louder). If you pass the d1ckhead test you could probably get away with 95dB Resist the temptation to tell Mr. Po Po to jam it, and you will avoid being in a world of hurt. Cheers, SW

You can (last time I tried) get all the bits for the box from Nissan and i_cant_remember_the_name_of_bearing_people_but_your_gearbox_rebuilder_will. However, the disassembly + gaskets + bearings + reassembly_assuming_no_broken_bits won't leave you much change from $1k. Cheers, SW

you've deleted the atmo BOV and the nonstandard fuel pressure and it's still stalling? Stock ECU and stock everything now? weird. had your AFMs checked?

Hey, Assuming your new FPR is working properly, sounds like your problem is too much fuel because of two things: Atmo BOV == too much fuel when it opens. This is what happens on an air-metered car when the air is dumped. Fuel pressure without vacuum should be 43psi for an R32 GTR (not 45) per p. EN-25 in the service manual. With vacuum it should be about 36psi at idle, but the BOV change may affect that. Try decreasing the base rail pressure to 43psi. Cheers, SW

The NSW WORKPLACE Surveillance Act 2005 ( http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/wsa2005245/ ) ??? It's directed at employers monitoring their employees, not the public monitoring the public. I hope he didn't "really" lose it - he could take it to a lawyer for a professional opinion. Who knows: the officer in question might learn some manners, and your mate could be one of those people that gets paid a handsome sum to shut up by NSW Police. And the more money this officer costs NSW Police, the less likely that they will remain employed. Win/win/win. Cheers, SW

As of 2006 truth became a complete defence: http://www.efa.org.au/Issues/Censor/defamation.html So it would be very hard for someone to win a defamation case based on the content of an unedited video. Cheers, SW

zomg. I'm sure I wrote an article about this awhile ago for a GTR: wait, here it is: http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/111401-bosch-044-intank-r32-gtr/page__hl__gtr+044 Basically: the 044 is fine in fuel (mine's still in the tank and going strong); fitting isn't unreasonably hard for the flow; but there are reasonably-priced drop in replacements like nismo or tomei available now that will get you close for similar money without all the fsck arsing around. If you are considering Walbro and high HP you should check its flow at your required rail pressures like 65+psi (i.e. 38psi rail + 27+ psi boost) because you might be unpleasantly surprised at the falloff. Cheers, SW

pfft to 500km+ per tank in an RB Nissan Best I've been able to do thus far closed-loop is 14L/100km (2630+). Of course, the PFC is fairly venerable tech these days and I'm fairly sure I've never managed to avoid the dreaded right foot at least once per trip. Still, beggars can't be choosers. It might be dragged from my Cold, Dead Hands but you can never be sure...

tmk they have the air bypass hardware but not the required ECU mapping. I can't imagine any manufacturer that offers warranty leaving this "feature" enabled. Cheers, SW

You are going to have to make the electrical joins at some point; while it's possible to disassemble the plug and connect the pins to the wires, you will probably get a better result from doing what you prefer not to (i.e. join where the breaks are with solder and heatshrink). Cheers, SW

SURE = 100%. You cannot be sure. Apart from replacing the entire system. But you can be reasonably sure. Flush lines and components with solvents, look at the outflow. Throw stuff that has small gaps (e.g. oil coolers), hope for the best. Cheers, SW

I still have the stock exhaust from my 93 v.spec; I had it measured when it was on and IIRC it was 87.something dB at 4800RPM. There's a massive difference in audible sound level between 88dB and 96dB - maybe your mufflers have packed it in? Was your test administered by the EPA or by the mechanic? If mechanic, visit another and get a test. Reason: * dB meters can go out of calibration (most exhaust places don't calibrate; the EPA is supposed to) * the test has to be administered a certain way (many exhaust places don't know the method, it's in the ADR) * there is a temperature correction (IIRC, for temps different to 25 degrees). It is very cold now; low temperatures == louder, most exhaust places won't correct. * there is a frequency weighting curve (don't know whether meters apply this automatically or not). Don't really know. I don't think that 94dB is what a stock 90 GTR came out at; but since I don't have one of those I can't tell. Since it's post 1989 (Motor Vehicle Standards Act) you'd think that it would have had to comply with whatever the emissions requirements were at the time. You need to find out which ADR your car needs to be compliant with. If it was Aust-delivered or imported pre-1992 that would probably be ADR28/00 (93dB max limit, 92dB stated but within 1dB is compliant, drive-by test). If 1992-2005 might be ADR28/01 (91dB max limit, similarly 90dB stated but within 1dB is compliant, stationary and drive-by tests) http://www.fordforums.com.au/vbportal/modules.php?name=Content&file=viewcategory&cid=18. has what looks to be the originals of many ADRs Cheers, SW

Hey, You don't want to go "toe to toe" anyway - just keep your mouth shut. Since you're not telling them they're being recorded, they won't be upset about it. If they see a camera and ask that it be shut off, politely ask them why and under what law they are making the request. They are law enforcement officers and if there is a genuine applicable law to enforce they should be able to tell you. And always try to pass the d1ckhead test - no need to make trouble for yourself If a police officer makes trouble, you want it to be perfectly clear that's what happened when you go visit their CO. Regards, Saliya

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/other/lawreform/VLRC/2010/18.pdf?stem=0&synonyms=0&query=right%20to%20privacy%20in%20public%20places - Victorian Law Reform Commission on Surveillance in Public Places (2010). "At present, no Australian jurisdiction has enacted a statutory cause of action for invasion of privacy, and no appellate court has acknowledged the existence of a common law tort of invasion of privacy." http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/taaa1979410/ - Telecommunications (Interception and access) Act. "(1) For the purposes of this Act, but subject to this section, interception of a communication passing over a telecommunications system consists of listening to or recording, by any means, such a communication in its passage over that telecommunications system without the knowledge of the person making the communication." This Act is the one stopping you from recording another party's telecommunication without their knowledge, is the cause of the "you are being recorded" messages when you're speaking to a call centre, and is the probable cause of the oft-repeated but mostly-wrong "you can't record someone without their permission". Cheers, SW

At present, there are no laws governing recording of data in a public place (a roadway, by definition, is a public place). The consensus seems to be that whatever you do in public, you should be willing to have recorded. There are laws that prevent image/audio recording where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g. your own home). The police inform you because things you say/do might be used in evidence, and there is the requirement that you are informed (basically because they have an unfair advantage). The reason that call centres inform is due to the Telecommunications Act 1997 - you are using a carrier service, and it's unlawful to record something carried by such a service without either a warrant, or informing the parties that they are being recorded. Outcome: As of now (2011); by law, you don't need to inform a police officer (or anyone else) that they're being recorded by your camera/phone/incar surveillance if you get pulled over and are recording them from your car. The police officers have no reasonable expectation of privacy when they are interacting with you. Regards, SW