joshuaho96

R34 factory service manual or the 350Z factory service manual contains all the torque specs for the caliper. Front caliper mounting bolts are 110 ft-lbs, rear caliper to the upright is a much wider range but they say to target about 40-50 ft-lbs. It's ballpark because you can't get a socket on the back, torque adapters exist but it's going to be an interesting problem to fit an adapter + torque wrench in there. Personally I just tapped the rear bolt with a dead blow lightly until it seemed like it was tight, but not stretching the bolt. I'm a weakling so it's pretty hard for me to stretch/break bolts unless the torque spec is in the sub 3 kg-m region. I could barely even get the front caliper bolts to 100 ft-lbs before I called it a day.

What is even the point of the logo? IMO the Autech/unlabeled 300 kph cluster that was used in the Nurburgring test cars is the way to go IMO. Personally I'm probably just going to take my cluster and change the resistor calibration on the speedo to read 180 mph instead of kph if I end up not memorizing all the kph/mph conversions over time.

Can't imagine you'd have a problem with capping the hydraulic output line on the actuator block for the A-LSD as long as the solenoid isn't trying to actuate and send a bunch of pressure through the line to test just how leak-proof the threads on your blanking cap really is. I get the impression that the pump is a common pressure source for both the diff and the transfercase so I presume the solenoid is what controls how much pressure the diff/transfer actually sees.

You have to make sure to emphasize old Nismo logo to get that 2500, otherwise nobody cares it seems.

If it helps here's a wiring diagram, it is from an R33 but I'm pretty sure this would be conserved across those two generations, no real reason to change things dramatically: There is some kind of PCB track system that prevents the motor from being powered in one direction once fully extended/folded but it can be powered the other way around. The top two motors are for actual mirror adjustment, the bottom 4/5 pin are for storage. You apply 12V to 4 and 0V to 5 to get the mirror to go one direction, then 12V to 5 and 0V to pin 4 to go the other way. I would try doing this with a bench power supply, preferably with overcurrent protection and all that fun stuff to reduce the risk of blowing something up. If it folds and opens up properly see if the harness is signaling voltage properly. If it sees voltage and the mirror seems to be fine then I dunno life gets complicated at that point, you have some issue pulling voltage too low to operate in one direction while it works fine in another. Maybe the mirror motor has a bad bushing causing the windings to contact the case in one direction but not the other? Something strange like that.

With a standard brushed fuel pump there's no controller needed, once you transition to a standalone you just do what @Dose Pipe Sutututu described, a relay controlling the connection to ground driven by a digital output on the Link. This approach unlike the stock dropping resistor doesn't run into issues with high flow fuel pumps getting unhappy when driven at low voltages.

Right, the actual answer is don't bother with the stock ECU and just use a standalone to drive the PWM. Brushless fuel pumps mandate and come with a motor controller.

I don't think the fuel heating issue is quite as big a problem as it is on stuff like the R35 because the transmission is up front, in the R35s it is actually bad enough with some fuel pumps to cause fuel to boil at the pump inlet which almost immediately causes cavitation and fuel pressure loss. So in that situation you absolutely want to avoid running higher duty cycle than necessary. Deatschwerks makes a fuel pump controller that takes a PWM signal, all I'd need to get it to run on the stock ECU is yet another microcontroller sitting between the stock ECU fuel pump signal that translates the digital signal from the ECU into a PWM signal going into the fuel pump controller. Or I'd have to take apart their 2 speed controller, look for another digital input that could be used, and somehow figure out how to rewrite the code to be able to specify arbitrary duty cycles for "full speed", "medium speed", and "low speed".

Make sure the FPR you buy can actually return a ton of fuel if you plan on running it with the stock ECU, otherwise you are going to seriously overfuel as the fuel pressure will overshoot. Or you will have to come up with some kind of alternate solution to replace the stock FPCM to slow down the pumps at low RPM. You don't actually want to have too much fuel flowing on the return line, it heats up the fuel and eats away at reserve amps on your alternator. You could also cavitate the pump running the tank low much more easily. Only pulling 40A for a short period at WOT is a very different thing compared to pulling 40A all the time just to run your fuel pumps. I've also heard that the stock fuel rail actually flows just fine for big power, so you may want to think about how necessary that really is. I've been agonizing over something similar on my R33 and I think my conclusion is to run a 5 bar FPR on a DW440 brushless fuel pump to get just enough flow to max out my dinky little twin turbos. The hard part is the controller, I don't really see any simple drop-in replacement that can use the OEM ECU fuel pump signals to set an appropriate fuel pump duty cycle. It really shouldn't be that complicated, just 3 speeds instead of the 2 speed variants I've seen and some method of programming the desired duty cycle for each speed.

Isn’t there a speedo calibration resistor network on the back of the gauge cluster? Or is it more complicated than the R33 in that regard?

98 RON is 93 AKI, roughly speaking.

In this video at 1:45 Skaife mentions that the engines ran 1.8 or 1.9 bar and roughly 650-700 hp for max attack, probably qualifying. For the actual race 1.2 or 1.3 bar, roughly 600 hp: Modern technology helps but at the end of the day people have mentioned that the RB26 starts flexing in ways that are not conducive for longevity around the 700-800 crank hp mark even with a dry sump to 100% fix any oiling concerns. You can use block braces and all that fun stuff to keep pushing the limits but strictly speaking about what Nissan engineers designed the RB26 block to do it sounds a lot like 600 hp for group A with a 1.2x safety factor to me, with additional derate depending upon how long you want to go between rebuilds. To me 600 hp is a lot, especially from a dinky little 2.6-2.8L engine but you might not agree. Even with 2.8L that would be on par with stuff like the A45S AMG which has the highest specific output engine in a production car today.

The group A RB26 motors supposedly only ran max attack 700 hp in qualifying and dropped boost to get closer to 600 to actually survive the race. Those are engines that only have to survive one race before getting completely rebuilt. Nissan claims the Zexel group A R32 GT-R that did the 24 hours of Spa was running 550PS. So ballpark that's what the block was "designed" for. 540 horsepower or so for 24 hours of racing before rebuilding the whole thing, with everything around the block up to spec for 24 hours of endurance racing as well. Personally I don't want to blow up an RB considering the cost of parts these days so it's easier to just keep power goals conservative and focus on reliability/driveability but some people just want to make these engines go further so the parts are out there to make it happen. Big power builds may not last very long but they can work, if they didn't you wouldn't see 6/7 second RB powered GT-Rs.

A lot of modern cars won't even warm up if you idle them in many conditions, Honda's 1.5T is rather notorious for this.

If it's a street car you probably want poly bushes instead of the rose joint/spherical bushings. not sure if the R33s have the protection mode but you likely need to fool the HICAS system into thinking all is well in addition to locking out the HICAS so you don't get weird behavior in the power steering.

https://youtu.be/4d3nrBZjYKA?t=478 Splitfires were tested and seem to be all over the map there, but it's hard to say if the reason why the used RB25 coil was so bad was because it was old or not. Personally I've always been skeptical of going aftermarket for these kinds of parts, I bet the OEM coilpacks will end up comparable to a Splitfire in VQ applications.

I haven't been able to actually run the Haltech on a live engine yet so I don't really know if this makes any sense, but is there a more sensible way to do transient fueling instead of the enrich amount table being purely TPS-based? That seems like a very brittle solution compared to stuff like MAP prediction/X-Tau in Adaptronic's ECUs. Not sure if the non-linearity in the MAP signal correlates with actual non-linearity in transient fueling though, I get the impression the answer is maybe not. I saw that the axis selection allows for the enrich table to be MAF load vs TPS-derivative, I'm just not sure if that actually makes any sense. I learned recently that G&K is actually not a monopoly, the one other CA certified grey market emissions lab is J.K. Technologies in Baltimore, Maryland on the other side of the country. I have no idea why they're the only other one, but at some point in the past there was also NCDL which I believe worked with Canepa to get some 959s CA legal back in the day, but for whatever reason their certification lapsed and they can't do that work anymore. But yes, they're generally pretty unpleasant to work with and you need to be on guard with them. Document your car thoroughly before you drop it off, make sure the car is prepped as much as possible to reduce the time it spends there to the absolute minimum, document the car once you pick it up, etc. Personally I want to try and see if I can just send them the parts they need to modify for emissions compliance, then do the R&R with a mechanic of my choice to reduce risk further. The coating is actually a pretty thick film of thermoplastic urethane to try and prevent rock chips from destroying Garage Yoshida's work respraying the car. I suspect the adhesives and whatever they put on the TPU to keep it from yellowing is what's causing the smell. You may pass as-is, kind of hard to say at the moment. I would log the O2 voltage via consult and see if the engine is staying stoich where it matters, that will be a pretty important signal as to whether things will be ok or not.

The issue with changing the ECU map is if the tuner isn't 100% on top of things. You have to make sure everything is really optimized properly end to end. Cranking pulsewidth, cold + warm start enrichment, how rapidly you taper the initial cold start enrichment as the wall film builds and the engine no longer needs a comically rich AFR to idle stably, transient fuel control, all of it matters for the FTP-75 drive cycle. You can get away with just changing the fuel + ignition timing tables on the stock ECU for the most part and not have any issues on stock injectors + MAF, the problem is that most people and tuners don't just stop there. Changing injectors/MAFs on the Nissan ECU natively is a pretty big deal, it's not like a standalone ECU where everything is in real units like grams per cylinder or grams per second and you can just drop in a new MAF calibration curve with no other knock-on effects. It's likely that Nissan internally had that for their powertrain calibration engineers but to optimize for efficient use of memory/CPU cycles they simplify it down to something that doesn't allow for easy development. I know a guy who struggled with his Nistune map for a while, AFRs weren't really under control so it ran rich more often than not. Stuff like that will be an instant fail. Nistune has added some functions to make things easier these days but it's still not a simple table where you type in the flow rate data and the software does all the magic for you. I'm pretty confident that there's an issue on my end, reading out the consult port shows that the AAC is trying to drop the idle by going to 0% duty cycle but can't do it. If I slip the clutch it will start opening it up and can achieve 950 rpm if I don't cause too much chaos by adjusting the clutch pedal position/adding throttle. I'm still not actually at the point where my car is ready to be put on the dyno for testing. I'm also concerned about the paint protection film I applied potentially causing a failure of the evaporative emissions test, when I leave it in an enclosed garage I can smell the PPF when I walk in, it's a distinct acetone/nail polish smell. From what I've seen if you show up with any issues for G&K to resolve they're likely to hold on to your car for 6 months and then tell you to fix it yourself anyways when they find an issue blocking them from going further on the emissions testing, so it's better to make 100% sure there's absolutely nothing wrong with the car before you leave it with them.

I have the GTIII-SS working ok on the stock ECU map, just pull the wastegate solenoid plug to run wastegate boost for now. It's clearly hitting a kind of undesirable part of the ECU map though, I've seen 19 degrees of ignition timing at WOT. Doesn't seem to knock on 91 AKI CA gas though which is good. I'm just waiting on brake rotors because the rotors are pretty badly rotted on mine and the pads are very weak, they seem glazed or something because I can't even get the car to trigger ABS. Then I need to diagnose my slightly high idle (~1050 rpm with AAC at 0% DC) and send out the fuel injectors for refurbishing and to get them characterized properly. I've noticed that the engine doesn't feel 100% when driving it around at cold start so hopefully the fuel injector cleaning helps there. Feels like the engine has inconsistent power, almost like a weak misfire. It feels perfectly fine once it warms up though. Just turbos alone won't do anything for emissions btw, neither do adjustments to the high end of the fuel/ignition tables under boost. Basically only the areas with closed loop fuel control are tested. I've seen some pretty big fireballs on throttle closure from aftermarket tunes though and that's the kind of thing that will kill your catalytic converter and any hope of passing CA emissions.

I would be careful with the fuel for sure, 100 RON only on Mines' VX-ROM unless they've learned to be less aggressive with the ignition timing. Hopefully before the end of the year I'll have my car through CA emissions and I can start doing Haltech base map development in earnest.

Pretty sure the reason why it's not compatible is because the series 1 airbag has both the controller and the airbag in the wheel. The later series 2/3 wheels relocate the control unit. You would have to follow this conversion guide to do it right: https://www.gtr.co.uk/threads/r33-single-twin-airbag-conversion.8977/ Like I said, more effort than it's worth IMO. If you really want to do it you can, but I've made my peace with the steering wheel. One of those things where the more you look at it the less awful it becomes. At least they never put into production another prototype wheel which joined the bottom two spokes into one big spoke that looked especially awful. It's also worth mentioning, if you have the dual airbag setup it really complicates access to the evaporator box if you ever need to repair the HVAC door servo.

https://nissan.epc-data.com/skyline/bcnr33/3935-rb26dett/misc/D84/KD8400/ Survey says no, the Momo wheel only works with Skylines from 8/1996. I got over the series 1 wheel eventually but I grew up with cars that had those massive airbags. I figure it's probably less likely to fail than the newer airbags as well, seems like the 1st generation air bags in the 90s have been less likely to turn into anti-personnel mines with age.

Sounds like it may be a coolant temperature sensor issue then. Either a bad connection or a bad sensor. Verify that the temperature starts off at a sane value in Consult, then verify that it rises up to operating temperature in a reasonable timeframe while driving the car. If you see unpredictable jumps in temperature it could be a bad connection somewhere causing the problem.

Is it even possible to get down to 600 rpm in most cases without messing with the throttle stop? My R33 is idling around 1000 rpm right now even with the AAC duty cycle reporting 0-2 in consult under most conditions.

not particularly, but high idle is pretty irritating to drive around if it's bad enough.