GTSBoy

All that you wish to know is readily findable on here already. You might benefit from some searching and reading before asking people to rehash old posts.

I would just like to point something out. From an engineering perspective, it is absolutely unnecessary to torque a bolt up to anywhere near its recommended limiting torque. The correct torque will be whatever is required to produce the mechanical clamping force required in the joint. If that is only 150 Nm, then it's only 150 Nm. Normally an engineer would not then select a bolt that is massively more capable than that, because of cost. But in something like a crank pulley I'd be perfectly willing to believe that an engineer would perhaps happily go up a size or two, in order to obtain better numbers elsewhere, such as thread pitch, or area under the bolt head, or toughness/resistance to vibration or cyclical load. Any of a whole bunch or reasons. Now, I'm not saying that 150 Nm is correct in this instance. But it is definitely true that it is enough to hold the pulley on. It may not be enough enough, especially when coupled with other things that can happen when 3rd parties (rather than the guy on the assembly line with the ISO 9001 system certified torque wrench) are refitting the pulley. There's about 15 different things that can be wrong or go wrong when somebody does this. But it might have been just fine for what is ultimately just a 250HP 2.5L six in a mass produced car. The fact that the same manufacturer specs a much bigger number for other similar engines is a bit suspicious. But then the bolt is bigger and the intended usage model for the RB26 was also known to the factory to be "tuned and thrashed". So there might be a perfectly consistent logic in there. Nevertheless, there is no way that I would be arbitrarily torquing the stock RB25 crank pulley bolt up to 400Nm. Seems like waaaaay too big a step up from 150, and waaaaay high compared to 8.8 rating. It's not likely to be any better than 8.8, and might not even be that good, because it is quite possibly oversized for the duty. But, I wouldn't have too much problem with picking a number like 250Nm and doing it up to that. It's unlikely to go anywhere at that torque, and it's unlikely to stretch the bolt or wreck a thread, etc.

It's not hard. If you have a little scrap flat plate and your MIG, you can make a locker that goes where the starter is, as per BK et al above. Just needs to have a couple of bolt holes and a piece welded on that will jam the teeth of the flywheel. Might take 2 shots to get it right, but you'll see what's needed as soon as you look through the spot where the starter was. Of course.....access there kinda sucks too. But that's what they make inspection cameras for.

Careful use of a dremel with a real small cutter in it required to machine down in the slot after welding. Not going to be fun. Steady hand required. I'd try to do it with the slot facing down, lying on my back with the crank snout at a comfortable height. Couldn't imagine being able to find a nice spot to do it from in front, unless radiator, cooler, AC condenser, front bumper all removed. And even then. Conversely, I wouldn't want to weld it from underneath. Although that might work with delicate TIG action.

Raceworks is generally good. My bro-in-law has had complaints about fuel rail kits they have sent him that haven't fit, but there's a couple of points about that worth considering. He buys HEAPS of such kits from them, and from others. I have heard of other kits having problems also. And things change with time. Some problems can be one offs from the wrong part being included. Other problems are genuine design issues that get fixed when they get found. On that basis, go with Raceworks if you want, or EFI Solutions, as above, or Goleby's, or any of the other half dozen usual suspects for this stuff. The main consideration I would have is the injectors - not the rail. If I'm buying injectors I want them matched, tested, not modified unless it doesn't ruin the spray pattern, etc.

Future Ben is a dickhead, so he gets what he deserves anyway.

It is a reasonable guess that there is a problem with one or more buttons. If one is stuck on or shorted in some way, it could prevent the other buttons from being registered. I'd be taking the buttons apart and looking for dirt/scorching/etc in the contact pads.

Yeah, for a wrap type shield the shiny side would just be too thin a foil. It would likely oxidise and burn away if put into hard contact with red hot pipes. The glass/mineral fibre side will be more able to take the temperature. The shiny side facing out would be just to reduce the emissivity of the surface so it doesn't radiate as much heat to nearby surfaces. It's all a long way from being ideal, but in some circumstances, you take what you can get. There's not always room for shiny surfaces both sides, air gaps and so on.

Toight!

No, I think you miss the point of what I said. It's the same engine. The clutch manufacturer knows what engine they're making the clutch for. They therefore know the likley characteristic rev/torque/power characteristic of the engine. A stock engine will to X torque at Y rpm and make Z power out of it. Make mods to it so that X increases and Y changes and you get a different Z.....and the clutch manufacturer can still choose to rate that clutch at the new Z number because it is likely tied very closely to the new value of X. They're not talking about "here's a clutch from a 20L diesel engine that can handle 300HP and 3000ft-lb, it is therefore rated to 300HP on a Honda K20. Because that woudl be silly. The opposite would also be silly with the K20 clucth on the diesel. But if they say, here's a stock clutch for an RB25 and it can handle ~350 HP, and here's a better clutch for an RB25 and it can handle 700HP, then there's a really fair bet that the better one can handle about double the torque.

So, either the knock sensor(s) is/are shagged, or there is a metric f**kton of mechanical noise at one end of the engine.

Fixed that for you.

Wiring problems.

Time and effort spent should be put into the best engine possible. 304 is not that. Nothing really "wrong" with it, except that it is hugely less good than a big LS.

No, because the original would be too small for either rotor. It is possible to bend the cover back away rather than cutting it (that's what I did to put 296 and them 310mm rotors on a 280mm car). The offset change on the disc itself with the Z33 rotor might mean that you don't need to do anything. I can't remember which way the disc moves, but if it moves outward then there's your magic.

I posted in your other thread. I did it many years ago. It is trivial and it works.

As Rusty said - it was originally R12. If it hasn't been converted to R134a, then that's what it will be. But if it has been converted to R134a, the fridge mechanic will be able to tell, because you have to put the right valve converters on the Schaeders and you MUST by law put stickers on in the engine bay advising the change.

RB25DE box is same box as RB20DET. So cable speedo drive or electronic senders will cross-pollinate between them. The 35DET box is a completely different box, so the speedo sender will not work with the skinny boxes. As Robbo suggested, the 4cylinder box's speedo drive should be same enough with the Rb skinny boxes, but there's no guarantee that the output speed will be correct. It might be, but I don't know for sure. Keep in mind that the electronic speedo sender in the box sends an AC signal to the dash. The dash converts that into a ~5V PWM square wave signal for the ECU. So all 3 parts have to be correct to get everything working perfectly. Sometimes near enough will be near enough.

Just put them on the same LSAs as any other 264° cam, or choose an LSA halfway between the typical 256° and 272° cams' specs. Tighten or widen the LSA by a degree or two depending on how you want the engine to work.

That's perplexing - that he couldn't/didn't find anyone who wanted to continue the business. It's not like there's a dozen competitors in Australia.

Yes. The rotor ends up in a different place relative to the hub face (and the caliper! if you try to cross Z33 rotors with GTR calipers.)

I might have to crack the sads over that.

No. GT-T rotors are only 310mm diameter. GTR Brembo rotors are 324mm diameter. You cannot put a GTR Brembo on a 310mm rotor. Just repetition for repetition's sake. But.....GTR Brembo rotors aren't thicker. They're all 30mm. Only the 296mm GTR rotors are 32mm. Right?

Ammeter is a function for measuring current on your typical multimeter, which can be had for ~$10 off eBay or your local Jaycar equivalent. Find the fuse that runs the tracker. Remove the fuse, put the ammeter across the terminals where the fuse was. Now you're in the circuit and can measure the current it's pulling.