GTSBoy

2s of googling shows 570cc as a common number. But apparently there is more than one injector across teh years. Why not search based on the part number on side of your injector? As to latency, the same search could tell you things. Nistune forum has this https://forum.nistune.com/viewtopic.php?t=3534

The electrical connector is clearly attached to a knock sensor. The oil leak photo appears to have been taken with a potato. Get a better picture.

Just repair it?

Depending on the cooler, you may struggle to get above 280rwkW anyway.

^as above, and you can make your own with a block of rubber and a hacksaw blade. I don't like chassis stands under the jacking points because they are too close to the centreline of the car and leave too much weight hanging out front and/or rear. OK for jacking up at the side of the road, but not great for working under.

As I said. NEVER put chassis stands under the chassis rails (your orange circled bits). They are simply not strong enough. Nearly every Skyline has had the chassis rails irrepairably damaged by people** doing that. **I use a special term for people like that. I never support the rear of the car on a jack stand under the diff. Reasons? 1) The jack is there, so it's hard to put a stand there. 2) As a single stand, a central support is just stupid. You cannot properly support a car on 3 stands at the rear. You can only get 2 of them loaded properly at a time. The 3rd one can only serve as a "safety" in case it falls off the others. In which case, you're doing it wrong. I support the rear on 2 stands under the subframe just adjacent to the lower rear arm pivots. You can't use the pivots because they are on an angle. The subframe is not ideal, but it is good enough if you are careful to place the chassis stands just right so you get the best contact and the lips on the tops in the right spots as you lower it off the jack. Do not support the rear on the subframe mounting bolts (which is where I think you have the red circled chassis stands). That's just asking for damage. As I already said, right on the lower inner pivot points. Go back and read it again. Those are not the "side rails", seeing as they are a long way from the sides of the car. They are the main chassis rails. The "side rails" would be the sills, if you were going to use the term "side rails".

Lack of compatibility of statements is concerning. Cosmetic trumps performance. So just do what you want. How do you come to that ratio? Have you done all the calcs? You have the hyradulic bias at the MC, then you have the hydraulic ratio at the calipers, courtesy of the different piston areas. Then you have the brake torque which is a calculation done off the pad force, coefficient of friction of the pads (which are not necessarily the same front & rear) and the effective working radius of the force applied to the rotor.

He's talking about GTRs. Trolley jack in the centre of that is fine, but make a rubber pad to stop the sheetmetal getting damaged. As I said above, it's not strong enough for point loadings. Never place chassis stands under ANY of the main chassis rails. They are not intended for that either. The official jacking points are strong enough to lift the car, using the scissor jack, as Duncan said. That is what they are for. BUT only the jacking points. Nowhere else along the sill seam.

What Duncan said. The diff casing is a heavy casting. I'm not sure why anyone would think it might crack. Just place the jack bowl evenly under the bottom rib. Don't put chassis stands under the front crossmember. It is not strong enough to take the point loads from the tops of chassis stands. The best way is put the chassis stands under the lower inner pivot points. You may have to grind the heads of the chassis stands to make them narrow enough to fit. And if you have to remove the lower arm, you will have to find an alternative support point. You can make a buffer to go between a chassis stand and the proper jacking point under the sill and support there. Don't use the chassis stand bare under the sill as you can still damage them, even if they are strong enough to carry the car.

Any Nissan that ends in Z. 240, 260, 280, 300, 350, 370. Specifically in this case though, the Z32 TT. Why would it not? Aftermarket arms take up the same space as any other arm.

Just put the bloody exhaust back on it.

THE R33 CROSSOVER PIPE IS LITERALLY MUCH LONGER THAN THE R34 ONE BECAUSE THE R33 ONE DOES NOT HAVE THAT TCS THROTTLEBODY! What you are putting onto the car CANNOT be an R33 crossover pipe. Just look at some pictures of the engine bays! And it literally does not matter that one of your crossover pipes has a nipple tapped into it and the other one doesn't. Just connect the boost sensor to where it is supposed to be connected.

Which is usually phosporic acid based. Don't use other snake oils.

I think you miss the points I made. 1. The "nipple" you circled in the pick of the R34 crossover pipe is not a nipple. It is what I said it is. 2. The R34 ECU (or actually, the R34 ABS/TCS CU) requires to see a present and fit and healthy traction control throttle body, upstream of the main throttle. Without it, the ABS/TCS CU goes into a tizzy, and as the ECU is with the same union, when one goes out on strike, they all go out on strike. You will have fault codes in the ECU that will not go away because of the removed TCS equipment, unless you are using a Stagea motor/ECU.

Um. What about the traction control throttle, motor and position sensor? Stock ECU won't be amused without it. Making a connection for the boost sensor is a triviality by comparison. Drill and tap a hole and put in a nipple. But "mostly stock" and your description of the shit that has been done to the car are somewhat worrying. Your photo came up as I was typing. That is not a nipple. That is a piece of line that runs under the crossover pipe. You can see the other end of it on the front side, next to the mounting bracket. It's the passthrough for vacuum to the charcoal canister.

I don't get it. Is it your plan to have both your turbos connected up to both exhaust manifolds? As in, the existing crossover pipe is still there, you're just hanging the GT30 off the same exhaust supply as the GT42? In that case, you are wrong about how it will work. You will to be lucky to spool either turbo, because each one will just be a bloody big wastegate for the other one! If your plan is to have the GT30 just running from only one bank, while the GT42 is running off the other bank, with both boosting into the same inlet system, then you are in for a different version of shit. The GT30 will then indeed be boosted by a 1.9L engine (a pretty shitty 1.9L engine though, not making as much flow as 1.8L of Honda). But that bank of the engine will be receiving the same boost as the other bank, whilst having a much tighter exhaust flow path. So the two halves of the engine won't be making anywhere near the same power. And, if you plan to have all sorts of exhaust and/or boost switchover valving to try to make it work, then you're back in the Toyota/Mazda sequential world I was talking about, and I wish you luck.

Because....2 different sized turbos implies a sequential system. An inexperienced hobbyist setting up a sequential system from scratch sounds like hilarity. Toyota and Mazda spent millions on their systems and never really got it right. So, I'll assume you're not doing a sequential system. I'll also assume you're not doing a true compound system, seeing as the turbos appear to be planned to be on opposite sides of the engine. And also because low boost and high boost numbers quoted appear to be about 1/4 of the values that you'd expect for compound. So, maybe just two stage compression? In which case, the GT30 is mahoosivley oversized. Either that or the GT42 is. Well, at least one side of each of them, probably. So, then I make a sensible suggestion of binning the additional turbo and putting an original M90 supercharger back into the Ecotec system and properly twincharge it. This actually makes a lot of sense because it will do what you suggest (fill the torque hole caused by the GT42) but.....if proper sequential is out of the question, then proper twincharging is also probably out of the question. And all of those thoughts went through my mind prior to posting my first response, and it all seemed too hard, so I just copped out and made the post I did.

I came in here to post something, but, for the life of me, I can't see how I can say anything that would be useful.

Yes. I have no idea about your neck of the woods. But here you can get them from GK-Tech, and probably many others. They are fairly common. In my experience, all the readily available boots do most of the job, but only most, not all. They still allow grease to get out and they still allow crap to get in. So they help, but they're not perfect. I have none on the front of my caster rods and I have made some covers out of 0.8mm thick clear PVC sheet and some velcro tie.

CF bonnet not road legal, in case it matters to you.

Toe out at the rear might be good for drifting, but it will make it nervous and scary on the street. I have zero toe at the rear of my car right now and I will be going back to 0.5mm toe in next time I align it. Toe out at the rear does not make the car oversteer biased. It just makes the rear end unstable and ready to change direction at the merest whiff of a steering input or a bump or a camber change or a butterfly farting on the other side of the plant. Toe out at the front does nothing to change the steering balance of the car. If it is otherwise understeery then it will remain so regardless of how you set the front toe. Same if it is already oversteery. I have zero toe set at the front at the moment and I would not be changing it to toe out for a street car for love nor money. I had toe out on my ALFA 116 many years ago. Completely different car - and it was a good thing. Won't be doing it on a Skyline any time soon. Rear camber is slightly adjustable with the stock upper arms. Eccentric bolts. You can buy lower arms to provide camber adjustment, but I am baffled that you have not sen the myriad of adjustable upper arms for Nissan rear ends. You can't even open an eBay page in a browser without being assaulted by recommendations for all the cheap-arse no-name Chinese ones available. Anyway, the easiest way to adjust camber at the rear is to buy a good quality upper arm (and the traction arm) from a trusted brand. Top wishbone. As above. The toe arm (either the HICAS tie rod or the eliminator kit's toe rod) allow you to set the toe. This is the ONLY arm that allows you to SET the toe. Changing any other arms length will also CHANGE the toe. You cannot set the toe and then change the camber without going back and fixing the change that that will make to the toe. Trust me. The traction arm is critically important with respect to to in one major way. It controls the change in toe angle as the suspension moves through the arc of its up-down travel. This is called bump steer. This is why I said above that if you change to an adjustable upper arm to set camber, you also have to change to an adjustable traction rod. If you leave the traction rod at stock length and change the camber arm's length, you will introduce a horrendous amount of bump steer. Bump steer is bad. You can never really have zero bump steer, but the suspension needs to be set up with the MINIMUM amount of bump steer. Here's the best bit. Unless you build your own bump steer measuring device, you can't even see it, let along measure it. I built a bump steer gauge and used it on my car recently, only to find that I already had my traction arms set to a satisfactory length to keep bump steer to a minimum. No. Compression means when the wheel moves up into the wheel well for any reason at all. Launch will do it. Bumps will do it. Cornering (body roll) will do it. Rod ends and poly bushes. Rod ends have no give in them at all. They are the roughest and toughest way to connect suspension pieces together. They offer the firmest and tightest control of location. They are unforgiving. They are noisy. They are not really good for a road car (although I now have a number of them on my car). They wear out. They need to be protected from grit and dirt. They need lubrication and cleaning (despite what the vendors may say). They are for race cars. On the road they increase the amount of maintenance you need to do on the suspension by a factor of about 10. Poly bushes are soft and flexible compared to rod ends but generally much tighter than the original rubber bushes on most cars. They are a good compromise for a street car. They need proper lubrication and will often need to be re-lubricated at various points through their life, or they will gall up and die. With many adjustable arms these days it is also possible to get them with tough rubber bushes, which are also a sensible compromise for a street car.

But....a CV is a CV is a CV. If there is anyone that can rebuild any CV in your country then that is all you need. It's not a tough mechanical problem.

And what is the process in getting a mod plate? Assessment by an engineer?

They are. The 4x ABS wheel speed sensors are also a significant input into the ATTESSA CU and the A-LSD. I wouldn't have thought that messing with the front ones would cause the A-LSD to freak out, but anything is possible. If there is nothing physically wrong with the CV joints in those shafts, then it is fair to assume that the different widths of the lands on the tone rings is responsible for the freak out.

I didn't say that it would stop it from starting though. What does the timing light say about the ignition timing?