GTSBoy

A/S/L?

The GTT's Neo actually did produce ~206kW at the flywheel. The 34GTR's 26 really did not produce 206kW at the flywheel. By the time the 34 came around the 26 was likely up around 230-240 kW, and probably could have been more. The Japanese manufacturer's had an agreement to not sell any cars that made more than 206kW (actuall, their agreement was expressed in the stupid non-metric German ps units which is essentially horsepower, and the numerical value in the agreement was 280ps). So Evos, Supras, GTRs, 3000GTs, and so on, all had official 206kW power outputs published, and all made variously larger numbers than that. Even the R32 GTR made a decent margin over the official number, all the way back in 1989. As you'd bloody well hope for a TT 2.6l 24v engine running ~12psi of boost.

Potato potato

Yes, well, this is going to be a perpetual problem for people in the civilised world who have a good idea for a product, but choose to get it made in China because you can't beat the price. The quality out of Chinese manufacture is so wildly variable that it is almost impossible to trust it. You might have the world's best quality out of production from Factory A, and you might have it for a year or two, but suddenly, and without warning, your production is moved to Factory B and you don't notice because mostly it's just as good as Factory A. But then the nightshift at Factory B suddenly goes wonky and 50% of your product starts to have bizarre quality problems. But you don't know about it until they start failing in service. If you're not doing quality inspection sampling at a statistically significant rate, you might grab samples only from the dayshift and they all look fine and you can't tell why you're getting failures. Then, maybe you raise your eyebrows to the company doing they manufacturing in China and they respond with "no problem here" while secretly making changes to the back end, and maybe your production goes back to Factory A for a couple of months (unlikely, because they've got some new guy's stuff being made there and he's still on the honeymoon), or maybe the sack the nightshift boss or maybe you get your production moved to Factory C because they suspect that you suspect that things have gone to shit and that you will pull your production contract from them and they start to care even less. The only way to produce in China is to have your own people there, accountable to you and you only. And that can't happen if you're a small transmission specialist. Hell, my company is massively bigger than these gearbox/diff guys' businesses and we don't have the resources to run our own operation in China (nor anybody from here willing to go live there to oversee it!!).

Neat Gearboxes

Heh. I tell most people who ask me what sedan they should buy to just buy a Camry, and if they want to use the least fuel, a hybrid (although, like with domestic solar batteries, it's hard to see how they will pay themselves back better than investing the difference in the sharemarket). But, I wouldn't and couldn't do it to myself. I look at every Camry I drive near with the greatest of fear because their drivers are universally the most terrifying dickheads possible. Loud boingy boingy music, watching the phone instead of the road, random lane changes. Just horrifying. I teach my children to be wary of Camrys, Mercs, Audis, BMS Xs, VR-VZ utes, Mitsu 380s (they're the R31 of the modern era), Rangers and everything that looks like a Ranger, white vans and Golfs.

Well, that conrod is definitely more of a "because you can" rather than "because you should" thing. It doesn't have to look like a Geiger painting, they just want it to look that way so they can make people ooh and ahh.

Define "work". I presume that you have fitted a new head unit and are trying to drive the rear speakers direct from the head unit's speaker outputs? Have you run new speaker wires (even temporarily around the outside of the car) to drive the speakers from the headunit, to prove they work? Are are you just putting a AA battery on the terminals to see the cones move? (Not that the AA battery test is a bad test, just that it's not as convincing as using an actual amplifier to make noise come out of them). FWIW, I wouldn't use the original wiring that ran from the Nissan stereo to the rear amplifier for speaker level wiring. It's pretty skinny. It only take an hour or so to rip out some seats and run some new speaker wires from the front to the back.

WRT EVs - yes, all that is required is a better battery technology than lithium for them to be more acceptable. You need circa double the capacity, although more would be better. You need circa double the number charge cycles, although more would be better. And you need them not to be so bloody flammable. And they probably need to be recyclable in a reasonable fashion, which all lithium based batteries do not achieve right now. All of these things are possible. It might be hard to get all of them at the same time. But if you could get even just the non-flammable and recycling parts, you could go forward. As to powders for 3D printing. Easily available. If they have the printer, they know where the consumables are bought. Not cheap by any measure though, even via Alibaba, and the wastage can be a bit frightening for poor student. Inconel, like all "stainless" materials, has more corrosion failure modes than even mild steel. People don't seem to take notice of this fact. Steel pretty much just rusts, with a few variations on the theme. But simple stainlesses like 304 can do wierd arse shit like stress corrosion cracking and pinhole corrosion, where if you subject them to cycling stresses (like in a pressure vessel that doesn't operate at constant pressure) and a chloride environment, the chloride ion can invade the material at the grain boundaries, suck the chromium atoms out of the grains and precipitate a chromium chloride ceramic material out in the grain boundaries. This leave the stainless steel seriously chrome depleted in the bulk and it just rusts away. And then it tends to go bang. There are many other shitty things that can happen to 300 series stainlesses, and they all have their unique twists on them. Inconel in particular is only "strong" at elevated temperatures under certain conditions. Granted, these are fairly broad, and the scaling temperature of 600 series inconels is up around 1100°C or so. It retains a lot of strength up at those temperatures. But strength isn't everything. If you hold inconel at ~800°C in an atmosphere that contains sulphur or many sulphur containing species, then you get something that is called hot corrosion. The S attacks the oxide layer on the inconel and it just evaporates away. The new bare parent material forms a new oxide layer (if there is oxygen around to make it) and then that just jumps off the material under S attack. Rinse and repeat. The material loss rate can be truly frightening. I've had 25mm thick burner faceplates go away in weeks. These things could last forever under better circumstances, but they only last weeks when the conditions are wrong. All these materials have different responses to being operated at different temperatures in oxidising conditions compared to what they do in carburising condition. You really have to know your stuff before choosing a material for an application. If you don't, you soon learn. I agree that 3D printing in metals offers some massive advantages, particularly for the things you mention. Heat exchangers in particular can be done in ways that are otherwise unmanufacturable and yield terrific performance. The major problem associated with such manufacturing techniques for these sorts of things is that they are often non able to be inspected and offer challenges to maintainability. You often can't replace subassemblies because it is monolithic. You have to replace the whole thing - which leads back to wastage and recyclability again!

Good chat.

Yeah, I meant industrial combustion, not internal combustion. My business will still be moving forward in 20 years. Internal combustion will be nearly dead. I make the front ends of my equipment from materials like 253MA, 310, 314, various Inconels and Incolloys. And on top of those we use really tricky superalloy coatings. And we still end up having to rebuild burners every 9 months in many industrial processes, because shit is ugly in clinker kilns and acid roast kilns and the like. I have had burner tip components made using 3D printing. It is hugely expensive for very little to no gain and you cannot print in most of the materials we want to use. There is only a very limited range of high temperature high nickel alloys available, and you can't just use inconel in many of our applications because it doesn't like running at ~800°C in the presence of sulphur, and guess what much of our stuff has to do.

Sorry, I thought you'd circled back around to the rebuild.

They click onto clips. If the clips are broken, you need clips.

You do realise we're talking about the whole engine being excruiciatingly cleaned out? Not just the turbo? Right?

No. If there is loose metal, then it will be stuck all over the place. And if/when it shakes loose after the rebuild, it will cause damage to your new stuff. It's not to be contemplated.

I work in industrial combustion. The challenges there are very very different to recipro-internal combustion, but there are a wide selection of similarities. I have to keep telling my upper management, "If wishes were lollies there's be candy shops on every street corner". I have one particular member of upper management who seems to outright believe that just because he wants something to be true, then it must be achievable. You cannot point to the existence of the insulation tiles on the space shuttle and then tell me that it must be possible to insulate an umbilical carrying power, control signals and maybe even fuel while it passes through the 1800°C part of the flame, without giving me at least a suitably sized slice of NASA's budget to achieve it. And so it is also with any technical development. There are constraints, whether they be physical (ie, available space, material properties, whatever), or physics (ie, kinetics, turbulence, momentum, emergent phenomena, etc), or budget, or other resources that make for an N-dimensional array of compromises to pick from. Some compromises might mean "We can build it, but it won't do anything useful". Others might be "We can build it, but it will cost the earth, moon and half the output of the human race for the next 10000 years to make it happen". And then there's the always wonderful "You need Start Trek level technology to be able to identify specific minerals under the surface at a distance of 1000km" (and yes, I've had to deal with exactly that sort of thing in our other business, which does mineral analysis). Which is why I poo poo the prospect of successful TJI as a retrofit on RB26 or any similar vintage engine. There might be ways to make it happen, to whatever the limits that it can be realised are. And of course those limits are obviously driven by the fact that it has to be passive TJI to be even close to being described as a "retrofit", and the passive version only yields a tiny fraction of the full potential of the concept. And even the best possibility with passive requires things done (in the way of EGR, etc) that further muddy the possibility of being able to describe it as a "retrofit". And remember, you're all hoping to be able to do this TJI retrofit with whatever arbitrary combination of turbo and injectors and management and cams and manifolds and pipework and engine capacity and compression and whatever else could possibly be different between enthusiast modified engines some 30 years after they got shipped out of the somewhat low tech assembly line that they were built on. Whereas, any work that the developers of TJI have reported generally lists an extremely long list of extremely tight constraints that they put on it while they fiddled around for thousands of hours in the lab environment to even get it to work. In my world the equivalent is MILD combustion. This is a pot-of-gold-at-the-end-of-the-rainbow situation where you're firing fuel and oxidant into a chamber (not an engine combustion chamber, a furnace combustion chamber) with certain turbulence properties so that there is massive recirculation of the spent combustion products whizzing around in there and diluting the combustion reaction zone so that it moderates the peak temperatures and minimises NOx. This is a reasonably difficult condition to successfully create in the lab. And the lolly shop on the corner managers want to be able to create MILD combustion in practical combustion chambers with real industrial processes going on inside them (like, calcination, sintering, clinkering, roasting, of lime or analogues, iron ore pellets, raw minerals, acidified minerals, etc). Im-bloody-possible. Never going to happen in the real world. If you manage to get a MILD condition to even be achievable, you'd probably only be able to achieve it for 10 minutes on the 3rd Tuesday after the next cometary close approach. But no-one wants to hear it because they all want their lolly shops. If you have to put a hundred grand's worth of stuff into an RB engine/bay to be able to achieve TJI, surely it has to be better to just use a better engine? One that's actually designed to do what you need. It is at this point that the existence of people like Herman who are willing to develop castings becomes useful. In the modern world, the "democratisation of production", to coin some sort of phrase, driven by the ability to do decent design work in CAD and get complex stuff 3D printed for dev, for mould/blank production or even for final parts if you're willing to trust metal printers (which I am actually unlikely to put a lot of trust in for parts exposed to combustion and process conditions in my work) , starts to permit people to put some effort into making a head that might allow an RB to successfully work. It could have camless free-valve type stuff to permit the EGR to be internal. Or it might include necessary pathways for moving exhaust gas to the other side of the head to allow an EGR cooler to be placed on the better side under the intake. And it might have more room for a proper TJI injector/chamber. And it might have better port shapes/heights/chamber shape. And it might even have space for a tiny auxiliary spark plug if required, and so on. But you'd need to expect to be able to sell it to nearly every surviving RB engine to be able to recoup your costs. Or sell it for >$100k per installation, and....you can guess the likelihood of either of those coming off.

Yuh, I think my original point (yes, it was me who said "in your dreams bitch") that I'd be extremely unwilling to believe that you could just throw a special plug into a combustion chamber not designed to be fired that way, and expect very much from it. Certainly not to the extent that the technology is claimed to be able to deliver when used in chambers that are actually designed for it. And hence, not really a "retrofit". If it needs a special head, then it is something much more than just a retrofit.

Could you please express this thought again with some clarity added?

You'd be one of the few, if you hda.

I don't see it as a huge problem because I seldom watch embeds. I just click on the title link in the video and a new tab opens and you can watch the video there. This certainly works better for me in the years since I installed NoScript on all my browsers, because having to manually enable each automation (such as for embeds) is a pain in the arse (but a pain in the arse that I willingly submit to, in order to make it impossible for the creeps to track me around the web). The permissions for youtube at youtube are already enabled in all my browsers, so there's no extra work required.

It's on the same assembly as the pump. Little pressure vessel.

If it's uprated vs anything at all, it would be the diff only pump from the RWD cars. The ATESSA pump is waaaay more beefy than what is required to run the diff. I'd suspect that adding the diff duty to it would not even make it realise that it had extra work to do.

It's less about the sock and more about what might have been shaken loose from the tank walls/floor maybe by E85 or summat.

Dirty sock?

It's more a case of forcing videos to be viewed at YT.com instead of with embeds, because embeds were not getting shown adverts. And it is all about the adverts.