Gav

From the manual: (1) Front final drive (F160) Nissan gear oil hypoid GL-5 85W-90 [approx. 1.0 L] (2) Rear final drive [R200 (mechanical LSD)] Nissan gear oil hypoid LSD GL-5 80W-90 [approx. 1.5 L] Note that different spec oils (i.e. LSD and non-LSD) oils are specified for front and rear

Check with Perth Brake Parts - I beleive that the retail is now around $400 for the front set. Certainly not cheap, but they are certainly bloody good!

Hi Gary The good news is that the pads for the non-Brembo GT-Rs are the same as those fitted to the S15 amnd many models of the WRX. Very easy to source. If you want a set of excellent pads I have a set of "Pagid Blues" that I sourced from Perth Brake parts a while back. These are the "ducks nuts" and have done less than a 1,000 kms. Will really transform your braking! Drop me a PM if you are interested. Gav

As per title, I'm looking at a BA Falcon ute with a dedicated gas engine as a cheap run around and parts chaser etc. Can anyone with experiences on these engines offer comments? Specifically interested in: *Is there any special maintenance required on the gas system - i.e. if I pick up a vehicle with 60,000 kms or so am I up for any significant expenses on the gas system? * What is real terms economy like - i.e. cost to run? Any comments for/against welcome. Cheers Gav

Chill Mike - nothing condescending or presumptuous meant. My point was that "optimal" can relate to any of the properties that I mentioned in my post (peak power, early boost, maximum fuel economy etc). All that I'm saying is that many people (including me) have made gains be spending extra time (and as you point out money) on the dyno optimising cam timing to suit your goals. This is particularly the case if your goals change with time (as mine did). I've played around with my GT-R few a few years now, have a click on my gallery here. Again (genuinely) good luck Gav

If you want 2wd for static burnouts (ie at the drags), you are best disabling the ABS also

Hmmmm......is that THEIR optimal position or YOUR optimal position? Changing the cam timing affects variables such as fuel economy, exhaust emmissions and idle quality as well as changing the shape of the power curve (eg maximum power versus response). In fact I would go as far to say that the gains you will get with adjusting the standard cams on the dyno (via adjustable pulleys of course) may be more significant than just adding the cams on their default timing setting. Your call, but as I said previously, it's certainly worth playing with cam timing to optimise what YOU want from your engine. Good luck Gav

Another idea is to use the material in welding helmets that goes dark when a flash hits it. I tried this myself by placing a newspaper behind the window and then taking a flash picture. The material reacts fast enough that you cannot read what's behind the glass. Downsides are: * I haven't seen these panels large enough to cover a plate * Only works if the camera flashes (i.e. night)

I'm assuming these are for a 1992 Hyundai Excel?

You can look it up in the Skeptics Dictionary - you'll find it between Haunted Houses and Homeopathy. To quote "Hiclone promises fuel savings of up to 20%, power increase of up to 15%, and hydro carbon emission reductions of up to 30% with prices from $160-$215 (Australian). They'll even sell you something called Fuelmax which "is a magnetic frequency resonator which clips onto the fuel line and 'fractures' the passing fuel, allowing it to mix with oxygen more readily and thus burn more efficiently." This should keep you laughing for up to ten minutes" The results were certainly good, although I onnly laughed for 5 minutes - perhaps because I'm an old bastard and remember the Brock Polariser and such.

Hi Brendan I seem to remember that Ken/Lumpy sold an N1 R32 about a year ago (had a blown engine from memory and went pretty cheap). Drop them a line and they may know the whereabouts. Gav

Many thanks!

I find Bulgarian easier to read than this guy's English. My apologies if English is his second language, my scorn if it's not!

Not expecting anything out of the ordinary, but could someone check out: BNR32300987

Looks interesting. I see from the Tein site that they have replaced the RA model with the "Mono Flex" which spec wise looks similar to the GReddy unit above. Would be interested to hear some feedback on both of these products.

I originally had "mismatched" cams (264IN,272EX) both in step 2 lift. I changed out the IN cam to 272 and picked up both power and response. This was an a 2.8L with GT-RS terbs however. My gut feel for your applications is that 256 both IN and EX would be the go, but probably better to get some other opinions from people using these terbs. One thing that has come up time and again - cam timing plays a huge part in performance. This is time consuming on the dyno, but certainly worth while experimenting!

Know what you mean - I fried and heat warped a basically new HKS twin plate recently. Trying out the Exedy twin plate now that is supposed to cope with heat build up better. Would certainly like to use a single, but just can't see it surviving in my application and use.

Actually, to be pedantic it has very little FORCE at 200 km/h, but it certainly has plenty of MOMENTUM. However in a way I guess you are right, a sudden deceleration (like hitting a tree) at that speed will convert to plenty of FORCE :-)

Correct, the PS2 centre lug is larger than the PFC connector. The centre lug is normally plastic, however, and can simply be trimmed slightly with a razor blade from the top. Hard to explain but easy to work out if you compare the 2.

If anyone forwards this estimate to my wife (i.e. she learns the real cost of my build! ) I will personally hunt them down!

I can only speak from my personal experience. I'm certain on my 2.8L motor 600 rwhp would be possible maybe up to 620 with all the supporting mods and optimising cam timing for top end power rather than for mid range as in my present case. I'm sticking around the 550 rwhp mark, however, as the car is now "balanced" to accomodate this level of power (i.e. 680cc injectors, single high volume fuel pump, sprung centre clutch etc). To go beyond where I am will really detract from making this an enjoyable drive on the street (and cost a swag more dollars and tuning time). Sorry - the above is a long winded way of nme saying that I believe that GT-RS won't get you into the 700-750rwhp range IMO.

I suspect that my results are more a case of increase exhaust flow was required to spool up the larger GT-RS terbs. In otherwords, matching the cams to the terbs. I'm sure there was also more experimentation done with cam timing at the same time, so it may not be simply a case of achieving the improvements with simply going to a longer duration camshaft on the exhaust.

I'm running low mount GT-RS terbs on an HKS 2.8L kit. Redline for that particular run was just over 8K, but I've had the motor spinning to well over 9k and it still felt like the power curve was flat. Further details at: Dyno and Engine Specs

I'm now running 272 "STEP2" cams (around the 11mm lift) on both inlet and exhaust. The originally I was running a 264IN, 272EX, however changing to 272 on both I gained both top end and midrange. See the following graph Dyno Graph Unfortunately it's shown in speed rather than engine RPM, however you get the idea. Oh yes - the idle is really "tough" now

If you want to stay with twin low mounts, I'm sure there's nothing wrong with using the 25/30s. Will still deliver penty of top end and will provide very good response as you have requested. For even more top end, GT-RS terbs will suit the extra cubes of the RB30 very well (I'm very happy with the response of these on my 2.8L).