dojobi

Three cowboys are sitting around a campfire, out on the lonesome prairie, each with the bravado for which cowboys are famous. A night of tall tales begins. The first says, "I must be the meanest, toughest cowboy there is. Why, just the other day, a bull got loose in the corral and gored six men before I wrestled it to the ground, by the horns, with my bare hands." The second can't stand to be bested. "Why that's nothing. I was walking down the trail yesterday and a fifteen foot rattler slid out from under a rock and made a move for me. I grabbed that snake with my bare hands, bit its head off, and sucked the poison down in one gulp. And I'm still here today." The third cowboy remained silent, slowly stirring the coals with his penis.

I'll be keen for a cruise if it's in the very near future (I'm selling my Skyline).

Another Novocastrian here too. Why don't you like Newy Kyle?

Also, it's not like our RBs are torqueless - so everyone thinking "just imagine the torque" might want to rethink that. Turbos are one of the best ways you can add torque. Just look at the latest WRX STi - 394Nm from a 2L! That aside, I do like the idea of a V8 in a Skyline though. It's something different. That engine would just be near the bottom of my list. VH/VK series or a 3UZ would be the way I'd go. Good work though, anyway.

Yeah I've got to say I'm with Abo Bob on this. I have the whole list at home somewhere - probably the same as the list that AB has. Can you post it up, please? It would save me searching my hard drive.

Maybe it has a different meaning in the 2nd letter position?

Although the SDU site does say it, I wouldn't believe that it has to be true. They also get the power figures wrong on some of the Skylines which is pretty straight forward stuff. I don't think it's meant to be the definitive Skyline / RB guide, just general advice. I had also heard the 6 cyl closed deck theory too, Abo Bob. Can you think of any other Nissan engines with common letters? All I can think of at the moment is the RD28.

There's one in Newcastle too. It was featured in a recent HPI. I know the guy through a friend, so if you want to get in contact with him I can try.

Thanks SydneyKid. A guess at its size is better than nothing to me That size sounds like it'd be nice and responsive on a 2.5L Neo. Cheers, Michael

I know it's probably hard to tell, SydneyKid, but can you guess what the closest HKS/Garrett equivalent to your highflowed turbo would be? If you could provides trims and all the usual info that would be nice too. Thanks

Well I know my cat was replaced when my car got complied, so I'd say it's still functioning quite well. What I was trying to get at was that I think we should try and do our best to cause as little damage to the environment as we can (especially since we drive performance cars). Possibly gaining a few kW for removing something that is probably still functioning quite well is a pretty questionable move to me. EDIT: Just thought I'd add this - Removing it for the track or dragstrip I can understand, as you want to get that slight advantage and get a lower time, but to have it off all time I just don't get it.

I still can't work out why people do this. Is the environment really worth the pitiful 2kW you'll get?

Well I guess that confirms Infiniti's arrival too. Hopefully we get the V35s too.

haha yeah sorry BOOSTD. I should never have brought it up So how about those 3071Rs?

Very true. It definitely isn't level at all. Yeah I am guessing on the T88 - I was just going on what I've read about them and that's that they hit really hard up top. I definitely agree that it isn't a crap turbo by any means - I never thought it was. just like any other turbo, it's got to be well matched to the engine and tuned properly. The reason I brought it up in the first place was that the article just interested me as I kind of like the idea of a turbo that spools up with a similar to stock curve, yet with a much nicer top end. I didn't really ever question the lowish boost levels on the turbos.

Yeah I guess you're right. If one turbo really isn't meant to be at a low boost level, then it's really killing it's potential. I suppose it really isn't fair to compare the turbos this way, but that's the way they did it to try and make it a level playing field. I'm not sure if they would be able to do this, but if they knew what the optimum boost level was for a turbo (maybe from those maps with the surge line on one side - I forget what they're called), then maybe they could do a comparison at each turbos most efficient boost. With your T88 example though, it still would have killed the stock one at 0.9 Bar in the top end, but yeah, I get your point

So an S15 turbo is pretty much as good as a GT-RS then? If so, then that's pretty good news for S13 and S14 drivers.

For the boost controller, have you considered using the Power FC's unit?

BTW I realise this turbo is probably a lot smaller than the 3071R, but they also do make bigger turbos that have really good boost response (at least according to their web site - www.avoturbo.com). You might want to check them out.

Steve, I just found the mag and here's what it had in it generally (I'd rather not type out the whole article). It was comparing the GT-RS with the AVO 320hp one (and a few other turbos, but these were the ones that stood out to me). The test conditions were pretty good as they tuned the car with a Power FC to a 12.5:1 AFR and advanced the timing as far as they could for each turbo. It was a CA18DET that got 137rwkw peak when fully tuned with the Power FC and stock turbo. They had some trouble doing an exact comparison as they couldn't set the AVO one above 1.1bar because of a problem with their boost controller, so the HKS is at 1.2 Bar and the AVO is at 1.1 Bar. It's a little hard to explain the dyno charts in words, but here goes - the HKS one got a peak of 189kW with a curve that was under the stock turbo until 104km/h, then it overtook it and maxed out at 189. The AVO turbo followed the stock turbo perfectly all the way until, funnily enough, 104km/h and then continued ramping up all the way to 178kW (but this is at 1.1 Bar, the mag said it should have made around mid 180s at 1.2). To me the AVO turbo was the better buy by far (even though it had a slightly weaker top end curve) as it made similar peak power and a hell of a lot more power down low. The RRP prices on each were $4356 for the GT-RS and $2035 for the AVO. It was a really good article and I'd recommend picking the issue up. It's so hard to choose a turbo these days. There are so many different ones that get on boost early yet produce awesome top end power. BTW if you want to know about the other turbos in the comparison, just ask.

I'll find the mag tomorrow and post up what it was called. I haven't got a scanner at my house, so I'll try and describe the power curve.

Sounds pretty good to me. If it's as good as it sounds, then I can't see a reason to pay the HKS prices. There was a turbo (from AVO from memory - presumably using Garrett parts) in a CA18DET turbo comparison in the latest Zoom mag that also performed better than the equivalent HKS.

Say you actually got caught doing it, but you weren't charging for the content on the CD (just the time to do it and the cost of the CD itself), would you get in as much trouble?

I couldn't disagree more, weetbix It's got a very nice arse, but, yes the lights could be changed to 4 round ones.

I reckon the G35 looks like the 350Z but with the ugly arse fixed up. It's a much nicer car to me.