Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Have been looking at M35 info. Is there a twin turbo model available and is it able to be complied?

Nope. The only turbo model was from 2001-2004 and is the VQ25det.

Feel free to get one and add another turbo if you wish though :rolleyes:

Nope. The only turbo model was from 2001-2004 and is the VQ25det.

Feel free to get one and add another turbo if you wish though :rolleyes:

There is one advertised in carsales in Qld. A dealer, says "Twin Turbo". Check it out.

There is one advertised in carsales in Qld. A dealer, says "Twin Turbo". Check it out.

Sorry Hugh.

Just a standard RS with the factory Aero kit and a Dolphin grill.

Considering all the piping is stock, there is no way he could be running an additional turbo in there.

Edited by iamhe77
There is one advertised in carsales in Qld. A dealer, says "Twin Turbo". Check it out.

maybe you should make an offer and then ask where the 2nd turbo is? Make them install it.... it would really go then

Please excuse me if this has been posted elsewhere but I couldn't see it.

I was talking with Northshore Prestige yesterday and they said they've now got approval for compliance of the VQ35DE engine (and that they were the first and only at the moment). Evidently there's a 2006 Stagea that should be available in a couple of weeks (it's been to the Ford factory in Geelong for testing) and quite a few more on the way.

He seemed to think it'd be priced at about $28-$29K.

Please excuse me if this has been posted elsewhere but I couldn't see it.

I was talking with Northshore Prestige yesterday and they said they've now got approval for compliance of the VQ35DE engine (and that they were the first and only at the moment). Evidently there's a 2006 Stagea that should be available in a couple of weeks (it's been to the Ford factory in Geelong for testing) and quite a few more on the way.

He seemed to think it'd be priced at about $28-$29K.

No it has not been posted and you are correct.

Keep an eye on their web page next week.

yes it is, it doesnt appear to be installed on any other nissan engine that we can tell...........

$28-29k?? thats not unreasonable! thats very tempting to upgrade if i could get enough of a trade in for my car. which i probably wouldnt :action-smiley-069:

$28-29k?? thats not unreasonable! thats very tempting to upgrade if i could get enough of a trade in for my car. which i probably wouldnt :)

The import duty drops from 10% to 5% in 2010 that might equate to about a $1-$2K saving on a $30K+ car. So it'd be worth holding back until that saving takes effect. Though this may mean your car is worth less as well...

Its all swings and roundabouts and the value of the yen/$A/$US

and the fact that japan know what cars go where and adjust the price according ling. japanese economy also has a bit of bearing on it.

I've read quite a few posts about the limited life of the stock turbo. I was just wondering if this is specific to the M35 or not?

The turbo itself is specific to the M35, the turbo problems are not. I believe the issues are exactly the same as with earlier model stageas, however the M35 runs more boost as standard, particularly the ARX (going by the posts above or on prev page), making a turbo failure far more likely on the M35 than previous stageas.

The turbo uses a ceramic turbine which tends to come unstuck from the shaft or shatter when it is exposed to a certain amount of heat for a certain amount of time. If you search all over these forums (skyline R33 & R34 have same issue) you'll find that its generally agreed that 14psi is pretty much the limit for these turbos. more pressure means more heat and if you run 14 or higher psi for any length of time, sooner or later the turbo will break. Why Nissan released the car from the factory running such high boost on these turbos will probably remain a mystery. It seems they were aware of it because the turbo is apparently supposed to be replaced at 100,000km.

My RS is stock and runs around 11-12psi which by rights should be fine (my turbo is still going very well at 108,000km) but the bottom line is that if you buy an M35, bear in mind that the turbo may need replacing at some point. It should cost under $2K to replace it with something similar to the factory one, and from there it will likely never need replacing again.

The turbo itself is specific to the M35, the turbo problems are not. I believe the issues are exactly the same as with earlier model stageas, however the M35 runs more boost as standard, particularly the ARX (going by the posts above or on prev page), making a turbo failure far more likely on the M35 than previous stageas.

The turbo uses a ceramic turbine which tends to come unstuck from the shaft or shatter when it is exposed to a certain amount of heat for a certain amount of time. If you search all over these forums (skyline R33 & R34 have same issue) you'll find that its generally agreed that 14psi is pretty much the limit for these turbos. more pressure means more heat and if you run 14 or higher psi for any length of time, sooner or later the turbo will break. Why Nissan released the car from the factory running such high boost on these turbos will probably remain a mystery. It seems they were aware of it because the turbo is apparently supposed to be replaced at 100,000km.

My RS is stock and runs around 11-12psi which by rights should be fine (my turbo is still going very well at 108,000km) but the bottom line is that if you buy an M35, bear in mind that the turbo may need replacing at some point. It should cost under $2K to replace it with something similar to the factory one, and from there it will likely never need replacing again.

Thanks for the info.

So if I end up with a Series I or II then the turbo may still be an issue (as per any any other parts of the car) but it is less likely as the boost has been running lower over it's life time (provided the owner hasn't increased it).

Thanks for the info.

So if I end up with a Series I or II then the turbo may still be an issue (as per any any other parts of the car) but it is less likely as the boost has been running lower over it's life time (provided the owner hasn't increased it).

I'm sorry to say this but, I would think that a fair proportion of them out there have had the boost raised, even if the owner denies it! :D

I an really trying to like the M35, but that arse end is so ugly. If someone was to make adecent rear lights kit, like was done for Commonwhores, I may be tempted. Front and side, AOK, but...........

I have bBenny,s pic as my desktop.

Nissan made the arse end like that just to keep the cops off my back. Works a treat, even with a 3 inch straight through exhaust.

Just gotta get some Volvo badges for the back and I will be in the clear.

You could always paint the top part of the lights to match the car...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • They are what I will be installing. 640s for me.
    • Hmm... From my experience you get about 0.25° camber change per mm of RUCA length change. So, to correct from -2.5 up to less than -1° (or, more than -1° if you look at the world as a mathematician does) then you'd be making 6-8mm of length change on the RUCA. From a stock length of 308mm, that's 2-2.5% difference in RUCA length. My RUCAs are currently very close to stock length - certainly only 2-3mm different from stock. I had to adjust my tension arms by 6mm to minimise the bump steer. That's 6mm out of 210, which is 2.8%. That's a 2.8% change on those, compared to a <1% change on the RUCAs. So the stock geometry already has worse bump steer than is possible - you can improve it even if you don't change the RUCA length. If you lengthen the RUCAs at all, then you will definitely be adding bump steer. Again, with my car, I recently had an unpleasant amount of bump steer, stemming from a number of things that happened one after another without me having an opportunity to correct for them. I only had to change the tension arm lengths by 1mm to minimise the resulting bump steer. (Granted, I also had to dial out a lot of extra toe-in in the rear, and excessive rear toe-in will make bump steer behaviour worse). Relatively tiny little adjustments having been made - the car is now completely different. Was horrifying how much it wanted to steer from the rear on any significant single wheel bump/dip. And it was even bad on expansion joints on long sweepers on freeway entry/exits, which are notionally hitting both rear wheels at the same time. My point is, the crappy Nissan multilink is quite sensitive to these things (unlike the very nice Toyota suspension!). And I think 99.75% of Skyline owners are blissfully ignorant of what they are driving around on. Sadly, it is a non-trivial exercise to set up to measure and correct bump steer. I am happy to show my rig, which involves nasty chunks of wood bolted to the hub, mirrors, lasers, graph paper targets and other horrors. Just in case anyone wants to see how it is done. I'll just have to set it up to take the photos.
    • What do you have in that bad boy ? Ill go with the 725cc since I'll be going with Nistune ( would definitely like more engine protection but Haltech is too far out of reach at the moment... plus, Ill probably have a pretty safe tune as its a daily, not gonna be chasing peak power 24/7 ahahah ). Are Xspurt a safe choice?  Pete's great. He didnt mention anything about traction arm length so I reckon it may be good. When I get some new wheels/tire later down the road I'll ask him about it and get his opinion on em. I heard from Gary that you've got the bilsteins too, are you running the sway bars too? and what other suspension goodies do you have installed or would recommend?
    • In true Gregging style...  
×
×
  • Create New...