Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey all ............

i need a little help my R33 Gts-t auto

after i gave it a little bit of a hard time on wednesday night

it has started slipping

1st gear dont slip nor does 2nd that i can noitice

and i dont think 3rd does either

but once in 4th-O/D is slips like nothen else

Could really use some help becasue its only started slipping afteri over headed it down the 1/4

thanks in advance

Andrew

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/276659-auto-gearbox-is-slipping/
Share on other sites

what im worried about seen its done this ..... how long does it how until it shits it self ........ becasue im looking at upping the boost this week

You're not going to have a catastrophic failure, she'll just slip like mad until the band gives way completely then you be missing that gear.

If I were you, I'd leave the boost as is and baby her until you sort the issue.

Either drop the manual in or replace the box with a second hand one for now, depending on your financial situation.

My clutch pack fried too, and I found a secondhand auto box for $350, pulled the old one out, chucked the replacement one in, and turfed the old box.

Awesome thing about everyone converting to manual is that complete boxes are cheap as chips.

picked up a 2nd hand auto box for 150 end of last year after i killed my old one. much cheaper to just buy another box and swap it rather than pay for rebuilds etc

also look into a shift kit and trans cooler, or you'll just kill the next one

Edited by stenve

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...