Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I thought there was minimum thicknesses (that is thicker than glass) you had to run under cams on safty grounds? I can't remember what it is though

Old sport sedan regs at least, 3mm side windows, 6mm windscreen - not entirely sane the last bit either, if you ever have plans to do a wet race! General requirement of 6mm transparent to separate the driver from the fuel cell or whatnot if it's a single volume car.

I think some of you blokes need your head read spending that amount of dough on that UK stuff knowing how often you need to change it, even the hard coat isn't a guarantee of long life.

  • Replies 65
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think some of you blokes need your head read spending that amount of dough on that UK stuff knowing how often you need to change it, even the hard coat isn't a guarantee of long life.

Mine isn't going to sit out in the sun. It'd last a long time wouldn't it?

can't see why not. we have Lexan screens on our boat, they do have black mesh 'bra' screens but see a disgustingly hard life, and look good after a year (sits on a Marina, exposed to the elements 365)

and its not really huge money, I was up for a rear screen anyway, at 330 cost price for a aftermarket jobbie through Novus and 2k for the rear screen with no wiper hole. 800 delievered for sides, qtr's and a rear in hardcoat isnt half bad IMO

I was talking to the owner of a big glass factory here in tas when i put the lexan screens in the boat, he said the only downfall was resistance to UV, so if the car is stored out of the weather I'd expect decent life. time will tell i guess!

Mine isn't going to sit out in the sun. It'd last a long time wouldn't it?

UV wasn't the issue, if you've got any sliding they scratch from vibration contact with one another, inevitable fingernails, the good intentioned helper who wipes the morning dew off with a paper towel or rag, before you can yell at them!

Seems a bit steep that Pommy price anyhow (2k landed?), although the tint and edging inevitably push the price. Been a couple of years now last hatch in 4mm was around 400 locally (uncoated), some 3mm for a lathe last year and cut to size - enough to do 2 typical windows was well under 100 as well.

2k? Nah matey 1600 delivered to aus from the uk for a full 32r kit and a full 33 kit both in hardcoat. 800 for sides qtrs and a rear. Not tinted, but OEM edge round the qtrs. unsure if I will fit the qtrs yet see how they look first.

Yeah the 34 has one in, one out. In is on the drivers side. Gives option for attaching donkey dick tube to run air over driver on really hot days, or after curry.

Haha that's what I was thinking of doing. How is the donkey dick tube attached? cable ties?

I've got the Plastics4Performance 5mm side windows in hardened and 4mm elsewhere in R32 racecar. Have 6mm screen (min thickness CAMS allows to race) coming in next week (hopefully). Have got some windscreen tear-offs to protect from sandblasting/wiper damage. - even glass screens get badly damaged racing at Barbagallo. Other than weight saving the other big plus is safety. Have a look at their video of impact testing. What would punch straight through glass (and you!) just bounces off Lexan with hardly a scratch. The finish on the windows with the OEM blackout is fantastic and fitted perfectly - looks factory. The side windows still have electrics and haven't been scratched even slightly in a season of racing use (nice to be able to get some fresh air while in pit lane!) so the hard coating is well worth it at least on these windows.

The side windows do flex a bit so you'll need to open the door to wind up the last bit so they seal on the top rubber. Other than that they work fine when fully closed.

Edited by Nissanmania

Picked up my kit today off Burgz, just drilled holes in passenger side screen for the mount studs stops and guide, great to work with. Great fit. Rear screen same deal nice fit. We got 5mm side and 4mm qtr and rear. The rear weighs 4460grams, sides about 2180 and qtr screens 730 grams. Oem side screen was about 4700 on the 33. So they lived up to their ' half the weight or less' can't complain for the money so far

  • 2 weeks later...

Picked up my kit today off Burgz, just drilled holes in passenger side screen for the mount studs stops and guide, great to work with. Great fit. Rear screen same deal nice fit. We got 5mm side and 4mm qtr and rear. The rear weighs 4460grams, sides about 2180 and qtr screens 730 grams. Oem side screen was about 4700 on the 33. So they lived up to their ' half the weight or less' can't complain for the money so far

overall, how much weight saved?

Well 5 kg's just on the doors, don't know about qtrs yet haven't removed old ones and rear screen I busted mine and ditched it months ago, but I 'think' I remember reading that a 33 oem rear screen weighs about 7kgs so all up you'd save between 8-10 kg's depending on what thickness lexan you get. We got 5mm sides 4mm qtrs and rear.

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

    • I'd be installing 2x widebands and using the NB simulation outputs to the ECU.
    • Nah, it's different across different engines and as the years went on. R32 era RB20, and hence also RB26, the TPS SWITCH is the idle command. The variable resistor is only for the TCU, as you say. On R33 era RB25 and onwards (but probably not RB26, as they still used the same basic ECU from the R32 era), the idle command is a voltage output of close to 0.45V from the variable resistor.
    • It's actually one of the worst bits of Nissan nomenclature (also compounded by wiring diagrams when the TCU is incorporated in ECU, or, ECU has a passthru to a standalone TCU).... the gripe ~ they call it the TPS, but with an A/T it's actually a combined unit ...TPS (throttle position switch) + TPS (throttle position sensor).... ..by the looks of it (and considering car is A/T) you have this unit... https://www.amayama.com/en/part/nissan/2262002u11 The connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit, is the TPS (throttle position sensor) ...only the TCU reads this. The connector on the unit body, is the TPS (throttle position switch) ...ECU reads this. It has 3 possible values -- throttle closed (idle control contact), open (both contacts open, ECU controls engine...'run' mode), and WOT (full throttle contact closed, ECU changes mapping). When the throttle is closed (idle control contact), this activates what the patent describes as the 'anti stall system' ~ this has the ECU keep the engine at idling speed, regardless of additional load/variances (alternator load mostly, along with engine temp), and drives the IACV solenoid with PWM signal to adjust the idle air admittance to do this. This is actually a specific ECCS software mode, that only gets utilized when the idle control contact is closed. When you rotate the TPS unit as shown, you're opening the idle control contact, which puts ECCS into 'run' mode (no idle control), which obviously is a non-sequitur without the engine started/running ; if the buzzing is coming from the IACV solenoid, then likely ECCS is freaking out, and trying to raise engine rpm 'any way it can'...so it's likely pulling the valve wide open....this is prolly what's going on there. The signal from the connector on the flying lead coming out of the unit (for the TCU), should be around 0.4volts with the throttle closed (idle position) ~ although this does effect low throttle shift points if set wrong, the primary purpose here is to tell TCU engine is at idle (no throttle demand), and in response lower the A/T line pressure ... this is often described as how much 'creep' you get with shifter in D at idle. The way the TPS unit is setup (physically), ensures the idle control contact closes with a high margin on the TPSensor signal wire, so you can rotate the unit on the adjustment slots, to achieve 0.4v whilst knowing the idle control contact is definitely closed. The IACV solenoid is powered by battery voltage via a fuse, and ground switched (PWM) by the ECU. When I check them, I typically remove the harness plug, feed the solenoid battery voltage and switch it to ground via a 5watt bulb test probe ; thing should click wide open, and idle rpm should increase... ...that said though, if it starts & idles with the TPS unit disconnected, and it still stalls when it gets up to operating temperature, it won't be the IACV because it's unused, which would infer something else is winking out...  
    • In the context of cam 'upgrader' I mean generally people who upgrade headers/cams - not my specific change. I mean it makes sense that if I had a bigger cam, I may get more false lean readings. So if I went smaller, I'd get less false lean readings. To a point where perhaps stock.. I'd have no false lean readings, according to the ECU. But I'm way richer than stock. My bigger than normal cam in the past also was giving false rich leanings. It's rather odd and doesn't add up or pass the pub test. Realistically what I want is the narrowbands to effectively work as closed loop fuel control and keep my AFR around 14.7 on light sections of the map. Which is of course the purpose of narrowband CL fuel control. So if I can change the switch points so the NB's target 14.7 (as read by my WB) then this should be fine. Haven't actually tested to see what the changed switchpoints actually result in - car needs to be in a position it can idle for awhile to do that. I suspect it will be a troublesome 15 min drive home with lots of stalling and way too rich/lean transient nightmare bucking away for that first drive at 2am or whevener it ends up being. Hopefully it's all tune-able. Realistically it should be. This is a very mild cam.
    • Messing with narrowband switchovers is a terrible bandaid. I don't want to think about it. You are a cam "upgrader" only in concept. As you said, your new cam is actually smaller, so it's technically a downgrade. OK, likely a very small downgrade, but nevertheless. But the big thing that will be the most likely suspect is the change of the advance angle. That change could be equivalent to a substantial decrease in cam lobe duration. I haven't gone to the effort of trying to think about what your change would actually cause. But until someone (you, me (unlikely), Matt, someone else) does so and comes to a conclusion about the effect, it remains a possibility that that is the change that is causing what you're seeing.
×
×
  • Create New...