Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hello again,

A while back I wrote in to say I was thinking of putting a RB30 motor in a small Toyota bus. I got lots of very good advice, thank you, but it left me with lots more investigation to do. Well, to cut a long story short, I went through just about every engine combination recommended (or possible), but I kept coming back to the RB30. It came down to a two things: (1) the RB30 has a terrific reputation and (2) the diff ratios available to me were just too low for the bigger holden V6s or a Ford straight 6.

Finally, after a long trip on the original 2.4 litre a month back it struck me that the RB30 would have HEAPS of power for the job, so I fished around and found a pretty decent 88 model skyline with 200,000km on it, registered and in very driveable condition. Aside from one sticky lifter and a slighty rough shift on the auto, it seems good, and it is in having the auto serviced now just to be sure.

Assuming they come back to me and tell me it is ok, I will be fitting the engine and auto in the bus this weekend. But it has occured to me that the shift points on the auto might be a bit out. On the one hand it will be pushing around the equivalent of the old Pajero in weight, with a lot less rolling resistance but more windage, on the other hand it will be doing so with a lower diff ratio, working out at 2600rpm at 100km/h.

So can anyone tell me if it is possible to reprogram the auto computer on these? From what I have read it seems that I have a series 2, and I have read that these use the engine management computer to control the auto. I can see how to reprogram the injectors etc in the engine, but I can't see any reference to reprogramming the shift points.

Thanks you,

Matthew

P.S. At the end of the process I will have a very stripped out 88 skyline to dispose of, from the north west peninsula of Adelaide, and it is too good to throw away. I'll be open to offers.

dont go exactly off what i say but, you will need an aftermarket computer, they can do everything, i remember speaking to someone in regards to ecus for fords and they can adjust the point in when the gear changes, i doubt you could change a stock ecu

dont go exactly off what i say but, you will need an aftermarket computer, they can do everything, i remember speaking to someone in regards to ecus for fords and they can adjust the point in when the gear changes, i doubt you could change a stock ecu

Right... sounds like it will best if I see how it goes then.

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

    • This has clearly gone off on quite a tangent but the suggestion was "go standalone because you probably aren't going to stop at just exhaust + a mild tune and manual boost controller", not "buy a standalone purely for a boost controller". If the scope does in fact stop creeping at an EBC then sure, buy an EVC7 or Profec or whatever else people like to run and stop there. And I have yet to see any kind of aftermarket boost control that is more complicated than a PID controller with some accounting for edge cases. Control system theory is an incredibly vast field yet somehow we always end up back at some variant of a PID controller, maybe with some work done to linearize things. I have done quite a lot, but I don't care to indulge in those pissing matches, hence posting primary sources. I deal with people quite frequently that scream and shout about how their opinion matters more because they've shipped more x or y, it doesn't change the reality of the data they're trying to disagree with. Arguing that the source material is wrong is an entirely separate point and while my experience obviously doesn't matter here I've rarely seen factory service manuals be incorrect about something. It's not some random poorly documented internal software tool that is constantly being patched to barely work. It's also not that hard to just read the Japanese and double check translations either. Especially in automotive parts most of it is loanwords anyways.
    • If you are keeping the current calipers you need to keep the current disc as the spacing of the caliper determines the disc diameter. Have you trial fitted the GTS brakes fit on a GTSt hub or is this forward planning? There could be differences in caliper mount spacing, backing plate and even hub shape that could cause an issue.
    • Hi there I have a r33 gts with 4 stud small brakes, I'm going to convert to 5 stud but keep the small brakes, what size rotor would I need?
    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
×
×
  • Create New...