Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

There is a limited auto selection that can been used for auto conversions in GTR's, the easiest conversion is using the auto from a Stagea 4WD but you wont get 5-6 gears.

From there upwards in power capacity there are stronger auto transmissions however expect even less gears.

The biggest cost is taking a auto and adapting it to take the GTR transfer case and bolt straight on, not a cheap exercise.

Your better off getting a built Stagea 4WD auto as most of it just bolts straight up, reducing the amount of engineering involved to make it work.

There is a limited auto selection that can been used for auto conversions in GTR's, the easiest conversion is using the auto from a Stagea 4WD but you wont get 5-6 gears.

From there upwards in power capacity there are stronger auto transmissions however expect even less gears.

The biggest cost is taking a auto and adapting it to take the GTR transfer case and bolt straight on, not a cheap exercise.

Your better off getting a built Stagea 4WD auto as most of it just bolts straight up, reducing the amount of engineering involved to make it work

i assume your talking about the M35 transmission? how much power would that be able to handle roughly

Edited by JosephFoley440

WC34 (WGNC34 as Kiwirs4t pointed out), they ran the 2.5L straight 6, bolts straight to the rear of a RB26....obviously you will need the RS Four 4wd transmission to remain 4WD.

The M35 models got a V6 and it wont bolt up from my understanding.

I wouldn't think the M35 trans bolts up - he would be talking about the WGNC34 trans.

Frankly I would give the R32 a miss and look for a small auto performance car.

WC34 (WGNC34 as Kiwirs4t pointed out), they ran the 2.5L straight 6, bolts straight to the rear of a RB26....obviously you will need the RS Four 4wd transmission to remain 4WD.

The M35 models got a V6 and it wont bolt up from my understanding.

thanks for the help man much appreciated ill do some research

Kiwirs4t whys that man i know a lot of people are disappointed to see a auto GTR but I've always wanted to own one so i figure why not :)

That is trick but the box alone is $15k-$30k plus the padel air shift unit

c34 4wd stadea box would be the most cost effective way to do it

Then there is a company in sydney that make a T350-T400 auto adaptor kit to suit the GTR but these are really a race application setup

thanks for the help man much appreciated ill do some research

Kiwirs4t whys that man i know a lot of people are disappointed to see a auto GTR but I've always wanted to own one so i figure why not :)

I don't have an objection to an auto GTR (I know some people do) but its more that you will need to go to a lot of trouble and expense to get an auto that will hold a lot of power. Also when you go to sell it after getting bored with being out-dragged at the lights by Honda Civics (unless you stall it up and do a full noise launch which can get a bit tiresome/embarrassing) you won't get your money back.

  • Like 1

Yeah I agree, the stagea box will be fine unless you are putting out some serious numbers, it will be by far the easiest option to fit and wire up.

And I reckon, if you want a GTR and you need an auto, go for it! It's your damn car, do what you like

  • Like 5

I would think the stag box would be plenty strong enough for a stock 32 GTR for cruising duties

Obviously if he wanted to race the car it would need something stronger like the TH350-400 or even 700 might be enough once built

Well the OP did say 400-500Hp, the stag box built should be good to a reliable 450 (abused) from what ive read about them.

If he wants more power than that, then open the cheque book and look at the T400 option for reliability.

It really does come down to his need due to his disability and his power goal.....everyone should have the right to do what they want to their car.

If he is concerned about reliability, dont constantly rape the car racing everyone.......lots of people out there running lots of power on stock manuals but they dont clutch dump and bang the gear shifts, avoiding the need to buy a OS88.

  • 4 weeks later...

The biggest issue you'll face is that the auto is controlled by the ecu. You could run the 26 off the 25 ecu with either an SAFC to put 2 afm signals into 1 or a selin dual maf translator kit. There is some jiggery pokery to get the tps and iac to work correctly on the 26 using the 25 computer.

The up side is that series 1 auto stageas go for next to nothing for one that has a ratty body.

You could even set the auto up on an aftermarket controller, but I'm uncertain on cost.

  • 1 year later...

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

    • 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.
    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
×
×
  • Create New...