Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Full-Race Geoff said:

The 9180 1.05 can easily supply 500rwkw worth of airflow.  the rest of the setup will need to support this, fuel is the biggest factor (knock)

Full-Race has a few in stock, there will be a sale for the big holiday in the states this weekend

BTW, I meant awkw, not rwkw.

21 minutes ago, Piggaz said:

Piss it in. 8374/1.45 on my setup went 517 AWKW at 122,000 turbine RPM. 490 AWKW with the 1.05 bum.

Thanks mate. Is that on a 2.8 and on 98 or flex? Looks like you were just under the line there - for the 8374, is it 125k max shaft. speed?

Paul , you have had the 1.45 on for a while now and at first you were sort of thinking about switching back to the 1.05.

You have had a few runs now and one today with Dan , have you made your mind up yet ?

 

2 hours ago, Nismo 3.2ish said:

you have had a few runs now and one today with Dan , have you made your mind up yet ?

 

Nugget. Spending money on the wrong things, needs a shift boot and a front lip ffs.

I am too upset to talk about it in depth right now but will update with more when I am back in NZ ?;)

Edited by Lithium
56 minutes ago, fatz said:

1.45 no good? 

 

Dont they make like 4 million kw in seppo land? 

1.45 has its place. Did the Huntley hill climb today and just doodling through it at a corner that I had huge issues with the twins, it was ready to turn tyres.

I won’t be going back to the 1.05. Sub 3000 RPM there is Definately a penalty to pay, it feels a bit “soft”, from 4000 RPM it’s fine. If you’re “driving it” it’s all there. The 0.92 IMO should be made redundant IMO. No need for it.

Still well infront is the -5’s that we’re on it either way. 

Without the head work you have done and slightly higher CR 9.1 ish , would the 1.45 still give you what you want or just lag it to much for what you like in a Street car

Guess without some sort of comparison it would be hard to know how much difference it would make .

11 hours ago, Nismo 3.2ish said:

Without the head work you have done and slightly higher CR 9.1 ish , would the 1.45 still give you what you want or just lag it to much for what you like in a Street car

Guess without some sort of comparison it would be hard to know how much difference it would make .

Stock head no.

Depends on what you want, what you’re happy with. Having driven both, I would want my cake and eat it too. If the engine ever comes out I’ll throw a V cam at it and possibly bump the compression up a tad higher. Cake and eat it too?

As you know I am thinking of doing some headwork ( never ends lol) wondering if anyone has a 3.0 or 3.2 Lt that has has the compression increased  up to 10.5 ish   , mine is down to 8.1 for whatever reason during work on the stroker build ?

Maybe also done  some port & polish work?

Back to back Dyno runs would be great 

I will stick with the 8374/1.05 

Of course you should do that.  8:1 is 1980s CR for boost.  But you won't get that increase by changing the head. You'll need pistons.

20% increase in capacity means a 20% increase in head flow wouldn't be a bad idea.  Easily achieved with sensible porting.  1mm bigger valves gives the perfect opportunity to properly do the seat angles and shape the bowl into the back of the seats.  And there goes 5 grand.

8 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

Of course you should do that.  8:1 is 1980s CR for boost.  But you won't get that increase by changing the head. You'll need pistons.

20% increase in capacity means a 20% increase in head flow wouldn't be a bad idea.  Easily achieved with sensible porting.  1mm bigger valves gives the perfect opportunity to properly do the seat angles and shape the bowl into the back of the seats.  And there goes 5 grand.

A decent full effort head costs as much as the bottom end. That’s where the last 15% of performance is found. Depends on how much that last bit is worth to you.

 

 

Sort it out Pete!

20 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

Of course you should do that.  8:1 is 1980s CR for boost.  But you won't get that increase by changing the head. You'll need pistons.

20% increase in capacity means a 20% increase in head flow wouldn't be a bad idea.  Easily achieved with sensible porting.  1mm bigger valves gives the perfect opportunity to properly do the seat angles and shape the bowl into the back of the seats.  And there goes 5 grand.

There will have to be new pistons to go with the new work, it will have to be done properly especially with the Vcam in the car, I already have 1mm OS valves 

i decided that if I am going to pull the donk down, get it all done at the same time

Wouldn’t do it if I did not have E85 close by now ?

24 minutes ago, Piggaz said:

A decent full effort head costs as much as the bottom end. That’s where the last 15% of performance is found. Depends on how much that last bit is worth to you.

 

 

Sort it out Pete!

Yeah mate , as you know I have been tossing it around for a long time and can’t help myself, must do it , have to feel the difference when I press the peddle, like an Fn drug ?

Just now, fatz said:

Pulling down a running motor is just dumb

just saying

 

break then fix

Know what you mean but I am not going to break it anytime soon and at 76 , F it I want to finish It , just wish I knew what I wanted at the getgo, but I think there are many blokes doing work on their cars and the goal posts just seem to keep moving 

But I had no idea I would go this far , it just gets in your blood like herpies and just keeps coming back when you think it over ?

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

    • Yeah, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...