Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So I currently have an R32 GTR making 310rwkw's @ 18-20psi (98ron) with a Nistune ECU.

For my next stage of modifications I'm looking to get into the high 300rwkws bracket but was hoping to keep my Nistune.

In speaking to my tuner he's sceptical that it will be up to the task, I understand that a Haltech or Link etc. will do the job better/easier but I would've thought the Nistune would still be up to the task?!?

Current mods and mods to undertake:

  • Garrett -7 turbos (rebuilding to -9 spec)
  • Nistune ECU (hoping to keep)
  • Nismo AFMS (hoping to keep)
  • stock airbox (hoping to keep)
  • 660cc injectors (upgrading to 1250cc)
  • Blitz DSBC (hoping to keep)
  • 98ron (upgrading to E85)
  • stock head gasket (upgrading to metal)
  • stock head studs (upgrading to ARP 2000)
  • stock cooler (upgrading to Plazmaman)
  • stock cams (upgrading to Kelford)
  • stock valve springs (upgrading to BC)
  • Walbro 460 (hoping to keep)
  • Extreme HD clutch (upgrading to Nismo twin plate)

…and yes before anyone chimes in I do realise this could be achieved quite easily with a nice single turbo ;)

 

IMG_7902.JPG

The ECU won't be the problem here. The only problem would be whether the AFM's run out of flow.

Given I've literally never read a scenario where someone running -9's has a problem with AFM's running out of flow you will be entirely fine.

The Nistune can do full flex now, as well as run E85 so don't let that one get in the way either if you want to head down that path.

  • Like 1
4 minutes ago, Kinkstaah said:

The ECU won't be the problem here. The only problem would be whether the AFM's run out of flow.

Given I've literally never read a scenario where someone running -9's has a problem with AFM's running out of flow you will be entirely fine.

The Nistune can do full flex now, as well as run E85 so don't let that one get in the way either if you want to head down that path.

Exactly what my thought process was going into this......

Cheers!

Yuh.  So long as the pulse width and spark can be controlled, there's no reason to not use Nistune.  By the way, that "so long as" condition is entirely rhetorical.  Of course it can.

The limitations starts to come down to things like the CAS, more than the ECU or even the AFMs.  You can upgrade the AFMs easily enough.  But you can't use a better crank trigger against the Nistune.  It would be good for Matt to make a feature pack that allows the ECU to use simpler and more robust trigger patterns though.

  • Like 3
13 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

Yuh.  So long as the pulse width and spark can be controlled, there's no reason to not use Nistune.  By the way, that "so long as" condition is entirely rhetorical.  Of course it can.

The limitations starts to come down to things like the CAS, more than the ECU or even the AFMs.  You can upgrade the AFMs easily enough.  But you can't use a better crank trigger against the Nistune.  It would be good for Matt to make a feature pack that allows the ECU to use simpler and more robust trigger patterns though.

Makes plenty of sense to me..... ?

Very interested in the outcome as your before / after have similarities with my current setup and what I intend on upgrading to.

Isn't high 300s optimistic for -9s though? I thought that 350ish was typical for -9s.

You haven't mentioned the exhaust setup but I assume that you have a high flowing large diameter zorst?

27 minutes ago, Robzilla32 said:

Very interested in the outcome as your before / after have similarities with my current setup and what I intend on upgrading to.

Isn't high 300s optimistic for -9s though? I thought that 350ish was typical for -9s.

You haven't mentioned the exhaust setup but I assume that you have a high flowing large diameter zorst?

Hey Rob,

I too thought this initially was probably a little optimistic but I'm basing my build roughly of what ActionDan achieved and from memory he netted around 380rwkws...

Remember this will be E85 and aftermarket cams/valve springs...

My issue is going to be more along the lines of my intake side of things I reckon, I want to retain the standard airbox, intake piping, Nismo AFM's etc... Basically pop the bonnet and it look standard to the untrained eye...

and yes I have a full 3.5" custom exhaust setup...

IMG_4670.JPG

IMG_4671.JPG

Edited by mr_rbman
  • Like 1
5 minutes ago, niZmO_Man said:

Nismo AFM = Z32 guts in standard AFM body IIRC

Not quite.  It's supposed to be 65mm body (same as normal RB26) but with flow vs. voltage curve that is same as Z32.  So the internals aren't "the same as" Z32, because that wouldn't work.  But the combo of the small body and the sensor calibration makes them "look like" a Z32 to an ECU.

  • Like 2

Nice zorst!

I had a good look at ActionDan's build and asked a few follow up questions as he had attained some good numbers all right.

I will be looking at similar mods: Kelford Cams, HPI dumps, custom exhaust, bigger injectors, Plazmaman cooler, AC Delco coilpacks etc. But like you, trying to retain the stock engine bay look with factory airbox / snorkel, piping, Nismo AFMs etc.

Will see how it all goes. I have 308KW at the moment which was fine when the original build was done as the drivetrain was ancient but I now have a brand new gearbox / clutch, recoed tailshaft and the diffs are next so happy to have a bit more torque.

I have similar set up as yours and also getting about ~300rwkw on 17psi with 93 AKI (not sure what that is in RON), so I'm interested to see your new results.

I'm confident Nistune won't be an issue for you, and my tuner had done plenty of +400kw Z32s on Nistune with stock Z32 AFMs so I'm sure your other hardware is up to the task as well.

On 7/6/2018 at 4:53 PM, GTSBoy said:

Not quite.  It's supposed to be 65mm body (same as normal RB26) but with flow vs. voltage curve that is same as Z32.  So the internals aren't "the same as" Z32, because that wouldn't work.  But the combo of the small body and the sensor calibration makes them "look like" a Z32 to an ECU.

Ah right, I read about them a long time ago, guess time degrades memory.

Also I believe MINE's made basically the same thing.

Ah right, I read about them a long time ago, guess time degrades memory.

Also I believe MINE's made basically the same thing.

 

MINE's made the same thing, but with RB25 AFM internals in stock RB26 65mm housing.

 

On 7/10/2018 at 7:17 PM, BakemonoRicer said:

Spending all that extra money you are nuts to retain twins.

Those things were in fashion last century

Seriously, go an EFR! Those things are magic and you wont be wasting your money doing things twice!!

Refer to last line of original post.... ;)

surprised it actually took 16 odd posts for it to be mentioned :-P

  • Haha 1
  • 3 months 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

    • Lucky man, who owns it in the family? Any pics? 
    • The engine stuff is Greg Autism to the Max. I contacted Tony Mamo previously from AFR who went off to make his own company to further refine AFR heads. He is a wizard in US LS world. Pretty much the best person on earth who will sell you things he's done weird wizard magic to. The cam spec is not too different. I have a 232/234 .600/603 lift, 114LSA cam currently. The new one is 227/233 .638 .634. The 1.8 ratio roller rockers will effectively push this cam into the ~.670 range. These also get Mamo'ified to be drilled out and tapped to use a 10mm bolt over an 8mm for better stability. This is what lead to the cam being specced. The plan is to run it to 6800. (6600 currently). The Johnson lifters are to maintain proper lift at heavy use which is something the LS7's supposedly fail at and lose a bit of pressure, robbing you of lift at higher RPM. Hollow stem valves for better, well everything, Valve train control. I dunno. Hollow is better. The valves are also not on a standard valve angle. Compression ratio is going from 10.6 to 11.3. The cam is smaller, but also not really... The cam was specced when I generated a chart where I counted the frames of a lap video I had and noted how much of the time in % I spent at what RPM while on track at Sandown. The current cam/heads are a bit mismatched, the standard LS1 heads are the restriction to power, which is why everyone CNC's them to get a pretty solid improvement. Most of the difference between LS1->LS2->LS3 is really just better stock heads. The current cam is falling over about 600rpm earlier than it 'should' given the rest of my current setup. CNC'ing heads closes the gap with regards to heads. Aftermarket heads eliminate the gap and go further. The MMS heads go even further than that, and the heads I have in the box could quite easily be bolted to a 7.0 427ci or 454 and not be any restriction at all. Tony Mamo previously worked with AFR, designed new heads from scratch then eventually founded his own business. There he takes the AFR items and performs further wizardry, CNC'ing them and then manually porting the result. He also ports the FAST102 composite manifold: Before and after There's also an improved racing crank scraper and windage tray. Helps to keep oil in the pan. Supposedly gains 2% power. Tony also ports Melling oil pumps, so you get more oil pressure down low at idle, and the same as what you want up top thanks to a suitable relief spring. There's also the timing chain kit with a Torrington bearing to make sure the cam doesn't have any thrust. Yes I'll post a before and after when it all eventually goes together. It'll probably make 2kw more than a setup that would be $15,000 cheaper :p
    • Because the cars wheels are on blocks, you slide under the car.   Pretty much all the bolts you touched should have been put in, but not fully torque up.   Back them off a turn or two, and then tighten them up from under the car with the wheels sitting on the blocks holding car up in the air.
    • Yes. Imagine you have the car on the ground, and you mine away all the ground under and around it, except for the area directly under each individual wheel. That's exactly how it'd look, except the ground will be what ever you make the bit under each wheel from
    • Yes, if you set the "height" right so that it's basically where it would be when sitting on the wheel. It's actually exactly how I tighten bolts that need to be done that way. However....urethane bushes do NOT need to be done that way. The bush slides on both the inner and outer. It's only rubber bushes that are bonded to the outer that need to be clamped to the crush tube in the "home" position. And my car is so full of sphericals now that I have very few that I need to do properly and I sometimes forget and have to go back and fix it afterwards!
×
×
  • Create New...