Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 85
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

R31_silo2: well.. I've got something in the works and it already has a comparable stereo gear. Curiously there are NO rear speakers... anyone seen this before?? I thought rears were stock.

race_snooze: well see, I coulda sworn I saw one that was white in my suburb and thought that was the one I was gonna check out, but this one was grey. So I might have seen yours, but I have nfi where you live :D

lol @ starting 32 vs 33 war

As for weight diff mines 1260kg so whats a 32 hmmm

what have you done to you R33 to make it 1260kg, as they came from the factory at a kerb weight 1370kg? R32's were 1290kg kerb weight from factory

Just remember guys, you can't get Milk and Juice in 2.5L

what have you done to you R33 to make it 1260kg, as they came from the factory at a kerb weight 1370kg? R32's were 1290kg kerb weight from factory

Just remember guys, you can't Milk and Juice in 2.5L

yea snooze you must have put her on a heavy diet as mine is i think about 1400kg's you got on anerexic skyline :blink:

I've got something in the works and it already has a comparable stereo gear. Curiously there are NO rear speakers...  anyone seen this before?? I thought rears were stock.

Dunno if I got this right, but by comparable gear I'm guessing you mean like aftermarket? Having no rears is not unheard of, specially caus by the time you get your hands on a car with stock speakers they are usually shite.. thus if you cudn't afford both front and rear .. and wanted some good front ones (ie splits), I know I'd shuv the old out the door.

Dunno if I got this right, but by comparable gear I'm guessing you mean like aftermarket? Having no rears is not unheard of, specially caus by the time you get your hands on a car with stock speakers they are usually shite.. thus if you cudn't afford both front and rear .. and wanted some good front ones (ie splits), I know I'd shuv the old out the door.

I dont have rear speakers in mine but the boot makes a good place for a pair of 12.5 Subs. Not putting in the rear speakers certainly helps the doof doof get into the cabin :)

Yeah. I just thought it was weird @ no rears. I don't send any signal to the rears in my Civic anyway (just fronts and sub), so I guess it just saves weight and no interference between 6x9's/whatever and the sub.

Mine subs only 10" and did the job in the Civic, hope it'll be ok in the line. I got 10" cos it was cheap and I like my metal so need a quicker response than 12".

I'm not quite outer belco snooze.

BTW: I made a post on car covers for skylines but noones answered :) guess everyone's lucky enough to have a garage (and not have a family of 4 with one car each!). Plus I'll have the civic until I flog it off so that's 5 cars. We have a garage but it's chockas so NOONE parks in there, what a waste...

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

    • 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.
    • The previous switchover point was 501mv. The stock value is like ~360. They now were idling at about ~880. The thing is, most people get a false lean condition. I am getting false rich conditions. This isn't a quirk of terminology, most cam upgraders get awful fuel economy because the O2's read false lean and add fuel - Mine are attempting to aggressively subtract fuel.
    • So... the whole idea was to upgrade the power of the motor from stock. The motor I bought with the gearbox had 'some' stuff done to it in the past, but it wasn't as well thought out/what I had wanted to do. The stock heads typically are a big restriction on LS's and need porting to unlock quite a lot of power. You can then go a bit silly with aftermarket castings to get more, aftermarket intake manifolds for a little more, and then porting those for more. <- We are here. Nobody in Australia really goes down this path (for some reason). It might* make 3kw or something more than doing things the tried and true path for 10X the cost. So that's probably why - I wouldn't even recommend it to people, the money was and is likely better spent on just CNC'ing the stock heads and putting a 6.3L stroker kit in. I didn't want to go down the 'normal' path and then think: But if I'd just done a bit more - I could have had a slightly better result. I assumed the heads were running out of flow and it always annoyed me - Turns out the previous installer advanced the cam 6 degrees so this is likely why it was coming on earlier and running out of puff earlier than advertised. The body panels were just lack of planning/no information on this anywhere on the internet and the fact they came out different was annoying. From test fitting the guard it appears I could have gotten away with GTR guards only, but I got the bonnet and raisers and everything else as well for a pretty decent package deal.
×
×
  • Create New...