Welcome to the SR20 Community Forum - The Dash.
Register
SR20 forum logo

Thread: Think I went with too big of a turbo...

+ Reply To Thread
Posts: 341-350 of 710
2011-08-21 22:42:06
#341
It doesnt take a lot to break our trannies, once you get over about 300wtq, that becomes fairly easy to do. I only broke one trans with my t2 setups and that was a trans that had issues from the getgo with a bad mainshaft bearing. My 60 trim setup, i didnt break one trans until I went to the twin disk, Then broke 2 in 2 months. However i was using a 75w90 gear oil as well and only broke them on the street with street tires because they have absolutely no give like slicks do. Then I switched the the Valvoline 85w140 gear oil with the 3rd trans i put in and wow, what do you know, trans lasted 9 months of torture, multiple drag strip runs shifting fast on slicks, I did go easier on the shifts on the street but not that much and did try a couple quick no lift shifts into 3rd and 4th that broke my other trans before that and it held up perfect. So a simple change to an awesome gear oil did that for me and helped save the trans.

Coheeds car however is much much heavier than mine, whereas i would spin most of the time he wouldnt and he would put all the power to the ground to get the heavy car moving and that means broken stock 5 speed trannies at that power level.

But hey, Rob glad you can agree with Gio when he said this whole argument is pointless being Vadim hasnt even dynod the car yet when i said that 3 pages back. But we know Gio is your boy. hahaha

Its just funny watching all the east coast boys taking each others side but havent shared jack.

My bet still stands but I doubt anyone will take it. lol.
2011-08-21 22:49:28
#342
And Ashton, not to attack you in any way shape or form, but why do you refer to your setup in every thread, that was put together so haphazardly (in my opinion)?? From the cutting of the upper rad support, to the awful piping solution for your upper radiator hose that ran across the turbo, to a rushed setup that was always broken. Also you always say "my setup is capable of 10 sec, etc" but you have never yourself actually ran that time because of breakages, correct??
I am happy for your input, but, there are alot of "what ifs" in your statements instead of "here is proof"..........
2011-08-21 23:01:59
#343
Again how was my setup always broken? I never ran the 10 second pass because i didnt give myself enough seat time at the track. Haphazzardly. Again who cares that i cut the radiator support. There are multiple people on here that have done that and ran a half size radiator. Again I had no issues. I had a crossover pipe that ran by the turbo not a hose. So again, never had problems with any of that stuff. Different? Yes, Functional. Very much so.

BTW everyone is giving opinions and examples from their vehicles or other vehicles they have worked on. Its not an every thread thing dude.

Breakages, yeah i broke an axle at the track. Big whoop. Other time i couldnt get the 10 because i had a pair of worn ass 10 year old slicks that just wouldnt grip and spun all the way down the track. Down to the threads and dried up they were soo bad. Again didnt break anything. My only break at the track was my axle a year after and about 40 passes later. You are a funny guy.

My current setup yes had issues. Those are being corrected and ill be back out. Plain as that. Again i dont see many other posting crap whether its because they just dont go out or just dont want to share. Whatever the case may be. Im always more than willing to share my info, build, and times. Its helped a lot of people on here and many can attest to that not to mention just solving and helping people with basic issues. So yeah.......Like Cliff says. Im the retarded one....Im the stupid one.......Im the one not doing anything......LOL Hilarious
2011-08-21 23:15:18
#344
I don't post much because, my friend (r.I.p) posted our results of testing things when he was alive and that did not go well for him. He had a few people that congratulated him but had many that said that's not possible. And it would become a debate.lesson taught lesson learned.
Only way to avoid alot of the nonsense.
2011-08-21 23:21:30
#345
Can the giant nut swinging contest end?

That is really all I see into this thread. Vadim is speechless!

No wonder people keep information to themselves, there is always someone going "not-uh".
2011-08-22 01:06:55
#346
Originally Posted by Coheed
It blows me away that this thread has side-stepped into a tuning argument. The tune is not the problem. The engine is in great shape. It's those cams with his setup that are the problem.

Wanna fix the problem? New manifold or new cams. Done.


X 100000000000000000000000000


Coheed WHY CANT THEY SEE THIS!!!! gosh
2011-08-22 01:18:07
#347
Originally Posted by Coheed
If you guys were making power like you claim, you would break trannies. Unless your car is completely gutted, you cannot fight simple physics. But that's not the point. The point is that you guys come in here with this "almighty" attitude, and tell Vadim that his tune is wrong. Just like you guys told me that the VET cams would suck. Just like you guys told me that reversion is "theory".

To say that you know that his tune is the issue is juvenile, especially since you guys haven't (in most cases) done all the testing I have. It's all well documented, and I've posted the quotes.

Point is, you guys come in and say he is doing everything wrong. But you give no insight to him. I've asked before, and I'll ask again. If there is something wrong with his setup, what do you think it is, and what would you do to fix it?



We did same Testing (Log vs Tubular Manifold) and got same results as Coheed, Even Andreas Miko says VE's DONT like a Log manifold. I really couldnt believe men went to Timing and Tune Issues myself lol.
2011-08-22 01:26:50
#348
Because there is a magical 50whp in a tune over someone who knows fairly well how to tune. lol obviously.
2011-08-22 01:29:33
#349
Oh and i just forget we used JWT GTIR SR20DET tune on our VE lol
2011-08-22 01:52:40
#350
I had heck of a busy weekend, catching up with the reading/replying.

Originally Posted by SR20GTi-R
There is just so much in here that is not correct.

I really one day would like to sit down and really educate this forum on daughterboards, how they work and the software behind them.

The board has nothing to do with how the car operates. Calum, Nistune, Tomei, Moates, and PLMS have been making boards for years. PLMS has been before Calum. You can take any bin and burn/use it in any board.

As of right now Nistune is the best option for tuning software availible for our ECU's. No one can say otherwise. Nismotronic is not availible yet so no comparison can be made. Without going into a long discussion, tuner code is just the firmware behind the ecu, it is not a GUI (graphical user interface). TunerPro is used inline to interpret Daves address file.

I can go on and explain and show Nistunes map tracing and logging abilities but I am not a promoter for them. Spend some time on the Nistune forum and see how far it has come. You will see why 90% of factory ecu Nissan's overseas use it. Don't knock something and glorify another without knowing the information behind it.


I'm sorry but do you care to explain how what I wrote is not correct? I just reread what I wrote it is essentially exactly what you wrote. I also said that it doesn't matter if it's Nistune or Calum, I didn't explicitly say daughterboards is the only difference. I never said the board makes a difference on how the car operates and never said TunerCode is a GUI either. You can go use Romulator if you want, you just need to grab the addresses from the .xdf file and make a .adr file.

Nismotronic is available, it only works on TunerCode ECU's though. TunerCode ships with proper TunerPro RT files to do real time logging and map tracing. After seeing how well it works, I regret buying Nissan DataScan.

Nistune as software is a nice all in one package, but it also comes at a nice pricetag. NismoTronic is already comparable for a much lower price. TunerPro with TunerCode definition files is very comparable too, but is missing maf and TP calculators.
+ Reply To Thread
  • [Type to search users.]
  • Quick Reply
    Thread Information
    There are currently ? users browsing this thread. (? members & ? guests)
    StubUserName

    Back to top