R33 appreciation thread.

Wow, I can't believe all R33 fans in the world have gathered in one /o/ thread!

File: received_1391679657573703.jpg (162KB, 1080x1920px)

162KB, 1080x1920px

Oregano

File: 20217882.jpg (40KB, 366x366px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 366x366px

>>16802379
I don't like any Skylines after the 31.
You could have made this an unpopular opinions thread OP, fucking homo.

File: 5af85cbb-9d54-43d8-9943-70c1183f1716.jpg (420KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

420KB, 960x720px

I like how it looks, especially since it isn't such a big meme like the r34 and r32 but I have heard bad things about the performance

>>16802338
I'm here for you, R33

File: 1480341197211~01.jpg (728KB, 1920x1210px)

728KB, 1920x1210px

>>16802379
>>16802560
I don't know what either of you are trying to say, but have this (You) anyway.

>>16802709
Thank you, bb. <3

>>16802715
>tfw someone reposts your R33

>>16802774
Very nice. Never seen that one before.

>>16802695
God damn that's sexy. Sauce?

>>16802537
>oregano

What did he meme by this.

>>16802873
O r i g i n a l e

File: 22608443375_9509ce16b0_k.jpg (399KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

399KB, 2048x1365px

theres literally only 2 R33s I like and both are Nismo

>>16802695
R33 is better than R32 as far as performance goes tho

>>16802695
It's literally an R32 with all the problems fixed

>>16802976
never drove one just heard ppl talk shit but nothing specific
>>16802873
desu I found >>16802695
and >>16802774
on tumblr when I still had an account...was just following some jdm guys

>>16802995
Nothing specific because

>if I don't like car, it's shit, no evidence
>if I like car, it's best, no evidence

Usually has to do with how they perceive the design. At least in the case of the R32/R33, it's almost always "omg r32zilla so minimal so sex so fast" and "ew r33 fat and ugly so slow."

File: 5kH8f8l.jpg (14KB, 454x240px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 454x240px

>LOLOLO R33 IS PIGFAT
>R34 weighs more but no one ever bitches about the weight

File: IMG_2502.jpg (103KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 640x480px

>>16802976
was the r33 successful in motorsports?

File: 2jz drag r33.jpg (154KB, 1858x1045px) Image search: [Google]

154KB, 1858x1045px

>>16802338
do you like this monstrosity?

>>16803019

It took a few JGTC championships.

>>16802338
New fag here, are the R31-R34s just meme cars or are they actually fast?

>>16803106
Moderately fast, but not the craziest thing in the world.

>>16802715
Hey, I live near where this was taken. Wonder how he got it here

>>16803162
That's what I figured. How are they to drive around town? Recently I started thinking about grabbing a R32 or R33, whichever I can find for a reasonable price, as a DD

File: IMG_6725.jpg (76KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 600x450px

>ugliest & objectively worst skyline appreciation thread

>>16803015
Thank you, I've tried to say this so many times, and nobody ever retorts. It's all about hive opinion.

>>16803185
What location is that?

>>16803106
R33 and R34 are about as fast as the F80 M3 stock to stock. Or an Evo 8/9.

>>16803203
Either way the Skyline is pretty old now. Make sure you have a backup car.

>>16803203
Comfy as fuck for the awd, the cheaper rwd are nice too, their not the super duper end all be all car but its a decent car, rb26s are good too as long as your not a retard and try to tune them to high hell.

File: Project33-10.jpg (2MB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x1280px

>>16802338
Aki's R33 is really impressive. It's revealing how Mine's VX-ROM is kind of shitty though considering how he clogs catalytic converters and there are weird issues with dead spots in acceleration.

File: Project33-04.jpg (1MB, 1920x1280px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1920x1280px

More of his R33

>>16803260
Yeah I was planning on keeping it mostly stock maybe some moderate tuning nothing like some of the 1000HP videos I see online.

>>16803486
What people don't tell you about tuning an RB26 to 1000 HP is that you have massive compromises.

Yes, you can do it. But unless you bolt two RB30s together to make some franken-V12 6L you're going to have shit throttle response at low RPM.

In order to get 1000 HP you need like 1250cc injectors. The injectors at the low end (where your car will spend most of its time) will be inaccurate so driving around town is going to be shitty because the injectors are going to meter inaccurately. They usually have just a single hole so their atomisation is shit compared to street cars which means sooty exhaust that clogs your engine with carbon over time.

In order to measure the kind of air that a 1000HP engine moves, you need to use a MAP sensor instead of the MAF sensors in the stock engine. Less restriction in the intake, but the individual throttle bodies cause noise on the MAP sensor and in everyday driving the ECU has to do some half-assed intake air temperature sensor compensation because the sensor gets heat-soaked.

Most standalone ECUs are shit as well. Most don't support MAFs like the Link G4, some don't even have knock control to protect the engine like powerFC. Huge pain in the dick is what I'm saying.

If you care about daily driveability, the biggest turbos you should get are the GT2859R-9 AKA HKS GT-SS turbos. Even then you will trade some turbo lag for more power. It will max out around 500 crank HP with stock camshaft profile.

The supporting modifications are what matter though. You really need to do a lot of work to make an RB26 reliable.

File: 16664885_1397327616975693_1868472910320559920_o.jpg (386KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

386KB, 2048x1365px

Here's my 33. I have an S1 spoiler waiting to go on it, by the way, just waiting for some clips in the mail. I appreciate the thead, 33s deserve more appreciation.

File: 16804338_1397327933642328_2521746983407623629_o.jpg (353KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

353KB, 2048x1365px

>>16803629

>>16803588

>not having primary and secondary injectors

mitsubishi had a handle on that shit in 1983

>>16803650
Most builds don't have them, most ECUs don't even support primary/secondary injectors. You can do it right, most people don't.

And regardless you will have to deal with turbo lag out the ass unless you do sequential twin turbo,

File: DSC_0072 - Copy.jpg (3MB, 3916x5890px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3916x5890px

>>16803635

>>16803224
>R33 and R34 are about as fast as the F80 M3 stock to stock. Or an Evo 8/9
Nope

>>16803361
Aki?

>>16803588
Switch to a single and you can make over 500hp with less lag than the OEM setup. I know because I have one like that. Although it is a 2.7 and has few simple mods done to it.

>>16803588
Shit dude, I knew that people put work in when they do those builds but I had no idea the levels of technicality that went into it. So what you're saying is that these guys who say that they DD their 1000hp are sitting on a time bomb until that turbo gets gummed up enough to snap the veins and send them into the engine then right? Or do you think they could just run some kind of lighter tune to fix the issue of soot build up?

>>16803588
>In order to get 1000 HP you need like 1250cc injectors. The injectors at the low end (where your car will spend most of its time) will be inaccurate so driving around town is going to be shitty because the injectors are going to meter inaccurately. They usually have just a single hole so their atomisation is shit compared to street cars which means sooty exhaust that clogs your engine with carbon over time.
ID or ASNU injectors idle and atomise fine even in massive sizes

>>16803736
So if it has less lag and can make about the same power as a Twin setup why did Nissan go with the twin turbo setup instead of just putting a single with a few other mods?

(I'm a muscle car guy and know nothing about tuners or what goes into making a viable DD build)

>>16803791
I have no idea what data pushed them towards twins.
However I can say back in the 80s a twin turbo setup was considered ballin.

File: Evo_R34.png (2MB, 1565x1122px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1565x1122px

>>16803679
Not that different, at least the R34. The R33 has less boost (.85 bar vs 1 bar) and a bunch of other changes.

The F80 M3 is pretty pigfat and RWD so on the track it's really not that fast. In the region of 7:50 on the burgerking. The R33 was around 8:00. 10 seconds on a track that long is like 2%.

I will say that the Evo 9 and 10 are probably a fair bit faster than the R33. But if you actually tune the RB26 to 400-450 crank HP the R34 is actually comparable to the 996 Turbo. The R33 needs some parts from the R34 in addition to more power to be competitive but it's stuff like the diffuser that literally just bolts on.

>>16803731
r33gt-r.com

>>16803736
If you get restricted to stock cams, stock displacement, it's really not that simple unless you get into really fancy stuff like variable geometry turbos. Singles are more efficient yes, but it is really hard to double your power without losing response.

>>16803763
The turbo doesn't get gummed up, but driveability is often shit with high HP builds. Stuff like catalytic converters are inevitably going to be useless because the soot clogs them over time.

Running high boost inevitably means very rich AFRs. Fuel efficiency goes to shit, you get fire shooting from the exhaust which sounds cool until you realize that your bumper is getting coated with soot and/or melting, your engine is wearing faster because rich AFRs cause greater oil dilution/bore wash, etc.

These big builds can be reliable but usually they're completely dead at normal RPMs, basically naturally aspirated. Unless you're high up in the rev range they won't make power. They're mostly for e-peen and youtube views because the power is basically unusable outside of a drag strip.

>>16803815
Being ballin rather than efficient is definitely something that is important to me!
/sarcasm

If I was going to get a Skyline I would get an R33

I hope imported R33 GTRs arent fucking $25k+ in the US like R32s are right now.

>>16803790
http://www.gtrheritage.com/topic/318-black-soot-issues/

They work yes, but not ideal. Denso UC 12 hole injectors are stock for R35. That's the standard for port injection these days and the ID injectors don't really compete as far as streetability is concerned. You do give something up for that extra flow.

>>16803791
Part of it was because "twin turbo" marketing. Another problem is that OEMs didn't really have access to single turbos that were big enough for 2.6L-3L engines.

Another thing is that until recently twin turbos were better at the time. Twin scroll turbos haven't been made until recently so single turbos did have some disadvantages as the unequal time exhaust pulses would cause interference effects that reduced the rate which impacted scavenging to the turbo. The reduction in scavenging meant less exhaust flow to the turbo which reduced spool.

Sequential twin turbo designs allow for exhaust pulses to be correctly timed to maximize the spool of the individual turbos. This advantage goes away with twin scroll turbos but they weren't available at the time of the RB26.

>>16803941
Judging by historical pricing I'm pretty sure they're going to be around there by the time we get to 2020.

>>16803866
Will soot not actually gum up a turbo? I was always told that it would.

So pretty much looks good, sounds good, but is pretty bad for the engine and there is no reason to do it unless you are actually drag racing or wanting to show off your pavement princess?

So for a 500hp build what would you need to do exactly? Just a turbo swap and maybe a tune?

>>16803960
Oh ok, so it was the most efficient setup for its time. So would a twin scroll swap be more powerful or about as powerful as the factory twins?

File: R33.jpg (372KB, 1024x686px)

372KB, 1024x686px

>>16802695
The sedan models are shit-tier, which goes without saying. But idiots love to meme, so they harp like all 33s are boats.

Pic related: Deceased uncle's GTR

>>16803866
The spec I run is focused on lessening lag, I effectively started from scratch as the car came as a roller without drivetrain.

>>16803960
I use R35 injectors on my RB27. ID injectors are much much better than the old single hole ones.

>>16803975
Soot will not gum up a fixed vane turbo unless your engine is chucking out coal by the ton.
>So for a 500hp build what would you need to do exactly? Just a turbo swap and maybe a tune?
That could work, or it might spit a head gasket.
People do run 500hp with minimal mods though.

>>16803995
check out the motive dvd videos on youtube. they do a twin vs single test

>>16803975
If it's really bad it's possible but usually unlikely due to the temps in the turbo. And yeah there's a good reason why even in the highest tiers of touring car racing you didn't see more than ~650 HP from an RB26.

To reach 500 HP the simplest method would be Garrett 2859R-9 turbos. They bolt on to the stock location. Get the latest version with ceramic ball bearings for best response.

After that you will want a different exhaust to reduce backpressure over stock. If you want something loud, Tomei makes something pretty good. If you don't want loud Midori-Seibi has their silent high power NR II which is almost at stock levels of noise.

You will also need new injectors. Stock is 444cc, generally speaking take the cc value and multiply by 85% to get the max HP. A new fuel pump as well to keep the injectors supplied with fuel.

Do not replace the stock airbox. It is a cold air intake and you will reduce the longevity of the engine if you go to pods as they tend to suck in more dirt than standard airbox + paper filters.

You will also need new MAFs to measure 500 HP of air. You will also need to remap the ECU. If you don't want to use the R32 ECU you will have to go with a standalone ECU like the Haltech Elite 2500 as the R33 and R34 ECUs are one time programmable.

That's pretty much it. HKS posted some dyno graphs of basically these exact mods on a stock R33 GT-R. They added VCAM Step 1 though which is designed to improve mid-range power/torque as well as emissions: http://www.hks-power.co.jp/en/product_db/turbo/db/17763

The GT-SS is a Garrett 2859R-9 with metal ball bearings and HKS actuators.

>>16803995
A twin scroll swap is going to be better yes. But you will have to go with top-mount: https://www.full-race.com/store/efr-series/efr-turbo-kits/nissan-rb26dett-efr-twin-turbo-kit-1.html/

The turbo shuffle they mention here is resolved by using new inlet pipe designs, the stock intake piping is such that one turbo feeds its air almost 90 degrees into the junction which leads to it basically choking the other turbo and causing it to stall. Nismo makes a carbon fiber part if you want gucci.

Or you can weld a divider into the stock pipe: http://www.gtrusablog.com/2013/01/divided-rb26-twin-turbo-pipe.html

Regardless you can see the huge difference in response and power especially as you get up to the big power builds. Smaller power targets you won't see as big a difference but it's definitely still there.

Parallel twin turbos is hardly obsolete though, even BMW still uses it in the S55 inline 6. It's mostly a packaging thing as companies don't want a glowing red turbo right where someone might touch it.

>>16804131
What kind of mods did you do besides single conversion? And really I think if injector dynamics stuff was good enough they would be used in OEM cars where atomization directly impacts emissions.

File: Snowplow R33.jpg (62KB, 960x640px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 960x640px

perfect use as a snowplow instead of a regular car

>>16804288
>What kind of mods did you do besides single conversion? And really I think if injector dynamics stuff was good enough they would be used in OEM cars where atomization directly impacts emissions.
it was built up from a 24U block with a 2mm longer stroke and 1mm overbore.
The head is a ceramic coated 25 Neo, cams were custom billet grinds by the engine builder, it has a wrc style dual plenum intake, electronically controlled 26 ITBs, inconel log manifold, Vband EFR7163 turbo, Mitsubishi Evo SAS system, 4 inch downpipe, twin 70mm exhaust, twin 76mm motorsport cats, Syvecs S6 ECU, 9:1 compression, water injection.

I'm probably going to ditch the SAS and go to a twin scroll setup instead of the Vband, and control the wastegate actuator directly from the ECU, electronically.

OEMs don't use IDs because they cost a lot more than Denso/Bosch etc, and I doubt ID has the ability to produce in volumes needed.

>>16804454
Doesn't the 25 Neo head add VCT? That's probably part of it, as well as a different camshaft profile and antilag air injection.

Injector Dynamics seems ok, but after checking their product catalog they also advise going with their ID725 injectors for OEM applications, I suspect you still give something up with the 1000cc injectors if you're only planning to build for 500 hp.

>>16804787
>Doesn't the 25 Neo head add VCT?
yep

>>16804819
I suspect VCAM would be better but it's also expensive as fuck and step 1 only gives 30 degrees of phase. It's kind of nuts how BMW is running 255 degree cams with 10mm lift on the N55, I imagine that they can only do that due to dual VVT + VVL.

>>16802338
I would buy a r33 just for the rb26.

>>16804858
Oh yeah, all R33's come with an RB26 apparently including the gt-s.
Nigger pls, just import the motor. It's not like they won't let you unless it isn't stock.

>>16804875
>It's not like they won't let you unless it isn't stock.
what does this mean? can you not import a built tomei motor for example?

>>16804880
In the US at least no one is going to stop you from just importing an RB26. You just can't bring an entire car in.

>>16804887
lol americans

>>16803960
91 mr2s had twin scroll turbos

File: twinscroll_OEM_1.jpg (63KB, 512x1145px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 512x1145px

>>16804963
so did the fc rx7

>>16804963
The 1986 Sierra RS Cosworth was designed for twin scroll Holset turbos but then Ford went with Garrett

>>16804963
>>16804969
>>16804975
Were there any twin scroll turbos available at the time that would actually work for a 2.6-3L engine? And would they fit in the low mount position where the twin turbos would be in an RB26?

I may be wildly off base, I was just under the impression that twin scroll turbos haven't really been used en masse until the early 2000s by which point it's a little late for the RB26 which was developed in the 80s considering how little shits Nissan gives about keeping their engines up to date.

Motive DVD's comparisons between the single and twin turbos aren't exactly fair, the GTX turbos are just obviously better than the GT turbos. I would argue that the difference between parallel twin and single twin-scroll turbos are going to end up pretty comparable.

Actually the funny thing is that a lot of single turbos have worse response than the stock twins on the RB26. Of course, when the ceramic wheel explodes you're fucked but it's not all bad: http://www.gtrusablog.com/2015/07/rb26-twin-turbo-vs-single-turbo-video.html

File: 20170304_105415.jpg (4MB, 5312x2988px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 5312x2988px

>>16802338

>>16805101
>purple

Fucking sexy.

File: CNN-Cruise-ship.jpg (90KB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 640x360px

>>16802338
best r33 reporting in

wish i had an r33. an r32 would be nicer tho

fucking rice tax in australia, i want one to A to B not le mad drifts

File: 032.jpg (333KB, 1280x1280px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 1280x1280px

I wonder why Nissan went with the R33-esque turn signals on the R34 sedan.

>>16804787
Tbh a 7163 is a small turbo, most people put them on 2.0 litre engines with great results. A 2.7 should have no problem spooling it fast.
The SAS improves spool by around 200rpm in top gear, it can be turned off via laptop so it's been tested back to back.

>>16804846
Yeah I really wanted the V-Cam so I could stick with an RB26 head but I thought I could get better results by spending the cash elsewhere and using the 25 Neo head instead.

>>16805410
Honestly I hate how the RB26 doesn't come with anywhere near a reasonable amount of power stock, it's basically in the region of a highly tuned NA engine.

A 2JZ build is trivial by comparison by tossing some different turbos and a remap.

>>16805547
Have you seen the Motive DVD videos on Youtube?
They've got almost 700hp out of a RB26 with minimal mods besides turbos and a remap.
I believe it's an R34 engine, so none of the oil pump drive issues of the R32.

>>16806944
Too bad the HKS R32 is more popular

>>16805547

>327awhp
>not reasonable.

>>16806944
does HKS really need to cover their cars in that hideous camo

shit looks like the print all over the walls of a mcdonalds playplace in 1997

>>16804969
nice, i forgot about that

>>16807458
yeah it's great isn't it?

>people complain the R33 is too heavy
>love the R34
>R34 is heavier than the R33
???

>>16805865
They don't do stuff like very aggressive track driving, mostly drag racing. Stuff like hard cornering constantly will absolutely kill a stock RB26 from oil starvation without a baffled oil pan and without an oil restrictor in the head the rest of the engine will also experience starvation.

Oil cooling is also needed without question for long hard track runs. Bouncing off the rev limiter too often will still break the oil pump drive even on the R33/R34, if you take apart the engine you'll see the kind of wear that the hard cut causes.

To safely run at 400 WHP my research is showing that I would have to replace the MAFs, injectors, head gasket, fuel pump, transmission, clutch, and timing belt in addition to the turbos.

In addition a baffled oil pan, new conrod and main bearings are advised, as well as an oil restrictor for track day use.

The upgraded R34 transmission is also needed which is retrofitted into MotiveDVD's R32.

>>16806962
The RB26 at best comes with about 280-290 WHP when they were shipping with 1 bar of boost by default. That's hilariously low amounts of power per displacement, on par with the R35 at launch.

>>16808642

>when they were shipping with 1 bar of boost by default

That's with the boost restrictor on the plenum still in place.

Everyone took them off, it was even advised by nissan to do so.

>>16809930
I'm pretty sure that by default the R32 shipped with 0.7 bar of boost, not 1 bar. My notes say that R33 was 0.85 bar and R34 was 1 bar.

You went from 280 crank to about 320-330 crank without the boost restrictor on the R32. I don't think anyone advises upping the boost on the R34 turbos, they can take more but they're still ceramic on the stock turbos.

Pretty much universally I see the recommendation to use 2860R-7 or 2859R-9 to upgrade over the stock car while retaining approximately stock response just to get rid of the ceramic exhaust wheels.

>>16808642
>they didn't come with a baffled oil pan already
Well, you learn something every day huh.

>>16810083
The stock block is strong but not much else is as far as I can tell. Really a pain in the neck.