Doughie

Yes apparently UK-specs brake a wheel when the wheelspin gets over a certain level. nobody has ever definitivley been able to prove it does this though. i've got a UK-spec and once (before i pulled the trac fuse out) i had a bit of a traffic-light GRand Prix in the wet. well the Traction control was switched on but i got MASSIVE wheelspin anyway. whether or not the rear wheels were being braked anyway, i don't know but it sure didn't feel like it. I'd be interested to know from anyone who has fitted (or will fit) this trac. removal kit, if it does seem to give more power due to removal of the butterfly etc.

here's one more URL on the tire-rack site : http://www.tirerack.com/tires/yokohama/yo_avs_sport.jsp

read about AVS' here : generally : http://www.tirerack.com specifically (AVS vs s-02): http://www.tirerack.com/tires/tests/avs_sport.htm another comment: http://www.audiworld.com/reviews/wheels/yoko1.shtml

yeah but we all KNOW that Justin drives like a loony 110% of the time !! Justin would trash *any* tire in 2000 miles, no problem.... BTW - Alex - i've got AVS Sport's on the rear of my car. they're fine, good grip in dry and wet, and wear well. I can recommend them and they will certainly last better than S-02's. Someone else has got them too (Paul somebody) and he has done 3 hard track days and 10,000 miles on them and he says they're not worn out yet. so if you want some good tyres that last longer than S-02's, get AVS Sports. I just fancy trying the S-03's to see what i think of them. I don't do big mileage so fast-wearing tyres doesn't bother me.

6000 - 9000 miles ? that all ? I guess it's how you drive it that counts a lot. I'd heard that S-03's were slightly longer lasting compared to their predecessor, the S-02. S-03 is still a soft tyre, but i think you could get 10k or more from them. They only came out in May though, so i don't think anyone has had a chance to wera them out yet ! For sure, when my tyres need replacing (and the front's are close) i will be getting S-03's. In the rain, i think i'll be thankful !

why not ? kidding ... i'll be careful !

OK thanks for the tips guys. can't do it yet as the old pads have got a few mm left to go but good to have a few pointers for when i do whack in the new pads. cheers

Ash So it's an easy job to put in the new pads, yeah ? Get 8 new pins, and then i'm sorted ? Is it advisable to put any "anti-squeal" copper grease stuff on the back of the metal plate ?

Makes sense to do a full-set. Otherwise if you only change, say, the fronts, then you are going to adversely affect the brake balance of the car. In racing parlance, almost all race cars have a brake bias control in the car which changes the allocation of the braking pressure front / rear. Too much at the front and you tend to lock-up the fronts, too much at the rear and you lock up the rears on corner entry which means you're likely to spin it on entry.

OK Got my new Porterfield R4S carbon-kevlar brake pads the other day. Is it easy to change brake pads yourself ? I had a look at the front-wheel caliper/pads and it looks fairly straightforward etc. Has anyone done it before ? Are the rear's the same as the fronts ? Do the two metal pins that slide through the metal backing plates simply slide out easily once you’re taken off all the metal clips ? And do I need to use some copper-grease or something on the pins before I reassemble to make sure the pins don’t stick ? any other tips / pointers ? TIA

I think that the stock TC comes in at 0.1% slip ! Seriously, any slip at all and it cuts in. Just going over a cat's-eye i've had it cut in. (UK-spec)

Yep agree with Eric - you definitely need a Fuel Cut Defencer from Mr Betts. mailto:[email protected] or his site : www.trlperformance.com I've got one on my car like many others and it's never hit fuelcut or done anything weird. About £60. Also your 1.0bar boost reading ties in well with both my own experience at that level of tune (no cats, aftermarket exhaust) as well as Eric's. Eric had about 15psi by memory (just over 1 bar) and I only got 0.9bar !! By the way, obvious i know, but the big performance increase comes in from 1.0bar to 1.25 bar. you're going to need either an electronic boost controller (like Blitz DSBC) or the cheap solution that i currently use is a bleed valve. i'm quite happy with the bleed valve really. does the job, and is 100% reversible if the person who i sell my car to eventually doesn't want it. I'd heard that fuel-cut is fairly dramatic and a bit violent but it sounds like your fuel-cut (if it was that!) was a little more genteel ? maybe this is another UK vs J-spec difference ?? UK-cars have a "softer" fuel-cut ??just guessing here.

Phil i just checked Pete's site - it's fine !! here's the link : http://homepage.ntlworld.com/peter.betts/supra/TechTips/vfcc_install.jpg The diagram indicates that black is indeed earth. might be your ISP ??

Yo Paul I *believe* that, as a default, the Jap-spec ignition timing is advanced relative to the UK-spec. (presumably cos of the higher octane fuel in Japan). Obviously if the engine detects knock, then it retards the timing.

I had a ride in an EVO VI last weekend at Boxhill. Felt nice. Power was ok but wouldn't have thought it would keep up with a Supra once you got past about 80mph. I guess Justin has got his EVO 5 al tweaked up and running big boost. The EVO VI's forte is undoubetedly going round corners for sure.

Mine's a TT, so i guess that Toyota have the engine number stamped in roughly the same place on the N/A. would seem logical to me.

Darren / Ash Actually I can confirm that the engine number IS visible without removing anything at all. When i bought my car i was checking the engine number and i was about to give up as i couldn't see it, BUT then i found it. You need a torch and it IS visible through a small gap. v hard to describe but it is stamped on the lower left side of the engine block. (left side looking towards the front of the car). You may need a few minutes to spot it, but it is there, and it's quite big text too, in raised lettering. Give it a go. roughly you have to look down at a 45 degree angle in between pipes and hoses and stuff and it's stamped on the block. cheers Stuart

looked pretty smart to me when i saw them at Boxhill.

Yeah sorry should have clarified - when i said "estimate" I wasn't taking issue with the calcualtion at all but what i was implying with any calcualtion is that the input value assumptions accurately reflect the real values. as you say, the 2 variables that are may be open to slight debate (hey, you're 10 times more techie on this fuellying stuff than me so i take your word for it !) are the duty cycle of 80% and the BSFC of 65%. The actual value of either one of these could vary up or down by a few percent and that would affect the end result of 310bhp. i quite like all this theory stuff. It's good to know what actually happens inside an internal combustion engine. A little bit of knowledge goes a long way!

OK looking at those figures, it follows that almost ANY mod to a stock Jap-spec will push the "safe" BHP over your estimate of 310bhp ? I think a lot of the potential variability is in the estimate for the BSFC figure. Why doesn't someone simply derive this figure by using a mkiv of KNOWN bhp (i.e. say a stock UK = 326bhp) and then run it on a dyno for a fixed amount of time with an exact amount of fuel in the tank, and then see exactly how much fuel has been consumed. OK so i can see that running it at max.power is not likely so why not run it at reduced revs, say 4000rpm, get the BHP figure from the dyno and then calculate fuel consumed per hour at that BHP. Just a thought. might be talking crud ! If 310bhp is approx. max. BHP for a Jap-spec then almost all the Jap-specs out there are runnning lean at max.power cos almost everyone's Jap-spec on this list is running more than that.

Gav you're becoming almost as much of a LOONY as Justin !!! ;-)

Syed Pull the TRAC fuse in the fuse-box area near the battery under the bonnet. This will disable the traction control (a GOOD thing as the traction control is irritating bordering on dangerous) but it also *apparently* has the effect of removing the 156mph limit on UK cars. I did get *fairly* close to this in France recently (allegedly). I pulled my TRAC fuse months ago. regds

HOOORAHHHHHHHHHHH !!!!!! the Supe went in for the MOT re-test today (having put the 2nd-cat on since the original MOT emissions failure). Car absolutely SAILED through. The bloke said was a completely different set of readings to 1st time. I made sure the CAT was nice and hot immediately before the test, and also pulled both EFI fuses for 10 minutes after fitting the 2nd cat. So in summary folks, if you are concerned about your de-cat supe and the MOT, the car will likely fail with no cats, but sails through with 1 cat on (2nd cat is easier to swap over). Also it was a useful exercise to see what the difference is with the 2nd cat on and off. It DEFINITELY picks up slower with the 2nd-cat on so that was useful to know. Now i've passed, it's : bleed valve OPEN, NUR baffle OUT, 2nd-cat OFF. :smile: cheers

Hmm. All the info i've read over the past year indicates that the Jap-spec cars were mapped to at leat 100RON and maybe 102RON. The ignition timing on Jap-spec cars is advanced (in the timing sense) in comparison to UK cars. i.e. UK-cars timing is, as stock, retarded to run on lower octane fuel than Jap cars. Chris Wilson has confirmed this to be the case, and is one of the main reasons why the Jap-spec cars are more torquey than the UK cars (though there are multiple other differences which also have an effect too)

OK I spoke to Leon earlier today about any advice he could give and he suggested not using Millers when the MOt's done. He even suggested using 95 octane fuel ! I have a feeling that i have almost a full tank in the car right now which is a bit annoying as i doubt i'll be able ti run it down before thursday. ok well we'll see what occurs.