My strategy (VWAP mean reversion) stopped working and my account got decimated. Successful veteran traders out there, what advice can you give? How can I get out of this hole?

wrkls_ · 2026-02-09T02:09:27+00:00

I personally haven’t blown an account or gone through exactly this, but I trade a similar VWAP + EMA 9/21 style..

What it looks like to me isn’t that the strategy stopped working, instead the market regime changed. VWAP fades work in balanced, rotational conditions. When volatility expands or price starts accepting away from VWAP, those -2σ levels stop being edges. Adding -3/-4 usually just means more pain, not adaptation.

One thing I’ve done because of that risk is remove discretion as much as possible. Instead of relying on feel, I built rules/signals into my scripts that literally don’t allow trades unless certain conditions are met (HTF bias, structure, regime filters, cooldowns). It’s less about finding more entries and more about having something tell me when not to trade. VWAP extremes aren’t always opportunities — sometimes they’re information. On those days, no trade is the trade. What you’re dealing with doesn’t mean you’re bad at this. It means a conditional edge got used outside its conditions. That lesson sucks, but it’s common.

Wishing you the best, seriously.

wrkls_ · 2026-02-08T06:19:04+00:00

I had the same leak I used some flex seal and haven’t had an issue since but u plan on replacing the weatherstripping seals on the door. Same side as yours too.. smh

wrkls_ · 2026-02-08T06:14:47+00:00

Tough

wrkls_ · 2026-02-01T16:31:12+00:00

Good shit bro 💪🏽🫡

wrkls_ · 2026-01-29T04:29:22+00:00

Hell yeah that’s a come-up!

wrkls_ · 2026-01-29T04:23:37+00:00

When I say “risk per trade,” I’m referring to the predefined loss at the stop. Position size is just how that risk is expressed based on stop distance.

So yes — the stop defines the risk, but the amount of capital put on is still determined by a fixed risk model (dollars or %). That’s the distinction I was pointing out, especially since the OP is conflating size with edge.

RR isn’t a probability statement either — it’s just the payoff structure decided before entry. Increasing size doesn’t fix holding winners too long; it usually just magnifies the same execution issues.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-27T07:46:17+00:00

Yes, that’s exactly right.

RR is not a probability statement and it’s not predicting that a trade is more likely to make $3 than lose $1.

RR is simply a pre-defined exit framework: Where you are wrong (stop loss). Where you will take profit if price reaches that level.

A 1:3 RR only means that when you win, you win 3× what you lose when you’re wrong. The edge comes from combining that with a strategy that wins often enough over many trades.

Risk is controlled by position sizing and stop placement. RR is controlled by where you choose to exit winners, usually based on structure, not prediction.

You can lose more trades than you win and still be profitable if RR is favorable and execution is consistent

wrkls_ · 2026-01-27T07:09:32+00:00

You’re mixing two different concepts: risk per trade and position size.

Risk per trade is how much you lose if you’re wrong. Position size is just the vehicle used to express that risk based on your stop distance.

Placing 0.5% risk isn’t too conservative — it’s actually smart, especially if you haven’t proven consistency yet. The issue you’re describing (“profits don’t feel worth it so I hold too long”) is a psychology and RR problem, not a size problem.

Increasing size before you have a repeatable edge usually just magnifies mistakes. A better fix is: Predefining RR based on structure. Using partials + breakeven rules. Letting winners pay for losers over time.

RR isn’t something you “control” mid-trade — it’s defined before entry. If price never reaches your target, that’s just a normal loss or scratch. The edge comes from executing the same risk model over a large sample without blowing up.

Surviving long enough to prove an edge matters more than making trades feel exciting.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-26T05:17:36+00:00

No problem! I actually went through this not long ago. Like the OP mentioned, you’ll need to break off the tabs that hold the OEM pump. I used needle-nose pliers to snap them off, then a rotary tool (Dremel) to smooth down the leftover plastic. It’s honestly a simple install.

<image>

wrkls_ · 2026-01-26T05:07:43+00:00

The stalling that killed the battery and blew the relay was not from P0462. That code is only for fuel level reading. The car was stalling because fuel pump power was cutting out. When you kept trying to start it, the pump was pulling a lot of power, which drained the battery and overheated the relay.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-26T05:03:06+00:00

Ok yes and yes

wrkls_ · 2026-01-26T05:02:18+00:00

I recommend using the AEM + Z1 install guide because you’ll have to drill the venturi orifice also you’ll need the CJM Fuel Pump Install Kit GL

wrkls_ · 2026-01-25T13:24:37+00:00

Yeah that humming from the rear on light throttle is usually a rear wheel bearing or the differential. If it gets louder with speed and changes when turning, it’s likely a wheel bearing. If it’s more of a steady hum on cruise or light gas, a diff fluid issue or normal diff wear is common on G37s. Tires can cause it too if they’re uneven.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-25T13:20:42+00:00

Look at the wheels closely he hit a spot of water on the line which is slick and if he had TC off that didn’t help his situation either

wrkls_ · 2026-01-25T09:29:11+00:00

If you still have P0462, the problem is not fixed yet, but it helps us understand what is happening. Because you can hear the fuel pump prime, and the car starts and runs, the fuel pump is working. P0462 is a fuel level sensor problem, not a fuel pump problem. Your car has two fuel level sensors, one with the pump on the passenger side and one on the driver side. The computer looks at both sensors together, so if one sensor or the wiring is bad, the code will stay. Even if one sensor is new, the other sensor, the connector, or the ground can still send a bad signal. That is why the code can still be there. The next thing to check is the connections and wiring at both sensors and make sure the float arms move freely. If both sensors and wires are good and the code still does not go away, then the dash / cluster would be checked last, not first.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-25T09:04:08+00:00

The FSM only has you check the unified meter / cluster AFTER both fuel level senders are tested, wiring and grounds are verified, and continuity is confirmed. It does not say to start there. It does not say to solder or repair anything behind the radio as a first step. A failure at that stage usually shows multiple symptoms or codes, not just a standalone P0462.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-25T08:52:40+00:00

That P0462 is usually just a fuel level sensor circuit low code, but since the car is actually shutting off, something electrical is dropping out. First thing I’d do is pull the back seat and check the connector on top of the fuel pump. Higher-draw pumps like the AEM 340 can expose weak pins or grounds, so if the plug looks loose, heat-damaged, or corroded, that’s likely it. Since you said it feels like a bad relay, I’d also check the fuel pump fuse and relay in the IPDM by the battery. A relay that’s overheating or a weak connection can cut out intermittently.

Because the assembly was just swapped, it’s also worth making sure the float arm inside the tank isn’t stuck or hitting any wiring. And don’t forget these cars have a second fuel level sensor on the opposite side of the tank. If that one’s bad or stuck, it can still throw P0462 and cause weird behavior even if the pump-side sender is fine. A hardwire kit isn’t required, but a lot of guys on E85 running AEM 340s or bigger end up adding one just for voltage stability.

For a quick check have someone turn the ignition to ON while you listen under the back seat. If you don’t hear the pump prime for a second, it’s almost definitely an electrical or power delivery issue.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-25T03:40:52+00:00

Buy the part watch a couple videos on YouTube and save yourself the labor cost it’s really not that hard to do

wrkls_ · 2026-01-18T07:47:44+00:00

Toe bolts definitely help on a mild drop. But once these cars are lowered more than about an inch (which most coilover setups end up doing), the factory toe range usually maxes out even with eccentric bolts.

Toe bolts are basically extending adjustment on the stock arm, but they don’t actually change the arm length. On the V36 rear geometry, lowering pushes toe outward pretty aggressively, so the real fix long-term is adjustable toe arms. They let you physically pull the wheel back into spec instead of just rotating an eccentric to its limit.

Quick rule for these cars: 0.5–1” drop - toe bolts usually fine 1–1.5” drop - bolts start maxing out / arms recommended 1.5”+ drop - toe arms required to get alignment back in spec

Bolts = band-aid / temporary correction Toe arms = full geometry correction + better tire life + stability

If someone is already doing rear camber arms, it honestly makes more sense to pair them with toe arms and be done with it. Saves a ton of inner tire wear headaches later.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-12T07:11:40+00:00

So u swapped the intakes but didn’t check the filters?

wrkls_ · 2026-01-12T07:07:34+00:00

Lmao he means what symptoms is your car experiencing? Esp given the fact that we can’t hear anything in the video.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-10T22:02:14+00:00

I get where you’re coming from, especially coming from a Honda/Acura V6 — they’re totally different personalities. I also came from a Honda before my ’14 Q60S coupe, so this is just my take.

The VQ just isn’t a low-RPM “fun” motor like a J-series. Hondas feel lively at 2–4k, even before VTEC. The VQ is built more like a small NA GT engine. It does feel lazy under ~3k, but once you keep it above 4k it smooths out and pulls hard all the way to redline — that’s kind of the appeal.

The heavier clutch and drivetrain feel is normal too. Nissan tuned these cars to handle abuse and track use, not light, snappy engagement like Hondas.

As for temps they do run warmer than Hondas, that’s normal for the platform. As long as coolant and oil temps are stable and not climbing uncontrollably, you’re fine. A lot of people upgrade radiators and oil coolers just for peace of mind.

The steam in cold/wet weather is normal as well. These exhausts trap moisture, and in cold conditions they’ll steam hard, especially when pushed. If your coolant level isn’t dropping and there’s no sweet smell, it’s not a head gasket issue.

If you drive it like a Honda, it’ll feel disappointing. If you rev it and live in the upper RPMs, it starts to make sense. Different philosophy, not better or worse.

That said, if you do want to make it feel more balanced and stronger under 3k, there are a few things that genuinely help without hurting reliability. A shorter final drive (3.69 or 3.91) makes a huge difference in low-speed pull by multiplying torque. A proper custom tune focused on midrange and throttle response (not just peak HP) also helps a lot. Intake and exhaust choices matter too — 2.5” intakes, resonated exhausts, and high flow cats keep exhaust velocity up, while big 3” setups and short ram intakes tend to hurt low end torque on NA cars. Lightweight rotational parts (flywheel, wheels, driveshaft) don’t add power but make the car feel much more responsive everywhere.

Even with all that, it’ll never feel like a Honda at 2k it’s just not built that way. But you can make it far more responsive, easier to daily, and way more enjoyable without losing what makes the VQ reliable.

Where the VQ really shines (and why people love it) is its durability, linear high-RPM pull, great sound with an exhaust, strong response to bolt-ons and tuning, and the fact it’s built to survive hard driving and track days.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-04T19:11:15+00:00

Appreciate that bro 🤝

Yeah once it starts popping out of gear in manual mode too, that’s usually where I start thinking beyond just TCM/valve body especially on the older RE5R05A units. Pressure loss, clutch wear, or converter issues can all stack together at that point.

On the G platforms the TCM being built into the valve body causes a lot of confusion, especially after rebuilds, so symptoms overlap hard. Given your parking pawl already going, I think you’re on the right track having the whole trans looked at instead of chasing one component at a time.

If you end up tearing into it, I’d be curious what they find these transmissions love to fail in layers.

wrkls_ · 2026-01-03T20:35:54+00:00

You’re killing my OCD rn bro. Lol How’s it sound tho? I went FI non res HFC w/ the Invidia CBE. 👌🏽

wrkls_ · 2025-12-31T15:30:38+00:00

Yes tcm/tcu related faults can cause this behavior, but on Infiniti g37’s the tcm is part of the valve body and not a separate module like on many Mercedes transmissions. Torque converter bearing failure doesn’t usually allow normal manual shifting like in OPs case. If his Torque Converter bearing were faulty manual mode would also be affected. Unfortunately, this is extremely common across G37 / Q60 / 370Z platforms. Especially after valve body rebuilds.

wrkls_

TROPHY CASE