Jump to content
SAU Community

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 08/24/2021 in all areas

  1. Hi everybody, Long time stalker on this forum, 1st time posting. found lots of helpful info here over the last several years, thought it was about time I signed up to the forums. I have a MY 1995 Nissan Skyline R33 GTS-T I bought back in 2005, as I was on "P" plates back then and at the time it was the only (barely) legal power to weight turbo'd skyline i could drive at the time, and it was love at the moment I sat in the drivers seat. I'd not had many cars in my history, a Blue Engine VC Commadore (I was given in payment for a custom PC I built as a freelance computer Tech.) a cleveland 302 v8 ford fairmont XD (swapped for a executive high backed leather office chair) a nissan pulsar 1.8L reebok sport (the first car I bought personally and traded in for the skyline) the Skyline and more recently (another Jap Import) Toyota Landdcruiser Prado 1kz 3.0L Turbo Diesel (Family Wagon) But the skyline holds that special place in my heart when i get in, turn the key, and the smile appears on my face. i hope that's a good enough introduction...
    1 point
  2. Hey mate, sorry both have sold Cheers, Sean
    1 point
  3. Yeah, so the second one is what (I think) 6Boost first started out with (many many years ago), claiming correct spacing of the consecutive entries into the runner meant that the pulse train was built up nicely and there was no need to increase the diameter of the runner as the additional cylinders' flows were added because the pulses were in train with each other, it wasn't like simply adding continuous flows to each other. Which is true, and the arguments made for it were all convincing - but this concept was dropped after a couple of years in favour of more conventional banana bunch manifolds like the first one. So while the concept seems to be right - it was dropped by the guy who was pushing it hardest, which might tell us something. I haven't done much thinking on the matter myself. The first one is essentially "modern 6Boost". It's almost impossible to obtain proper equal length along with a good collector along with packaging against the engine and the car. So most people don't even try, or just assume that it is equal length because they can't measure any differently anyway. And I think the majority opinion since a long time ago is that the gain from a true equal length manifold, laid out as ideally as possible, against what is possible in reality, is small enough to just give it away and not think about it.
    1 point
  4. So I commented on a WTB casually, and now it seems I have a buyer for the engine/box/ecu package so i've started removing it last night. Have started an FB page for my mates and I have some fun with our builds moving forward https://www.facebook.com/No-Crust-Racing-105366271868243/
    1 point
  5. I saw some really good reviews on set ups like that. Hopefully the lack of vcam won’t affect it too much. mum almost through reading the EFR v2 thread. There is a lot of info in there. The internal vs external gate is interesting. Internal seems easier and cheaper and some of the people seem to swear by them, but the tuners I’m using think external is better so that’s what I will go for. I’m trying to get my head around the twin or single wastegate for the twin scroll manifold. I can see how in theory twins mean you retain a true twin scroll set up but as far as I can see, as soon as the gate opens then the twin scroll disappears and isn’t needed anyway. The tuners I’m using have said to use one wastegate. The engine, fitting and custom fabrication is being done by Hi-power and the tuning will be done by NDT developments. Both in Auckland. They were companies recommended to me.
    1 point
  6. concept being even pulses? I can see two differing approaches for an I6 engine with regular cylinder pairing (1-6,2-5,3-4) equal length runners into a split T04 collector with seperate wastegates (lets assume each runner in this example is equal length and same cross sectional area): vs a concept like this (shared flow path to collector):
    1 point
  7. can you elaborate on what a proper pulse converter manifold looks like? my manifold is cyl 1,2,3 -> one scroll 4,5,6 -> other scroll. the first place the gas paths meet is just before they hit the turbine blade.
    1 point
  8. Here's a thing I discovered in my travels which may be of interest in here, this is the kind of comparison I've been hoping to see but not expecting to, finally... This is a dyno plot of a 1.05a/r divided EFR8474 (dotted line) and a 1.05a/r divided G35-1050 (solid line) with otherwise identical specs, including boost curve on an Evo X. Both hit target 2.15bar at 4500rpm and creep out to 2.35 at peak, which is as far as they were willing to push the engine at this point. Apparently the EFR8474 had stopped giving gains at this point however the G35 still seemed to have more to give, which they said they may try sometime if they get brave. So yeah, seems like the G-series range get a bit more interesting now that the divided housings are starting to seep into circulation! Worth noting that "km" stands for koń mechaniczny, or "horse power" in Polish
    1 point
  9. After speaking with the guy doing the work and the guy tuning it. I’ve decided to go with a 8374. It’s way more than what I thought I would want but it seems a really good option and I can always turn down the boost I guess.
    1 point
  10. Wide body molds are done! And first layers done at front. So carbon it'll be.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to Sydney/GMT+11:00
×
×
  • Create New...