Dale FZ1

Great result, shows how much the element of persistence is part of getting to the top. Well done!

Mount Morgan, near Rockhampton.

Do you have either the parts numbers, or critical dimensions for that particular bearing? Can't imagine it hasn't been done before, and there's a few reputable bearing suppliers between Warwick, Toowoomba and Brisbane.

I rejected split pulse/twin gate for generally similar reasons. Mainly because everything gets so busy and so hot. A properly thought out and executed divided pipe to a 60mm gate is what I'd consider if split pulse was chosen as "the next step". Truth (for me) is that there's too many other areas requiring priority consideration if you want to make the combination faster. The next step (for me) is to make the driver faster... Generally, the GTX3576 makes a lot of sense for tractability and a wide useable torque range regardless of whether single or split

Agreed. Unlikely that Roger Penske will be contacting any SAU people to come drive for him anytime soon, and even WTAC have regs. I find that while my 33 requires $$ and effort to prepare and run, it's the enjoyment of actually running it that makes it feel worthwhile. There's a whole lot of sense to consider running budget, and it's good to maximise seat time while we can.

This is the first and best thing to invest in. 100% agreed

Most honest comment would be you need to consider what you want to achieve in motorsport. Big difference between just having a run, and getting in there wanting P1. By your report, there was a big time difference between you and Paul Morris around Reid Park. Do you really want to beat him and others? Talent, current seat time, car spec all part of the mix - as we'd all appreciate. High spec car is going to cost proper $$ and effort if you want one built with cage, suspension, brakes, wiring, gearbox and diff. (Deliberately not talking about engines). And if you want aero, that's part of the initial build/spec planning. Chassis - there's a reason Toyota 86 is popular. Look at a bare shell and they are a substantial improvement over an S13. As you would hope/expect. Cage - you'd expect between $4-6k as a start, depending on how extensively you want things done (talking at good clubman spec here). Perhaps best to look at regs of classes and events you'd like to compete in, and build to that (regardless of whether you stay with S chassis or move on). Turn key options are attractive, even if it entails making running improvements along the way. My suggestions would be to at least consider an 86 Cup car, a Clubman, a MARC, and a TA2. Repairs/re-engineering the S13 is also still a reasonably sound approach. SEQ is a good 14+ hours run south for you, but there are a number of competent fabricators and engineers with experience to make one work well. I've got a couple of ideas who may be useful, will send PM on details.

@mlr that's an expensive donor chassis. Nothing special about an E30 except light weight, and compact dimensions. Body lacks rigidity. Rear semi trailing arm suspension very similar in concept and execution to a Datsun 180B. And the 80s spec M20 donk is even less exciting than a RB20E, plus more expensive to overhaul. If Dose gets any urge to look at that, I will send him a pair of knitting needles. The pain of those jabbed in the eyes will take his attention away from the BMW.

@Wheezy depending on who manufactured your turbo, there may well have been impeller options. With Kinugawa there certainly was. From recall, I selected the "middle spec" turbine which was 11 blade (stock being 12, and 9 being the highest flowing + lightest), and "standard" 6+6 compressor. There was also a full 12 blade billet comp impeller option for high boost applications. Thrust bearing was about 270 degrees for all units. With all of that, I ran the 11 blade turbine, 12cm housing, standard 12 blade comp, and the compact comp cover. Main target was decent turbine flow efficiency, and a modest power requirement under 400rwhp. It performed the required task, reliably. And there was room for much more. Boost response was satisfactory, not "awesome". At the price point there was little to complain about. I reckon yours will be a good thing, interested to see whether it can run to your power target. What I really like is your choice of Emtron and some decent sensors. Suggest you ditch that OEM CAS. I found greatly reduced timing scatter with a NZ Wiring sensor kit, if that's any help.

Got anymore detail on that turbo? What spec impellers and turbine housing? I ran a Kinugawa one with 11 blade turbine, 12cm T3 single scroll for several seasons. Was very good performer at the price point, only mistake I made was to spec a more compact comp housing with 3 inch inlet. My car was intentionally kept at modest boost and 375rwhp for track, but a short dyno test with more boost showed 460rwhp on 98 petrol was no problem. The bigger comp cover would have been a better choice if I wanted/needed to pursue bigger hp than that.

Looking great Neil. You'll be feeling like the king. Plans for a hoist of some sort too? My shed got a couple of strategically placed windows for natural lighting to make life easier when doing certain jobs. Bring on more pics and story on the setup.

The location of manufacture is not the issue. But the spec of the unit (dimensions, bearings, quality of castings and machining) is. I've run a Kinugawa on RB, generally it was fit for purpose especially at the price point.

Changed back to OEM for appearance, or performance? Not sure what ruined your car

Both of those units are a long way from a stock bolt in option and would probably perform well below expectations compared to the OEM turbo especially without ECU tune changes. OP - 0.7A/R comp housing does not provide any basis for comparison of 0.63 turbine housing on the other unit. There's some very good resources out there in internet land if you want to get your head around turbos. There are some decent replacement turbos out there that will bolt in and do the job you want. Try an experienced supplier like Hypergear and see what can be done cost effectively.

I generally find there's too much going on to have time looking at a lap timer. Cool tech though.

Biggest question is what do you want to achieve? Throw up a dyno sheet and explain how the car drives (as in engine performance), what you like, what you don't like about it.

Ally fretting on steel cross member is either going to wear it paper thin, or cause fatigue. Problem in the making. Also I'd reckon the mounts require a zero set - twisting it (power train) while tightening it all down is only going to introduce stress points under load as you say. Matt's solution looks the goods.

You've done the hard work by measuring actual deck height of the piston in your engine. Target clearance to the quench pad should be about 1.0mm, plus/minus 0.1mm. Order HG to suit your measurements.

No thoughts of going to a 3.69 diff to capitalise on "streetable" torque? There's a lot to like going on here.

Keen to see your developments as they progress.

Welcome to SAU - first time posting! Firstly - RB26 are not known for strong low-mid range torque. Your combination of 272 cams and a 6466 that's barely working at 18psi/600hp can't be expected to "wake up" much before 5000rpm. Referring to on-off throttle driving, not what's seen on a dyno sheet. Secondly - quality of design/fabrication can vary wildly. Shapes, sizes, angles, merges all play a part in how things work. Your manifold design, 2 into 1 wastegate pipe merge etc is an unknown. Was the wastegate pipe divided right up to the valve? Maybe create a build thread for your car and post up a few pictures to help people see what your car is like. Thirdly - tuning outcomes can vary wildly. The engine hardware creates limitations, but so does the tuner's knowledge of how to make something work on the road, as opposed to the dyno. Something to consider. Running 100 octane petrol is no bad thing - your tuner should have capitalised on its knock resistance with an ignition map approaching what might be seen with E85. Fourthly - final drive gearing definitely alters the way a car feels on road, as per previous comments. If you can source a set of 4.375 diff gears for your car, the extra rpm in any gear for a given road speed is going to accentuate responsiveness. Suggestions - install some stock RB26 cams, and spend some dyno time dialling them to what you think you want. Retain the 6466, talk with your tuner about boost control and what they can do to achieve best spool. And run another 5psi boost to get an idea of what its capabilities are like.

Pros - engine bay looks cool. Cons - eliminating long runner inlet costs torque. (very bad on a torqueless RB20) Outcome - any perceived gains in improved "response" are swamped by the loss of torque that the factory gained through empirical R&D. Suggest - run heat shielding, drive and be happy with turbo + tune.

Link provide an extensive help menu. But you need to go right through the whole tune file, make sure the sensor settings are correct, and calibrated. This includes CAS, TPS, injectors. First time around, you will burn time. But follow their prompts and don't leave out any steps. Physically check connections like CAS, injectors, and coils. It is easy to test fire the injectors and ignition without the engine running, just follow the help menu. If you haven't got IAT wired and functional, you're going to need to work around that one, in case the settings makes the ECU think it's seeing -50 or +140C temps. The other thing is to double and triple check all earths around the engine. Link has a good feature to tell you when inputs are off scale and erroring too. It's all in the help menu.

If you want more high rpm breathing capability, those mods should push things that way. If you're currently running it to 9000, based on the dyno sheet, begs the question of why? It's done its best by 7000 and torque is falling at that point. Sticking with a stock RB30 crankshaft, or have you spent on a fully counterweighted crank?

Sounds like a weapon. Must be nearly tractionless! Car pics in your intro thread look good, lot of work involved as many here on SAU can testify. Could you post up in the RB30 dyno results with sheets? It helps bring things together, allows easier comparison of setups. Being from UK, were you quoting 750 "derived" crankshaft hp, or is that at the wheels?