Dale FZ1

I have. Generically they are very similar to a 240Z fitment. Initial concerns about cutting the metal were there, but the result was worth it. Some people don't want to alter the original spec. I don't share that sentiment. Remember it's just an object made of metal.

So who made the custom one then? Pics please!

Definitely left field stuff. Love it. Give us more detail!

Shortcut!! Is there bitumen on the outside of that kerb? edit - watched the video. Yes there's bitumen out there. Nice lap.

Understood Unless you get something that has a fair bit of increased turbine capacity, it will tail off somewhere around 6-6500rpm. I may know of something suitable as a stop gap.

You've probably got to get a firm idea of what you're trying to achieve. And at what cost/effort. What are you trying to achieve? There's nothing inherently wrong with the 2530, BTW. It just has limitations, same as any other turbo. https://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/turbochargers/gtx2867r-gen-ii You could use a GTX2867 supercore and install your existing turbine housing onto that. Relatively simple changeover, and it should make a bit more hp with broadly similar (but different) response characteristics. Not a worthwhile change IMO, on a $$/hp basis. Unless the 2530 looks like it's on its last legs. Home-cooked hybrid spec turbo just isn't worth it either, when there are plenty of tested/proven combinations for RB25 out there

So in summary, their customer relations/communications need improvement. And for fitment you've needed to trim exhaust manifold stud length, be patient/dextrous with a spanner, and use a more creative means to plumb the oil supply. As per Peter's comments ^^ the fitment issues are fairly common, and most people experience these things. They are less concerning than getting good clearance/fitment for the dump pipe and WG plumb back; not to mention the compressor plumbing. Modifications usually involve a problem solving mindset, and perseverance. Hopefully the setup works well once it's all done. What turbo are you using?

https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/472431-r32-gtr-efr-7670-build/ Check this thread above^^, and read in conjunction with Lithium's comments in this thread to your question. IMO the short answer is "no". You don't "need" split pulse to achieve your performance targets. But if you have the budget, yes you should consider it - but stay IWG for the relative simplicity of install. There's enough accumulated experience that suggests a properly executed EWG setup will be a performance improvement on an IWG. Comment applies to single scroll and twin scroll. I wouldn't discount the idea of a well designed manifold/gate setup, and a reasonably high spec single scroll turbo.

Progress is progress. Keep it going!

The development path you're on looks well thought out, and should be proving cost effective and fun. Look at a HICAS lock bar, and a 1.5 or 2 way diff centre next. Makes a massive difference to handling and power down capabilities.

Referring to the caliper adapter kits. Alpha Omega? Good to see steady progress and sensible upgrades with your car. Hopefully there's a proper diff centre on the horizon? 1.5 way at the very least, but don't be afraid to go with a 2 way. Massive improvement when incorporated with a HICAS lock bar.

At the 1000+hp mark, going to need something to stop it sucking the seagulls in!! What application do you reckon Michael? - Strap one to a GTR and go Flying 500 at WTAC 2018, Snowy 1000 etc?

Impeller sizing on the PTE 5862 is very similar to the EFR 7670. GTX 3576 runs a smaller turbine. You'd think "broadly" comparable units, but they will all perform a little differently whether in-gear response, max flow, or boost recovery on gear changes. Housing options in all cases would make a huge difference on those performance measures. I'll be watching for results/impressions on the 5862. V band turbine inlet, very nice

So is there a reliability elephant in the room? Are EFRs failing in service and nobody's talking about it?

I know the engineers will have done their homework to achieve flow efficiency, but the size of the holes in the housings are a factor in how much air can realistically pass into/out of the engine. Lithium's calculations suggest a speed increase of ~30% to achieve the same flow. Makes me wonder about longer term durability for severe duty use, and whether they have done due diligence for the bearing arrangement. Turned out not to be the case with the early GT series with plastic bearing cages. But yes, it's sure going to be interesting to see how these things perform!

No. It might make more mid range hp, then taper off. Effectively make it feel like a tractor to drive. Look at the comment in Robo's thread from 13 years ago. That setup was at about 0.9 bar, 220rwkW. If you want more hp, bolt on a bigger turbo that can pass more air.

How much lower is the ride height? Post up a pic of the car. And confirming no aftermarket suspension arms in the rear? HICAS is still fitted, or removed?

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1378565 Here's something that might help with what's going on in BMW land using EFR7163

The comment that seems most common with EFR is that dyno figures do not convey the linearity of response. Provided you're sensible about how to engineer the fitment of turbine to manifold, and assuming the I/C + exhaust piping is adequate, you will achieve big improvements across the board. But be aware that all setups involve accepting compromises somewhere. It's not like you have found the silver bullet for performance - at story's end it's just a much better/newer spec turbo. Hard not to get a bit excited though and end up over-thinking what to expect - and many of us have been through that process. Not sure what engine that dyno sheet is off, or if there's any point trying to compare the result with a GT3576? In the absence of a result from an RB series engine, I'd look for what the BMW crowd have done with M54B25 engines. Although from what I've seen they go for the bigger 3 litre engine, and/or focus on the S54 M-spec engine and chase big hp with big turbo setups. At least they're using short stroke I6 engines so it's a closer/more relevant mechanical spec. I'm pretty keen to see a few pics of the installation as it progresses, and hear the results. FWIW - if you're looking at adaptors, or welding on different flange to the turbine housing, I would look at sourcing a decent quality fabricated manifold with small diameter runners and the correct flange or V band for straight fit and best outcome.

Firstly - is the body roll causing problems? Or are you indicating a handling problem? The real objective is to chase an acceptable balance front to rear for understeer/oversteer without spending big on components (eg why go to replacement bars if you can get a workable outcome without changing from OEM). Tyre size and spec WILL influence what suspension spec is necessary or best. eg. a set of 235 ADO8R vs 295 A050 will require different choices. Secondly, a nose heavy boat WILL tend to flog its front tyres. That's unavoidable. I'd review what ride height you have it set at, as this impacts roll centre and the tendency to resist body roll. Then I'd contact MCA, speak with Josh about your needs and his prices and recommendations. Then make a decision whether you want to run with their product or the HSD you have mentioned. Quite probably it's going to require 13kg fronts at a minimum. Ignore what GTR owners use, this is a 2wd chassis with different requirements.

Consensus on dynos is that Australian horses are bigger than those in the US and presumably Canada. ie. our dyno figures are generally lower than what you might get. So bear that in mind when interpreting comments from Aussies and Kiwis. Something most people here are missing is that you're running this donk in an early Z car with its inherent advantanges (much lighter weight than an R chassis Skyline) and disadvantages (semi trailing arm rear end, lighter components, less potential traction). So the car isn't going to require nearly as much hp to be fairly quick. And depending how you drive the car, how it's setup etc you may not want really high torque to avoid breakages and make it useable. It's not clear to me how the 6758 or 7163 is going to bolt up to the OEM manifold - flange differences? Not that keen on adapters. Talking Aussie hp numbers, and running on Aussie pump petrol 98. Using conservative tuning, I'd say 6758 around 320rwhp. 7163 around 370rwhp with turbine flow efficiency, ignition timing and a touch more boost up top the difference. E85 should add around 50rwhp to both. Feel - 6758 would be stronger up to 3000rpm, roughly equal up to 5000, and then compared to the 7163 fall off the pace after that. Ultimately the 6758 would make the RB25 feel comparatively strangled up top and (for road use) let you pull a higher gear a bit easier, using less throttle because it's feeding boost into it at lower revs. So I wouldn't see it making much different dyno numbers than the TD05H-18G you want to get away from, but the feel would be very different (quicker to make meaningful boost and more flexible). 7163 should hit all the marks most people expect of a short stroke smallish capacity 6 cylinder in a sporty car. It won't turn tyres at low rpm like some of those old small block sporty cars you'd see (eg Mustang) but the mid range and relative lack of "high" rpm (thinking 7000) torque drop will make it a comfortably better performance package than a comparable USDM sporty car. The 7163 should offer a fatter torque band simply because it won't be weak down low, and the torque will hold up for another 1000rpm. In my books, makes it the better of the two.

My first response is that NO setup is going to be the "silver bullet" for performance. It's only about achieving an acceptable compromise. It's always been amazing to review logs for how an engine behaves on-road (or track) and see how different that is compared to a dyno. What you've got isn't necessarily bad, but with the spiking there's room to make it less wrong. Secondly, the big thing (for me) is how does it feel? And can the chassis setup (which includes tyres) actually use it without just turning rubber to smoke? Edits ^^ from your post sort of indicate that you're actually in "about" the right performance area for a 2wd R chassis. Without the cheater traction advantage of a GTR, it's pointless IMO to try to emulate/expect the same sort of engine performance as a GTR because it probably won't work to best effect. https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/358438-34geeteetee-daily-track-project/?page=111 Have a look at what Mat has achieved with the 8374 on a 25 Neo. And look closely at the WG takeoff angles. Now he has no issues with boost control, but the target in that instance is going to be North of 20psi so direct comparisons aren't possible if you are for some reason targeting 15psi (arbitrary figure chosen). Perhaps Mat could offer experiences/opinions regarding the 8374 on an RB25, and his take on what applications that would best suit and/or what compromises would have to be accepted. Bear in mind it's experiences from a guy who's actually achieving some pretty solid results without major dramas. ** Somewhere in amongst this, I'm seeing that we are fixating on boost pressure as the measure of turbocharger control. There is enough tech available in Greg's setup that perhaps turbo speed is where the thoughts are best focused**

Good effort with the crank angle sensor setup. What's the expectation with turbo change to the HX40?

https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/421419-timmys-r34-gtt/?page=24 For track work, abandon the GT30 idea. Retained heat, poor scavenging, and relatively short turbo life are the results you should expect from a smaller (30 vs 35) turbine. The fast response you speak of may simply result in frying rubber off corner exits, and lower high rpm torque. Particularly for track, it's got to be able to exhale. The experiences of 34GEETEETEE tell the story in moving from the HTA 3076 to a EFR 8374. It's in the turbine. If you're fixed on the idea of Garrett gear, check what Tim has done with his on the above link, and how it's now performing with a GTW3476. I wouldn't ignore the experiences of someone who's just done the upgrade, and run at WTAC just 4 days ago.

Nothing comes easy with performance setups. However - maybe the ITB setup is over-rated. eg. Nissan persevered with it on the GTR and GTiR. No sign of it on the VR38 engine, and Mitsubishi never put it on the Emo range. Surely throttle response/control on a rally car is an important factor to performance?