Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

ok i have done a search but obviously i can't find anything on this website regarding what i need to know.

and this isn't a topic like... what turbo do you think is best.

basically i have a VQ30DET motor and i am twin turboing it. i figure the power output would be very similar to an RB26DETT..

basically i want to know what turbo's will work, and come on boost at a respectable rpm and make big power.

i'm chasing somewhere aound the 500rwkw mark..

i already have a GT35 garret turbo with a .63 exhaust housing and i was thinking about using 2 of these turbo's but i don't think i will have full boost till after 5,000rpm and when they are rated at about 500HP each turbo then i think it might be a little overkill.

so are there any GTR's out there making something around 450 to 500 kw, i'd like to know what turbo's they are using and when they hit boost. the other thing is that the VQ30DET has a rev limit of 6500rpm, i may extend that to 7000rpm but i need to have some useable power.

also yes this is a single turbo engine, i am making twin turbo manifolds for it.

I probably wouldn't want to use the term "come on boost at a respectable rpm" when your aiming for 500rwkw. RB26's are over square so that doesn't promote good boost response but I am not sure what VQ30's are. I would guess they are under square given the "lowly" 6500rpm limit.

Twin t67's will get you there. Keir wilsons gtr uses these but I doubt they will come on boost before 5000rpm on a 3 litre.

If the engine is in a 300zx you will have serious room issues as well.

it is not in a 300zx.

when i say come on boost at a respectable rpm, i mean anything below 5000rpm. i dont' want lag. i.e no boost on gearchanges.

i'm still chucking up the idea of leaving one big single turbo, or twin turbo's...

i already have a Garret GT3540 with a .63 exhaust housing which i'm sure will make teh power with 2 of them, but can anyone tell me when boost might hit?

if you guy's can say what hp rating the turbo is and when they might hit full boost.

thanks guys.

Edited by tai_180sx

By my calcs you'll need ~ 67lbs of air for 500Kw (670Hp) so about 33.5lbs per compressor for 2 .

Something like a pair of 48 or 52 trim GT2835's should get there easily enough . I don't think I'd go beyond 52T GT3037's if the rev ceiling is 6500-7000 . A pair of GT3540R's could potentially do 800Kw but I don't know of any T28 flanged turbine housings for them which you will probably need to keep the turbos and manifolds compact .

Cheers A .

Actually would a VQ35 be a better option given the limited rev range ?

Out of interest, what car will it be going into? I considered a vq30det swap about 18months ago but was put off by the lack of wiring information (and cheap bolt on manual gearboxes) at the time as i had limited time to take the car off the road to do the work.

I agree, would be running 28/35s or or disco potatos, if you have the room you can run 25/40s, they are an upgraded gt28 with 0.7ar comp cover, 0.64ar exhaust housing. they will flow at a good rpm but retain throttle responce. Anybody telling you to run gt35/40s are kidding themselves.

By my calcs you'll need ~ 67lbs of air for 500Kw (670Hp) so about 33.5lbs per compressor for 2 .

Something like a pair of 48 or 52 trim GT2835's should get there easily enough . I don't think I'd go beyond 52T GT3037's if the rev ceiling is 6500-7000 . A pair of GT3540R's could potentially do 800Kw but I don't know of any T28 flanged turbine housings for them which you will probably need to keep the turbos and manifolds compact .

Cheers A .

Actually would a VQ35 be a better option given the limited rev range ?

i'd like to stick to the garret range of ball bearing turbo's if i can...

so the only problem i am seeing is if i go internal or externally wastegated. ok so say i go for two GT2860R turbo's which garret say are good replacement turbo's for the GTR and they are rated at 400HP each. that should mean i would get 800HP worth of air flow, which would make me around 500rwkw at 20 odd psi... right?

so this is probably the biggest garret GT28 series turbo before the go into the GT30 range and run the bigger 0.7 front cover.

by the way this motor is in an extensively modified 180sx...

i spose the biggest problem is that i'd prefer to got a bit bigger than a bit smaller if you get what i mean. i don't mide driving cars with big arse turbo's. as long as i don't get lag between gear changes thats all i want.

the more power the better, but it's already at the point where i'll have no traction on teh street anyway...lol

No , not all GT30 turbine based GTBB turbos need to run the large .70AR ratio TO4S comp cover . These are only used with the 76mm 7/14 blade TO4S dinosaur compressors or the 82mm GT40 compressors .

The GT3071R runs a 71mm compressor and can use the TO4B cover (like the 2871R's do) or the TO4E cover they normally get and like GT2835's do .

Compressor cover families go T3 T04B T04E TO4S . The basic GT25 ball bearing centre section is almost the same ftom the smallest GT2554R up to the GT3540R (GT3582R) and all that really changes is the flange on the compressor end of the bearing housing . The smallest compressor stages are 54mm and the largest 82mm so the bit behind the compressor has to grow to suit 54 , 60 , 71 , 76 and 82mm wheel families . Then you have an aluminium backplate or adapter ring to make what are basically "T" series covers bolt to modern cartridges , once they are internally profiled to suit the compressor wheel that is . This adapter ring has a groove machined in it and butts up against a lip on the compressor end of the bearing housing and is locked in place with a large internal circlip . It fits on from the front and has a O ring to seal it up .

Cheers .

thanks discopotato been a big help, you obviously know what your talking about...although i don't understand all of it..lol

can i just ask one question..

if i go with twin 400HP GT28 style turbo's, what sort of rpm should boost come on and what power would i be able to pull at 20psi??

i realise its not a definate answer, but an educated guess would be fine.

Would be guessing, nobody knows what engine mods you have. remeber you are running two turbos off half the engine capacity. basically a 1.5litre engine pushing each turbo. would be keeping exhaust housing small for this reason. You still get the combined volume which will see you good power.

thanks discopotato been a big help, you obviously know what your talking about...although i don't understand all of it..lol

can i just ask one question..

if i go with twin 400HP GT28 style turbo's, what sort of rpm should boost come on and what power would i be able to pull at 20psi??

i realise its not a definate answer, but an educated guess would be fine.

OK here’s your problem. In typical Nissan manual gearbox fashion I bet you have around a 3,000 rpm drop on the 1st to 2nd gear change (ie; ~7,500 rpm to ~4,500 rpm). So you need a pair of turbos that make full boost at 4,500 rpm and at the same time have the airflow to support 7,500 rpm without dropping of boost. That narrows the search down somewhat.

When I was looking at twin turbos for the RB30, our turbo supplier (GCG) suggested a pair of Garrett 2871RS with the 0.64 turbine for circuit work and the 0.86 for drag. They come in T25 and T28 flange patterns. This was based on what the VG30 guys were running successfully (both 3 litres). Keep in mind we have largish cams, extensive headwork, 9 to 1 compression ratio etc etc. How this compares with your set up is important

:) cheers :)

Edited by Sydneykid

yeah i talked to GCG today and they definately suggested 2 GT3071 turbo's with .63 externally gated turbo's. said they'd be on boost at 3500rpm and will make 450RWKW on 15psi. said they have done this before and know this for a fact. so i think this will be the way to go.

anything under 4000rpm is great for lag and can easily make the power i want.

what do you guys think about this?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...