Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys i just got the latest HPI magazine and i found a good article on the hks t04z, and they tried the t04z on 1.4 bar on a stock internal engine.

the housing is the 0.81, and the car has hks 264/272 cams as well, plus the pfc djetro

they managed a solid 425.1kw at wheels on the 1.4 bar and climbing fast they said.

heres the dyno graph with a comparision to a few other sets of turbos on a gtr

the article was done at Willall racing as well.

they mentioned the to4z needed more rpm and more boost to show its true potential, and over 500kw is acheivable for sure.

IMG_1424.jpg

i noticed the gtrs's are no were near as laggy as the t04z but i suppose it doesnt show the true results until both setups are pumping more boost and pushing the setups to the max.

any thoughts?

  • Replies 181
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Is it just me or does the t04z graph seem to be a little later than the normal?

People have run off 450rwkw on i think 1.6 or there abouts, so they will make good numbers.

Would have been good to see the meaty 2530 line on there to compare aswell.

I take it the graphs of the other turbos are from other motors, of unlisted spec?

Is it just me or does the t04z graph seem to be a little later than the normal?

People have run off 450rwkw on i think 1.6 or there abouts, so they will make good numbers.

Would have been good to see the meaty 2530 line on there to compare aswell.

I take it the graphs of the other turbos are from other motors, of unlisted spec?

hey ash, im not sure on the specs of the other setups, but i'd say they are all on stock engines except maybe some bigger cams.

its in the latest issue of HPI (no. 68)

i reckon the trust turbos (t518z's) are probably the best lookin setup on that graph for overall power. though it say the other turbos (besides the t04z) will all run out of puff soon and the t04z is only just starting to get going.

do u think if they ran more boost on the t04z it would make more power earlier and not look as laggy as suggested on that dyno graph? surely the midrange will pick up and catch up to the others alot quicker?

at 152kmh the trust ones are making 325kw and the T04Z is only making ~240kw. big difference. especially considering on that particular set-up/test they are making the same peak power.

the graph says t5187z x 2

does anyone know how to work out the rpm instead of kmh on that graph with the gtr 4.11 ratios?

also whats the true max power potential of each turbo setup? (at the wheels, not engine)

Edited by CruiseLiner

I'm pretty sure I know who's GTR that T517z graph was based on. I've been in the car and yes... it pulls hard but it seemed to die off past 7300rpm but the graph doesnt reflect that. Also it took a while for the turbos to spool up again after a gearchange, well it seemed like that to me anyway.

Needless to say when the owner did a 8000rpm launch with RE55s it was like literally being punched in the guts!!

The T517z also have more to go because its not flatlining away in similar fashiion to the T04Z.

for 517's to be into the 400rwkw range they must be using some hoofing boost

still, if its compared to "other" cars graphs thats not the best of idea.

Who knows what parts the other cars have listed on em

wats the next step up from the gtrs's for a responsive power curve. this also being on a fully built rb26/30. i want 700awhp but dont want massive lag, and also dont necessarily want to keep the turbo's in the stock 'position', so to say

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

    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
    • You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...