Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Just wanna know what you's think about a gt35 turbocharger or gt40

my mate recommended it for the rb20

anyone know anything about em or fitted one to the rb20 before?

5pi by 6800rpm

I have been fitting the GT2876R turbos to the RB20's on the stock manifold. They are a good turbo with great response and output....mind you, it is a hell fight to fit it all unless you have done it all before.

Just wanna know what you's think about a gt35 turbocharger or gt40

my mate recommended it for the rb20

anyone know anything about em or fitted one to the rb20 before?

You would barely get any boost at all in first gear.

ok thanks dont worry bout that last post i looked it up

But...

im going to start a new post And i want everyone with the rb20 too

post up what turbo they are running when it hits full boost and any info about how much mods they

have cause im not getting very far this way i need results

Type of Turbo = Psi with ect ect ect = Power in rwkw

Cheers

(i also think we should do it with the rb25 for the r33 lovers)

ok im after some comfirmation on this turbo charger before i buy it

it would be nice to hear of someone else that has it on there RB20

i wanna know the specs on or what yous think about the gt2876r 0.64

when it will hit boost and type of power output

elite has already mentioned what it should put out ect but i wanna make sure these figures

are spot on before i buy so dont go copy what he has said in his posts

thanks

  • 2 weeks later...

Just wondering why everyone says the gt30r or gt35r turbo would be too laggy...Here in the states there are 2.0 4g63T with gt35r's making 600+hp sure full(30psi) boost dosen't until 5000-5500 but your power band won't stop until 8000rpm?? Are you guys saying that a 4g63T 2.0lt 4 banger can spool turbos quicker than the 2.0 rb20det??? I would think that gt30r with a .63 a/r would be the most perfect turbo for a mild to high power rb20...mild being 300hp(15-18psi...high being 500hp...yes you heard me 500hp!!!25-30psi :woot:

4g63 has less cyls and consequently has bigger bore and stroke to make up the same displacement, 85x88 (borexstroke) where as the rb20 is 78x70

from this 25% longer stroke, i think it would be safe to assume the exhaust would be pushed out around 25% faster (given same head, all the other crap)

they also run an 8.8:1 compression ratio compared to the rb20s 8.5:1, not much difference, but would help a bit.

generally a 2L 4 will spool a turbo better than a 2L 6.

Edited by salad

I know its late in the thread, but if i was you, i would go with a Sliding Performance RB25 Highflow...

Reason, good response, good bang for buck(under a grand exhange price), reliable and with a retune, injectors and the supporting mods you will see around 220rwkwish Guranteed!

I know this because im going to get that exact turbo very soon!

money is not an issue for me and high flows dont last too long especially the way i drive

does anyone know anthing at all about this gt 2876r .64

still havent got my turbs yet.......................

money is not an issue for me and high flows dont last too long especially the way i drive

does anyone know anthing at all about this gt 2876r .64

still havent got my turbs yet.......................

If you are after something a little more 'bolt-on' friendly, the GT30R will not be too laggy. Good for around 500hp on an RB20 but even with the 0.64 rear housing....don't expect 20psi til around 4000-4500. I would recommend cams and head porting to assist but at least cams if you are on a budget. Price is $1750 for one of these.

If you are after something a little more 'bolt-on' friendly, the GT30R will not be too laggy. Good for around 500hp on an RB20 but even with the 0.64 rear housing....don't expect 20psi til around 4000-4500. I would recommend cams and head porting to assist but at least cams if you are on a budget. Price is $1750 for one of these.

Finally, some reasurance:) Here is a 30r on ebay, for a pretty good deal, you will have to modify your downpipe though...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/NEW-GARRETT...sspagenameZWDVW

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Garrett-GT3...sspagenameZWDVW

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/GARRETT-GT-...sspagenameZWD1V

Edited by z31 rb20

Honestly my opinon only - the GT2876R are dogs . I would sooner throw money away on those ridiculous "turbo zets" and use them for paper weights . Trying to force a 53.8mm turbine to drive a 76mm big trim compressor is just plain dumb . Look them up on the turbobygarrett website - they clearly state not for a performance application , I can't see any use for them in anything . Buy at your own risk - its your money/choise .

Fours and sixes , can't really compare . As has been said the 2L six has ~ 330cc pots vs the 2L fours ~ 497cc pots . You are burning a greater mass of air and fuel in the four and venting a greater quantity of exhaust gas per cylinder - this makes a huge difference to low speed engine torque and the ability to excite large turbos .

The RB20 has had many birthdays since it last saw any factory level development where the 4G63 has been a constant evolution that is still ongoing . They have come a long way with mechanicals and controls since the early VR4's .

If there had been a 4 cylinder version of the RB26/30 it would have solved many arguments .

Cheers A .

Honestly my opinon only - the GT2876R are dogs . I would sooner throw money away on those ridiculous "turbo zets" and use them for paper weights . Trying to force a 53.8mm turbine to drive a 76mm big trim compressor is just plain dumb . Look them up on the turbobygarrett website - they clearly state not for a performance application , I can't see any use for them in anything . Buy at your own risk - its your money/choise .

Fours and sixes , can't really compare . As has been said the 2L six has ~ 330cc pots vs the 2L fours ~ 497cc pots . You are burning a greater mass of air and fuel in the four and venting a greater quantity of exhaust gas per cylinder - this makes a huge difference to low speed engine torque and the ability to excite large turbos .

The RB20 has had many birthdays since it last saw any factory level development where the 4G63 has been a constant evolution that is still ongoing . They have come a long way with mechanicals and controls since the early VR4's .

If there had been a 4 cylinder version of the RB26/30 it would have solved many arguments .

Cheers A .

Even the early, 4g63's gets the job done...little has been done on the inside of the 4g63, all of the evolution has been in the head, and fuel system...I belive the rb20 could push the gt30r well, not many has done it so there litttle info....people have to understand that if you want bigger kw numbers then spool time will have to suffer a little. Dual BB turbo are making the lag pains painless!!!! And if the lag is a bit much than maybe we should look into gear ratios, maybe run a 4:11 rear end gears...All i know is the rb20 is built for top end, trying to make it a have low end power is against it's design, and small turbos will not do it justice.....I would love to feel 20-30 psi from a 30r on the 20..oh boy!!! I soon will start my z31 rb20det swap, and im planning on 300hp(225kw) so i might just slap on a rb25 turbo, or some sort of t3t4 hybrid...this is going to be a daily driver...my 88 starion is going to be the beast 2.6lt(g54b) sc61 t04s turbo(cold .70 a/r hot .68) MPI!!!

post-31796-1158807502.jpg

If you are after something a little more 'bolt-on' friendly, the GT30R will not be too laggy. Good for around 500hp on an RB20 but even with the 0.64 rear housing....don't expect 20psi til around 4000-4500. I would recommend cams and head porting to assist but at least cams if you are on a budget. Price is $1750 for one of these.

Are we sure that putting cams in an RB20 makes it more responsive? If so what sized cam was it?

Also, head work, what is meant by that? Are you talkign about the chambers, the ports, match porting, bigger CA valves???? Again, just like with NA cars if you can worsen air velocity and low rpm response with cams and headwork....how do you avoid makign the response worse?

Are we sure that putting cams in an RB20 makes it more responsive? If so what sized cam was it?

Also, head work, what is meant by that? Are you talkign about the chambers, the ports, match porting, bigger CA valves???? Again, just like with NA cars if you can worsen air velocity and low rpm response with cams and headwork....how do you avoid makign the response worse?

Roy,

if using the hydraulic lifters (lash type), i don't think you can go higher than 8.5mm lift, and duration up to 270 degrees in the PROCAM and 256 in the PONCAM, according to Tomei.

if running solids, you can go as high as 10.25mm , with but other mods will be required.

hhmmm, i have a mildly ported rb20 head with modified cams sitting at home, now i am tempted and then i can fit up the TD06-25G that's also sitting in my garage :/

Edited by RS500

Ok So you think the gt2876r 0.64 is no good any experince with it at all?

The other turbo i was having a look at is the HKS GTRS but im not too sure on the type of power output id get

but on the other hand how does it compare to lets say 2530 or 2540

is the gtrs good quality or should i just go for something like the 2530

i want something i can run big boost on are they all similar

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 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...