Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

I have a fully rebuilt RB26 in an R32 GT-R. GT-SS turbos, HKS everything else (manifolds, pipes, pistons, rods) + Tomei poncams.

As you've guessed from the above, the car is built for response.

I took it out on track yesterday (Wakefield) and damn it's laggy. Boost starts kicking in at 4500rpm. Is this normal? I also drive an EVO 6.5 dead stock and that kicks the boost in at 3000rpm. I know I shouldn't be comparing the GT-R to the EVO. But I just wanted to know whether or not full boost at 4500rpm is normal?!

Maybe it's more about the car being so slow off boost. It's ridiculous, slower than a Barina off boost!!! Any suggestions, feedback, opinions, all appreciated. Thanks.

dyno.jpg

UPDATE UPDATE UPDATE 29/NOV.

It was the boost controller! Wasn't set up right. Wheeeee!!! Much more response, a whole lot smoother on boost too. Now to take it to the track again! Shame it's so damn hot at the moment.

Edited by justinfox
  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Funny! GTSS turbs were what I was going to get due to responsiveness.

It could be: Tuning what sort of mapping was done in the spool up low revs area.

Restriction in exhaust?

Maybe if you had GTRS turbs you would have this issuse but you don't and thats crazy it's so laggy!

Anyway good luck on your problem.

Hi guys,

I have a fully rebuilt RB26 in an R32 GT-R. GT-SS turbos, HKS everything else (manifolds, pipes, pistons, rods) + Tomei poncams.

As you've guessed from the above, the car is built for response.

I took it out on track yesterday (Wakefield) and damn it's laggy. Boost starts kicking in at 4500rpm. Is this normal? I also drive an EVO 6.5 dead stock and that kicks the boost in at 3000rpm. I know I shouldn't be comparing the GT-R to the EVO. But I just wanted to know whether or not full boost at 4500rpm is normal?!

Maybe it's more about the car being so slow off boost. It's ridiculous, slower than a Barina off boost!!! Any suggestions, feedback, opinions, all appreciated. Thanks.

Something is definately wrong there Justin.

I have GT-SS's on my car and they are probably the most responsive turbos you could pick for your RB26

I will check my dyno sheets later tonight and get back to you with some more info if you like.

yeah im a bit curious about this too

cause i am planning on getting GT-SS's for my gtr and if thats the lag i dont want them

RellikZephyr

Easy tiger, dont go changing your plans because of this - there is something else going on thats causing Justins turbo lag

Your car seems to be a ball ache. First the 2530s were laggy, now the GTSS. Have you been for a ride in other cars with similar setups. You should have gone for a ride in the white R33 GTR at Wakefield, basically a std motor with turbos bigger then yours.

If its worse then your car then there is a problem with your car. If its about the same then you have to come to terms that you are running twin turbos, which can provide almost 600hp of airflow, but with only 2.6L... it is a turbo car.

Your EVO runs a small little turbo with boost up the brazoo...so will always be responsive, will especially feel that way because of the gearing, weight and turbo of the car

GT-SS should be on the juice virtually like a standard turbo, and just have a LOT more top end compared to the stock turbos.

There is something wrong with

1) Boost Control

2) Tune

3) Cam setup

4) Exhaust restriction

Thats some stuff go get started with, but for anyone else thats reading this, this is NOT normal for GT-SS turbos.

So dont be put off by them, this setup just has issues :whistling:

I am pretty sure it's the tune. Here's my dyno sheet.

dyno.jpg

I have a similar problem with my r34n1's and my mechanic reckons its the tune cuz my exhaust cannot be blocked (or so i assume as I have a new cat as well as front pipes) So im going to get mine road tuned in a couple of weeks to see if they can find the problem. Good luck with yours!

That's all I got dyno sheet wise. It's on 1.2bar.

Exhaust is fine (HKS manifolds, piping kit, front/dump, high flow cat + Kakimoto Regu96 all the way back).

Boost is controlled via AVCR. I would love to get someone else to tune it but that will definitely void my warranty on the engine as currentlky the builder is the tuner. Looks like I'm in a situation then huh?

Do you know the boost settings and gain settings on the AVCR?

What type of computer do you have?

Hmm interesting i may have to check my boost controller see if they set the gain really low!

That's all I got dyno sheet wise. It's on 1.2bar.

Exhaust is fine (HKS manifolds, piping kit, front/dump, high flow cat + Kakimoto Regu96 all the way back).

Boost is controlled via AVCR. I would love to get someone else to tune it but that will definitely void my warranty on the engine as currentlky the builder is the tuner. Looks like I'm in a situation then huh?

Justin, I dont know of anyone who has ever tried to claim on a warranty for an engine rebuild!

Take the car to CRD and get Jim to sort it out or at least check the tune without adjusting it so your warranty is safe but you will hopefully then know exactly whats going on/holding you back.

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...