Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Dyno graphs will prove your claims, so get them up, surely you must have at least one graph after all the GTR's you've done??

i tune for a hobby, usually for free to mates and people who have 'interesting' setups that intrigue me, the dyno's graphs go with the owners not with me, as i posted earlier i will post up graphs once the new tailshaft is sorted.

In what way are they 'far' better??

I have results showing otherwise, with a big difference in midrange... bush bearing turbos versus twin ballbearing turbos....

For example, at 128km/h in fourth gear, my car was making around 160rwkws with the T517Z's(8cm), and with the 2860r-5 is now making 240rwkws....

I know which setup I'd prefer.... :P

Care to show us your comparison????

Go to post #29 in this thread for mine....

graph up 2moro, finally got some roller time (car is still playing up so it is only a 14.4psi run and making only 286rwkw-odd at the rears)

but at 120kmh it is making nearly 80-100 rwkw more than yours did from memory....

but at 120kmh it is making nearly 80-100 rwkw more than yours did from memory....

LOL, maybe its all those years of experience you have in tuning and building rb26's...for free....

LOL, maybe its all those years of experience you have in tuning and building rb26's...for free....

HAHA you a bit cut? i dont claim to be an expert but your car just seems "flat" by your descriptions especially compared to our results, i cant be held for your cars shortcomings.

Edited by URAS
HAHA you a bit cut? i dont claim to be an expert but your car just seems "flat" by your descriptions especially compared to our results, i cant be held for your cars shortcomings.

Hardly....

I don't get cut from people who make claims without backing them up, it just proves my assumptions of them... :D

You claim that the T517's are much better than the 2860R's that you have tuned in the past, I asked to see a comparison, assuming that you actually have tested both... still waiting....

I'm discussing my comparison with facts, your just talking out of 'insert YOUR username here'.....

Prove me wrong so the discussion can continue with merrit....

Will have to go back to Ben from Racepace and tell him he's not doing a good job on my car.. ;)

That is all....

HAHA you a bit cut? i dont claim to be an expert but your car just seems "flat" by your descriptions especially compared to our results, i cant be held for your cars shortcomings.

yeh get some results up,interested to see if i wasted money on 2860r...lol

i paid 2 much.could have got them cheaper...but i reckon from your results im gunna be more than happy with the 2860r even tho i paid more than most

dyno sheet at 14.2psi and still with issues

hmmm i seem to see 210rwkw at 120kmh...... with -6 degrees timing over the whole map. No doubt there is another 10-15rwkw hidden in there once ive found the breaking down issue.

post-34927-1177465301.jpg

Edited by URAS

jack makes 240rwkw at 128km/h or 4570rpm

yours makes 230rwkw at 128km/h

sort out the misfire then we'll see how it looks

also this is in a rwd chassis? so take out some 4wd drive loss on jacks setup

dyno sheet at 14.2psi and still with issues

hmmm i seem to see 210rwkw at 120kmh...... with -6 degrees timing over the whole map. No doubt there is another 10-15rwkw hidden in there once ive found the breaking down issue.

looks very similar to the standard turbo response.

looks very similar to the standard turbo response.

exactly.... wind in more boost and they will happily support 380rwkw..... which is my whole point (excellent response yet able to support good top end).

The same tune as above with std dumps, -6 degrees and fat mixtures 10.8:1 A/F pulled 328rwkw at 17psi.... (i would expect another 20rwkw easily with 12.0:1 and more timing). i would post the graph but i could not get a clean run without the missfire gremlin, next week i will run it up again.

But road speed can be misleading. What is the final drive of each respective car and the gearboxes they are running, also tyre size. You could be looking at large rpm differences .

LOL. Im amazed you folk let me get away with my silly RB20 remark. The gearing in my car means im pulling much higher rpm for a given road speed then you guys...hence why i have similar power at the road speed in the earlier example :(

But road speed can be misleading. What is the final drive of each respective car and the gearboxes they are running, also tyre size. You could be looking at large rpm differences .

LOL. Im amazed you folk let me get away with my silly RB20 remark. The gearing in my car means im pulling much higher rpm for a given road speed then you guys...hence why i have similar power at the road speed in the earlier example :(

GTR diff and R34 box (box ratios are the same), diff ratios are actually a little differrent as we run 3.9 instead instead of 4.11 which is std GTR ratio (which would actually disadvantage us comparison wise), it use to run 4.373 but it was too short with the GTT box. tyre size is 235/45/17

Edited by URAS
  • 4 months later...

Well i read every single post so far.

From what you guys have said and dyno sheets etc etc i am going with!

Garrett 2860R-5's

Stainless Steel Manifolds

Stainless Steel Dumps

With my supporting mods of

tomei 260 9.15 cams

700cc sard injectors

3.5" exhaust + highflow cat

K N filters

Hybrid intercooler

Blitz SBC - i color

Sard Fuel Reg

Boch 044

R32 ECU retuned

I should easily pull 300KW+ at 16psi give or take

The main difference between the HKS and garrett turbos is the wheel design. They are compressor and turbine may be the same sizes etc but the HKS wheels are upgraded to induce more air etc

  • 1 month later...
I think the point to take away is that the std manifolds are crap for anything over 350rwkw and definately do not improve response over the chinese ebay stainless mainfolds

517Z's, 2860R, HKSGT2530@24psi and my 2860R on std manifolds@26psi

At 95km/h, 85kw 95kw 90kw 85kw

At 112km/h, 105kw 140kw 130kw 130kw

At 128km/h, 155kw 240kw 200kw 200kw

At 145km/h, 255kw 305kw 296kw 317kw

At 160km/h, 330kw 325kw 315kw 350kw

At 178km/h, 360kw 350kw 355kw 361kw

At 194km/h, 365kw 358kw 372kw Chart stops

I do have a chart that keeps going and power drops off after 178km/h as does boost also....down from 26psi to 24psi at 200km/h The drop in boost starts at 169km/h at the 350kw mark. The 2530's with the stainless manifolds did not drop boost at all.

Full Boost is also made at identical points compared to the 2530's (134km/h)

As a real life comparison.

In 4th

2000rpm starts to make +ve boost

3500rpm .5bar

4050rpm 1bar

Does anyone have a comparison for 2530's ?

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'm looking for some real world experiences/feed back from anyone who has personally ran a EFR7670 with a 1.05 exhaust housing or a .83 I'm leaning towards the .83 because its a street car used mostly for spirited driving in the canyons roads. I"m not looking for big numbers on paper. I want a responsive powerband that will be very linear to 8000 rpm. I dont mind if power remains somewhat flat but dont want power to drop off on top. The turbo I've purchased is a 1.05, although the mounting flange T3 vs T4 and internal vs external waste gates are different on both housings, I not concern about swapping parts or making fabrication mods to get what I want. Based on some of the research I've done with chat gpt, the 1.05 housing seems to be the way to go with slightly more lag and future proofing for more mods but recommends .83 for best response/street car setup. AI doesn't have the same emotions as real people driving a GTR so I think you guys will be able to give me better feed back 😀   
    • Surely somebody has one in VIC. Have you asked at any shops?  Is this the yearly inspection or did you get a canary?
    • This is where I share pain with you, @Duncan. The move to change so many cooling system pieces to plastic is a killer! Plastic end tanks and a few plastic hose flanges on my car's fail after so little time.  Curious about the need for a bigger rad, is that just for long sessions in the summer or because the car generally needs more cooling?
    • So, that is it! It is a pretty expensive process with the ATF costing 50-100 per 5 litres, and a mechanic will probably charge plenty because they don't want to do it. Still, considering how dirty my fluid was at 120,000klm I think it would be worth doing more like every 80,000 to keep the trans happy, they are very expensive to replace. The job is not that hard if you have the specialist tools so you can save a bit of money and do it yourself!
    • OK, onto filling. So I don't really have any pics, but will describe the process as best I can. The USDM workshop manual also covers it from TM-285 onwards. First, make sure the drain plug (17mm) is snug. Not too tight yet because it is coming off again. Note it does have a copper washer that you could replace or anneal (heat up with a blow torch) to seal nicely. Remove the fill plug, which has an inhex (I think it was 6mm but didn't check). Then, screw in the fill fitting, making sure it has a suitable o-ring (mine came without but I think it is meant to be supplied). It is important that you only screw it in hand tight. I didn't get a good pic of it, but the fill plug leads to a tube about 70mm long inside the transmission. This sets the factory level for fluid in the trans (above the join line for the pan!) and will take about 3l to fill. You then need to connect your fluid pump to the fitting via a hose, and pump in whatever amount of fluid you removed (maybe 3 litres, in my case 7 litres). If you put in more than 3l, it will spill out when you remove the fitting, so do quickly and with a drain pan underneath. Once you have pumped in the required amount of clean ATF, you start the engine and run it for 3 minutes to let the fluid circulate. Don't run it longer and if possible check the fluid temp is under 40oC (Ecutek shows Auto Trans Fluid temp now, or you could use an infrared temp gun on the bottom of the pan). The manual stresses the bit about fluid temperature because it expands when hot an might result in an underfil. So from here, the factory manual says to do the "spill and fill" again, and I did. That is, put an oil pan under the drain plug and undo it with a 17mm spanner, then watch your expensive fluid fall back out again, you should get about 3 litres.  Then, put the drain plug back in, pump 3 litres back in through the fill plug with the fitting and pump, disconnect the fill fitting and replace the fill plug, start the car and run for another 3 minutes (making sure the temp is still under 40oC). The manual then asks for a 3rd "spill and fill" just like above. I also did that and so had put 13l in by now.  This time they want you to keep the engine running and run the transmission through R and D (I hope the wheels are still off the ground!) for a while, and allow the trans temp to get to 40oC, then engine off. Finally, back under the car and undo the fill plug to let the overfill drain out; it will stop running when fluid is at the top of the levelling tube. According to the factory, that is job done! Post that, I reconnected the fill fitting and pumped in an extra 0.5l. AMS says 1.5l overfill is safe, but I started with less to see how it goes, I will add another 1.0 litres later if I'm still not happy with the hot shifts.
×
×
  • Create New...