Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Sams Performance is getting a seriously good name with regards to Gen III's and LS1 Edit. A mate's VX II R8 was dynoed there a few weeks ago and made considerable gains and was very impressed with the knowledge on hand.

Definitely a V8 place though. Thought you'd have to bring your own tuner...

Adrian

  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

yeah there was one hella tuff black hsv with ls1 engine... i didn't know anything i saw in that engine bay coz my knowlege on v8s r minimal... :cheers:

there were cars from everywhere... victoria, canberra etcetc..

i brought HITMAN with me.... got 225kw @ 4wheels

Originally posted by Mr R32 M-Spec

for people with GTR's though, how do you guys get it sideways through a corner?

Allegedly, attempting to overtake a 1st gen RX7 around a tight corner will do it :cheers:

The torque split controller in GTRs feeds power to the rear wheels, as such it drives like a GTS-t would. When it detects wheelspin it starts feeding torque to the front wheels to a maximum ratio of 50:50. Quite different to a WRX which drives all 4 wheels all the time.

Naturally the reason why you need a 4WD dyno for a GTR is because on a normal dyno, as soon as it senses the rear wheels turning and the front wheels are stopped it goes "oh shit, wheelspin!" and feeds power to the front. The car then procedes to add a new window in the workshop :D

Hi guys,

Sorry to jump in here but I have a question.

First off congrats to Prank, very nice numbers...

But that is the source of my question.

My GTR has 2530's, dumps, full exhaust, power fc, hks intercooler and is making 320hp at all 4 on 1.15bar on a dyno dynamics dyno. If Christian is getting 280 on standard turbos shouldn't I be getting a lot more than I am with the same boost??? I am only running that because the injectors are getting close to maximum and will run 1.4 once i have bigger ones, but I'm curious as to why my numbers appear so low compared to standard turbo gtr's..

It's not just Pranks car either, others talk about 300 + on standard turbos so do ya think mines not tuned right?? The a/f's are spot on says my tuner...

Just a question...

Cheers

Brett

Remeber that output is largly related to boost. ie. if everyone that owns a GTR runs 1 bar of boost then hp should be reasonably close. The main reason that you usually upgrade turbos is so that you can run more boost and then make bigger hp.

Hope this helps.

I only recently witnessed how dynos can tell some big fat porkies. Two different cars and dynos.

Ones, I went for a drive in a 180rwks RB25DET, felt it too. Plenty of top end, and pulled nicely. (stock turbo)

The very next day a friend got his car tuned, and turned out a 185rwks reading.(HKS 2530) Imagine my surprise when he took me for a drive that night.

This thing stuggles for grip all the way thru 2nd slewing the car sideways, and pulls much harder in 3rd. There is no way these cars had remotely the same power.

There would be at least a 1.5-2.0 second difference in the 1/4 times. Im guessing close to flat 14 for one, and a high 12 for the other.

I always thought that no matter what turbo u had, 1 bar of boost was 1 bar of boost.....

I mean at the throttle the same amount of air is coming through no matter what has pushed that air through??? you're still getting 1 bar of boost into ur engine weather a T88's supplying that much pressure of 2540's are????

am I wrong???

can someone clear that up??

Originally posted by B-Man

But 1 bar from a huge turbo flows heaps more air than 1 bar with a small turbo.

that's the part I don't get????

logic would say that 1 bar of pressure is 1 bar of pressure... the measurement doesnt change just because 1 turbo's bigger than another????

if the bigger turbo is flowing more air than that can't be 1 bar???

can someone clarify??

No. Dont confuse volume of air with pressure. Pressure is a force, volume is a unit of measureing how much space is being used.

The way I understand it is, a larger turbo flows the same pressure over a larger area. Think about blowing air through a thin straw at 5 psi, then blow 5psi through a straw with a bigger hole, which straw will more air?

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...