Jump to content
SAU Community

Large Single V Medium Twins

[200]

By [200],
in Engines & Forced Induction

 Share

Recommended Posts

[200] Mentor

[200]

Posted
Posted

Hi,

I am looking at buying a turbo for my Rb26/30 build up.

I was looking at using a twin HKS GT3240 but after reading some info on the to4r.com site I think it may not be the best choice (1073hp on 35psi with a 3.4lt stroker). I had a look at the Garrett GT with the same amount of boost it made 1230hp (dont know if N20 or stroker kit was used). Dynojet dyno used.

Does anyone have any dyno graphs of these turbos from an Rb26 motor? I am thinking between

GT3240 x 2

GT3037 x 2

GT45

GT47

I am sort of put off by the garrett turbo's as they are so damn heavy and large although the GT47 has seen some impressive numbers on the track...

Ideally the car is for the drags, just as long as I can drive it there and back I will be happy. No need to worry about other mods either, I just want info on the turbos.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/191098-large-single-v-medium-twins/
Share on other sites
shanef Grand Master

shanef

Posted
Posted

well put it this way...

mark jacobson uses a GT47

theo woolett uses a GT45

for cost, ease of maintenance i'd go big single all day everyday.

assuming u've got all the right gear to support the big turbo, 800-1000hp use a GT42, anything over that look at a 45 or 47.

shanef Grand Master

shanef

Posted
Posted

maybe, but ud be paying ~2k extra for that slight performance gain, and that nice shiny badge :rolleyes:

have you thought about running say a 42r and some size shot of gas? (this is what i'm doing)

[200] Mentor

[200]

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I really didn't want to use gas. I hate the idea of having to pay extra money just to spool the turbo each time I want to run a quick time.

True about the extra money - it would be better off spent on other parts...

I am leaning towards the gt4508 now ~ $3,500 which isnt too bad.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kapr
      RB20DE NEO smallbox clutch.

      By Kapr · Posted

      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.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      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. 
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      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.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      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.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      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...