Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

okay guys... there have been a few dances around the subject of this particular turbo....

I have had my car off the road for a little while getting a full rebuild with the following

Engine - RB20 ---> RB2.3

-forged pistons.... yadda yadda..... all new block...

-1.2mm tomei head gasket

-Tuneagent low mount s/s lowmount

-HKS split dump pipe

-Free low straight zorst

-Nismo 555cc injectors

-Z32AFM

-Tomei Poncam 256/256

-Tomei Camgears

-Nismo FPR

Now the turbo i currently have is an HKS 2510..... i want to go bigger down the road as the engine in built for it now.... but on the previous standard engine it used to make 181RWKW on a conservative tune at 1.bar.....

i have witnessed these make 200RWKW before at same or a little more boost.....

ive read that chris32 had made 208RWKW at his highest recording.....

in question if i rung my setup for all its worth i would be able to get 220rwkw on a 2510???

I really wanna see what this thing can do....

i think if that if that figure could be achived i would have a demonically fast street car......

thoughts please......

all comments welcome....

Edited by new blood

I think if you worry too much about chasing a number you could end up hurting your nice enw engine. Tubn eit up, run 1.3bar in it and it will make whatever power it makes. No doubt it will be quick, whatever the numer is

If you really need 220rwkws get the tuner to use a cup of coffee...or whatevcer it is they do to fudge figures :D

Too small IMO , a HKS 2510 is just a 2530 with with the more spool friendly - and restrictive - GT25/28 turbine . Aside from a few more recent HKS options ie GT-RS much of the HKS Garrett GT turbo range have been around a while .

One of the best all round in its turbine size range is the 2530 IMO . Your call but with what you've done to your RB20 to make it breathe the last thing it needs is a restrictive turbine to choke it up .

My vote goes to an RB specific 2530 .

Cheers A .

I agree with the above that this new engine deserves a bigger turbo.....and i will be leaning towards a GTRS when the time comes......

I just wanted to put to rest the myths that dance around this turbo.... i have always loved the power delivery of this one... and even with 180RWKW that it previously had.... it was so much fun.... max power is never the issue with me.... i just loved the mid range torque it produced.... and regardless of what others have said... it pulled all the way to redline.... never felt like it dropped off....

So...... i figure with all the mods done.... and having an engine that is supposed to be "more efficient" than the turbo... at least we will know what can be expected out of this little snail.....

  • 3 weeks later...

hmmmmmmmm............ seems i have run into a few little difficulties in preparing the engine.... anyways... i should have the thing back in the car first week after new years... will then run in.... and then off for final tune and detailed results......

  • 3 weeks later...

well... long story short..... engine not back yet... so further delays.... ive had a little more time to cash up again.... and a new turbo is starting to look good just about now.... should i rebuild my current 2510 with a 2530 or 2535 core?

thoughts please

well... long story short..... engine not back yet... so further delays.... ive had a little more time to cash up again.... and a new turbo is starting to look good just about now.... should i rebuild my current 2510 with a 2530 or 2535 core?

thoughts please

well... long story short..... engine not back yet... so further delays.... ive had a little more time to cash up again.... and a new turbo is starting to look good just about now.... should i rebuild my current 2510 with a 2530 or 2535 core?

thoughts please

I guess it boils down to how much power you want and how much you want to spend...personally i recon a 2535 would be awesome for a rb23...and be good to around 220-240rwkw with pretty decent response...

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

    • 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
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
    • Can you also make sure the invoices on the box (And none exist in the boxes) are below our import duty limits... I jest, there's nothing I need to actually purchase and order in. (Unless you can find me a rear diff carrier, brand new, for stupidly cheap, that is for a Toyota Landcruiser, HZJ105R GXL, 2000 year model...)  
×
×
  • Create New...