Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I ran my RB20 for over 3 years with no BOV. And the previous owner ran it like that as well, it was boosted for most of its life and handled backing off at 1 bar just fine. Chuffed like a mofo, and sounded great.

Got bored with the turbo and replaced it with an R33 S2 one, and continued running without a BOV. It was fine as well.

NO BOV = NO WORRIES. Anyone who tells you your turbo will blow up has been brainwashed by the "your car needs an aftermarket BOV for better performance (and more money in my hip pocket peddling junk to idiots)" brigade.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588266
Share on other sites

i personally suggest running one. why would you want all that air slamming into your turbo fins then once you get back on the gas you got the little lag from you turbo slowing down. i kno people who ran no bov and their turbos are still ok then i know some that had their shit blow up. you never kno you could be next. id rather spend a couple hundred bucks on a bov versus buying a new turbo sooner than i have to

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588368
Share on other sites

I ran my RB20 for over 3 years with no BOV. And the previous owner ran it like that as well, it was boosted for most of its life and handled backing off at 1 bar just fine. Chuffed like a mofo, and sounded great.

Got bored with the turbo and replaced it with an R33 S2 one, and continued running without a BOV. It was fine as well.

NO BOV = NO WORRIES. Anyone who tells you your turbo will blow up has been brainwashed by the "your car needs an aftermarket BOV for better performance (and more money in my hip pocket peddling junk to idiots)" brigade.

no bov = stupid

yes its not going to "blow up" your turbo, bit it WILL create more lag in between gearchanges than necessary, i would never run any turbo car that i have without a bov. If you dont want the ptttch sound, plumb it back, easy.

search, this has been covered to death

Edited by R34GTFOUR
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588463
Share on other sites

lol!

it does not created more lag between gear changes lol it does the opposite. nothing wrong with running no bov most drifters dont use bov, and i have personally seen many cars go for years without a bov and big power and no problem what so ever with their turbo.

its a urban myth ...

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588518
Share on other sites

cefiro's and other nissan family cars equipped with RB20DET's run no BOV's (plumb back or atmo) and have worked fine for their entire lives (all 17 years of it). Granted they always ran on stock boost on stock turbos. Once you start changing factory boost levels and turbos etc, it'd be wise to put one in.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588522
Share on other sites

lol!

it does not created more lag between gear changes lol it does the opposite. nothing wrong with running no bov most drifters dont use bov, and i have personally seen many cars go for years without a bov and big power and no problem what so ever with their turbo.

its a urban myth ...

aahh wat??

your telling me air being forced back into a turbine thats spinning the other way wont slow that turbine down, then once that turbine's rpm has been reduced it doesnt take more time to spool up the turbo the the rpm which is would still be at if there was a bov there???

im the one lol

a mate of mine has a xr6t with no bov and the compressor surge is huge inbetween gearchanges when hes at 20psi, and there IS lag when he changes gears because of this. A bov in this situation WILL reduce spool up (or lag whatever you want to call it) time in between gearchanges when your on boost in the previous gear

its not a myth, its plain old physics

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588535
Share on other sites

aahh wat??

your telling me air being forced back into a turbine thats spinning the other way wont slow that turbine down, then once that turbine's rpm has been reduced it doesnt take more time to spool up the turbo the the rpm which is would still be at if there was a bov there???

im the one lol

a mate of mine has a xr6t with no bov and the compressor surge is huge inbetween gearchanges when hes at 20psi, and there IS lag when he changes gears because of this. A bov in this situation WILL reduce spool up (or lag whatever you want to call it) time in between gearchanges when your on boost in the previous gear

its not a myth, its plain old physics

where does the air go? if the air is not vented, it stays in the pipe. therefore once you jump onto the throttle again and the throttle body opens, and because the pipe is already fulled with air, it goes straight into the throttle body, unlike if you vent it.

this is one of the main reason why pro. drifters don't run bov as it helps with lag between gear changes *weather its noticeable or not is another issue*

also how fast is the turbo rotating/spinning ? 100,000rpm or more, do you think that the amount of air remaining in the pipe has enough force to slow down the turbine when it is speeding at such a high rate?

yes its physic, the air must apply a force on the turbine blades. the turbine blades are rotating which means they also have a force...

so we have:

Air:

F= ma

m= mass of the body (kg)

a = resultant acceleration of the body (m/s^2)

now because the turbine blades are rotating they have a torque.

t=mr^2a

m=mass(kg)

r=radius(m)

a=angular acceleration (rad/s^2)

but that is assuming the turbine blades are a point mass system and we don't consider the mass moment of inertia

what im tring to get at is that one force will be alot larger than the other, so the impact of the small force on the larger force won't be that great....

also their are other issue to consider but its late and i can't remember this stuff off the top of my head would have to go grab my uni books and start quoting lines etc

just to summaries my point. the Force exerted by the air is not great enough the reduce/impact the turbine blades , due to the relative large force it creates (creates is not the best word but you get my point)

Edited by [Michael]
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588553
Share on other sites

where does the air go? if the air is not vented, it stays in the pipe. therefore once you jump onto the throttle again and the throttle body opens, and because the pipe is already fulled with air, it goes straight into the throttle body, unlike if you vent it.

this is one of the main reason why pro. drifters don't run bov as it helps with lag between gear changes *weather its noticeable or not is another issue*

also how fast is the turbo rotating/spinning ? 100,000rpm or more, do you think that the amount of air remaining in the pipe has enough force to slow down the turbine when it is speeding at such a high rate?

yes its physic, the air must apply a force on the turbine blades. the turbine blades are rotating which means they also have a force...

so we have:

Air:

F= ma

m= mass of the body (kg)

a = resultant acceleration of the body (m/s^2)

now because the turbine blades are rotating they have a torque.

t=mr^2a

m=mass(kg)

r=radius(m)

a=angular acceleration (rad/s^2)

but that is assuming the turbine blades are a point mass system and we don't consider the mass moment of inertia

what im tring to get at is that one force will be alot larger than the other, so the impact of the small force on the larger force won't be that great....

also their are other issue to consider but its late and i can't remember this stuff off the top of my head would have to go grab my uni books and start quoting lines etc

maybe i've lost my point i was tring to get across but yeah

i know what your trying to get at, your thinking along the lines of the force required to slow down the turbine because of its weight cannot be produced by the force that the "trapped" pressurised air stuck in the intercooler piping, i studied physics aswell haha

But think along these lines,

The turbine is spooled from the load that the engine produces, no load = pretty much no boost as you would know with free reving (lets not get too technical and mention antilag)

I dont know why im saying this cause by the look of your post count you've been here for sometime and you know your stuff but anyway,

so when you get off that throttle and slam shut that throttle body butterfly, that compressor doesnt have the driving force from the exhaust turbine that it had when the throttle was on and the engine was under load, so the inlet charge WILL overwhelm the compressor wheel and slow it down. Theres not a matter of ifs or buts, the inlet charge will reduce the turbine rpm, maybe not all that noticeable at lower boost levels, but when the intake charge is up there, i've noticed a difference.

I've noticed with all my cars an instant improvement with a bov, atmo or plumbback. The same xr6t i mention above has a tad over 500rwhp and you can feel it slowing down in each gearchange, then have to spool again. Another mate had a stockish s14, no bov he ran a mid 13, nothing else changed expect a bov and he shaved .2 of a second off his time. If only every noticed nothing but improvements with a bov attached, and that why i stand by my original comment that i will never run a turbo car thats under my name without some sort of vent valve.

Its got abit off topic, and its late so im heading off haha

Edited by R34GTFOUR
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588569
Share on other sites

i know what your trying to get at, your thinking along the lines of the force required to slow down the turbine because of its weight cannot be produced by the force that the "trapped" pressurised air stuck in the intercooler piping, i studied physics aswell haha

But think along these lines,

The turbine is spooled from the load that the engine produces, no load = pretty much no boost as you would know with free reving (lets not get too technical and mention antilag)

I dont know why im saying this cause by the look of your post count you've been here for sometime and you know your stuff but anyway,

so when you get off that throttle and slam shut that throttle body butterfly, that compressor doesnt have the driving force from the exhaust turbine that it had when the throttle was on and the engine was under load, so the inlet charge WILL overwhelm the compressor wheel and slow it down. Theres not a matter of ifs or buts, the inlet charge will reduce the turbine rpm, maybe not all that noticeable at lower boost levels, but when the intake charge is up there, if noticed a difference.

I've noticed with all my cars an instant improvement with a bov, atmo or plumbback. The same xr6t i mention above has a tad over 500rwhp and you can feel it slowing down in each gearchange, then have to spool again. Another mate had a stockish s14, no bov he ran a mid 13, nothing else changed expect a bov and he shaved .2 of a second off his time. If only every noticed nothing but improvements with a bov attached, and that why i stand by my original comment that i will never run a turbo car thats under my name without some sort of vent valve.

Its got abit off topic, and its late so im heading off haha

fair enough i can see where your coming from :P

from my personal experiences i notice no difference from running no bov to running a blitz bov (350rwhp @ 16psi), but then again it comes down to the car setup, driving style etc as every car is difference.

i understand what your saying about the turbine blade spinning but i was under the impression that even when idle or during gear change the turbine blades are still spinning at very high rpm. Also the reason why i stated the forumlas so show that torque was also affect by angular acceleration not just mass, and one would assume the angular acceleration to be a large number due to the rpm that the turbine blades are traveling at.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588573
Share on other sites

sorry i cant quote, internet too slow.

but Micheal said where does the air go? if its not vented it stay in the pipe.

You're right where does it go? it pushes back to the turbo thats the only way it can go. if you got 12 psi in an enclosed area it going to go back the way it came. its just not going to stop and sit there and wait for the butterfly to open back up. the turbo is going to loose rpm then its going to have to spool again.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588571
Share on other sites

sorry i cant quote, internet too slow.

but Micheal said where does the air go? if its not vented it stay in the pipe.

You're right where does it go? it pushes back to the turbo thats the only way it can go. if you got 12 psi in an enclosed area it going to go back the way it came. its just not going to stop and sit there and wait for the butterfly to open back up. the turbo is going to loose rpm then its going to have to spool again.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588574
Share on other sites

sorry i cant quote, internet too slow.

but Micheal said where does the air go? if its not vented it stay in the pipe.

You're right where does it go? it pushes back to the turbo thats the only way it can go. if you got 12 psi in an enclosed area it going to go back the way it came. its just not going to stop and sit there and wait for the butterfly to open back up. the turbo is going to loose rpm then its going to have to spool again.

correct :P the air will go back towards the turbo but how much of the air will hit the turbo. depending on what car you have and your intercooler piping setup will determine the length of pipe and how far the air will have to travel to reach the turbine of course some of the air will come into contact with the turbine blades, and theoretically impacting on the turbine rpm. the time between the throttle body closing and opening is maybe a second, depending on the speed the air is traveling, the amount of air in the pipe and the total distance between throttle body and turbine blades will determine how much air is transfer through the blades and how much air remains in the pipe.

also depending if the air flow is laminar or turbulent, will have an affect on things too.

Edited by [Michael]
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/201983-is-this-bad/#findComment-3588575
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • 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
×
×
  • Create New...