Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

G'day guys

I know in may cases people will port there standard manifold to there match larger turbos housings, but I am wondering if anyone has had experience with porting the .48 housing on standard GTR Turbos when they rebuild them. I have seen some turbo shops do it - but I wonder if it is done because it "looks" like it would be a good idea or if the have proven that it does.

I have seen this done on turbos when they are mated to previosly ported manifolds - or when mated to after market manifolds (i.e. tomei or HKS).

This is not something I had done before as I have little understanding of A/R's and what effects changing the size of the "hole" will have on the turbo. One would think "bigger hole - better flow"...... but is it that simple?

I will get some pics up shortly to better illustrate what I mean (pics added).

As usual.. value your thoughts.

Cheers

post-24243-1204278223_thumb.jpg

post-24243-1204278233_thumb.jpg

Edited by Antimatter
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/208329-porting-gtr-turbine-housings/
Share on other sites

bigger hole = less responsive.

I get what your getting at, but all its going to do is incite less response... without much increase in top end because it'll be the compressor running out before the rear.

Depending on which part of the ex housing you are talking about enlarging, if its from the throat in, then i have found gains in boost control on highflow turbos especially when you aid the flow to the w/g flap. however if you are talking about enlarging the diameter-ie the clearance between the ex wheel and the housing, its an old school highflow technique, and whist preventing overboosting, it also causes lag city.

Depending on which part of the ex housing you are talking about enlarging, if its from the throat in, then i have found gains in boost control on highflow turbos especially when you aid the flow to the w/g flap. however if you are talking about enlarging the diameter-ie the clearance between the ex wheel and the housing, its an old school highflow technique, and whist preventing overboosting, it also causes lag city.

Yeah - talking about the "throat in". I could be convinced this may help with hi-flows as you mention. I have also seen the w/g hole enlarged to assist with flow and / or boost control. I am wondering then at which point it may be advantageous - probably not at all with standard comp wheels - but maybe of value on the next size up (comp wheel)?

I can see credit in your point too Nismoid - as stock (unmodified) .48 GTR housing give fantastic spool up. I cant see that getting any better.

Sorry if this sounds like a silly question but are the GTR's std manifold outlets actually that much wider than the turbine housing inlet or is that mark merely a carbon stain from where the gasket doesn't cover the housing flange .

I've had very little to do with RB26's but I do know they use a more compact and I think slightly differently angled turbine housing that your run of the mill T28/GT28 one .

My best guess would be that Nissan was concerned with gas speed into the two turbine housings (vs one) and so the housings inlet was made smaller to keep the velocity up . If the std manifold is the same dimensions as the housings inlet I reckon I'd make sure there were no steps in the wrong direction and call it day - I don't speak through experience though .

Cheers A .

Definately port match the turbo to your manifold to reduce any turbulence at the flange as it enters the housing which would reduce gas speed, particularly on low boost and transition to boost (i.e. offboost conditions).

Refer following comment from Kyle (6boost) on a recent discussion article on this forum re aftermarket manifolds. I realise your car isn't a 700 evo engine but the same principles apply. After that there's always extrude honing your manifold and turbine housing.

"(we were testing outlet shapes and sizes, and for a 700+hp car, the small hole was just too restrictive), and the red line was after 40min work with the die grinder to port match the manifold from a round hole to the same rectangle as the turbo. The results?? 380rpm faster spool, 40hp at all 4 wheels on the same boost,"

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

    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
    • Probably not. A workshop grade scantool is my go to for proper Consult interrogation. Any workshop grade tool should do it. Just go to a workshop.
    • In my head it does make sense to be a fuel problem since that is what I touched when cleaning the system. When I was testing with the fuel pressure gauge, the pressure was constantly 2.5 bar with the FPR vacuum removed. When stalling, the pressure was going up to 3.0 bar (which is how it should be on ignition).
    • ECUtalk pages don't mention they support the ABS computer (consult port has more than one CAN), so you might just need a different scan tool. But, I would expect ABS is a different light to the brake warning/handbrake light, do you see an ABS light come on for a few seconds when you turn the key from ACC to IGN? But since you said: I'd have a look at the ABS sensors in the rear hubs to make sure they are not damaged, disconnected etc.
×
×
  • Create New...