Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Not sure on cost, but you have a new ext. housing (ie: new turbo), so you should get a good trade as 0.86a/r housings are very popular, thus can be resold very easily.

Give your turbo supplier a call and see if they are willing to trade, with cash adjustment, or give Kyp at ATP a call.

Nope Matt's is definitely a GT30, same as mine on my 3.0ltr. Hence why we want to drive each others cars to feel the difference between the 2.5ltr and 3.0ltr engine, as our engines almost have identical bolt on parts.

  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Not sure on cost, but you have a new ext. housing (ie: new turbo), so you should get a good trade as 0.86a/r housings are very popular, thus can be resold very easily.

Give your turbo supplier a call and see if they are willing to trade, with cash adjustment, or give Kyp at ATP a call.

Nope Matt's is definitely a GT30, same as mine on my 3.0ltr. Hence why we want to drive each others cars to feel the difference between the 2.5ltr and 3.0ltr engine, as our engines almost have identical bolt on parts.

where abouts are u located in al? id be very interested in meeting up with u guys when my cars done to have a look.

but yeh ill defiently give my turbo supplier a call, and ATP.

is your car running yet?

Car was running, but currently being stripped and rebuilt as the machinist/crack tester missed a hole/crack in the block and i had oil weeping through, from one of oil drain galleries. Obviously not paying for anything, just inconvenienced as i am without my car again; especially when the build exceeded all my expectations/goals just on the run-in tune.

I am located in the Western suburbs, 5mins from Calder Park Rwy. Would be good to meet up once all our cars are running properly, unfortunately Matt had some issues over the weekend as well, so i couldn't drive his car.

Running a Extreme Turbo Manifold and the setup is currently internally gated. I have compared pictures of Kyle's manifolds with the ETM manifolds and they are very similar in design and quality. The only reason i went with ETM is that, at the time of order i never heard of 6boost and after i paid for the manifold, 6boost started getting a really good reputation on SAU. I agree with what Kyle has stated; that a really top quality, efficient, manifold will require better boost control at low boost settings. He is obviously trying to go out of his way to help you resolve the issue and sounds like a honest person.

Your set-up and Matt's (Yellow R33 GTST) setup are almost identical, except he is still using the 2.5ltr and you have a 3.0ltr, you both have a 6boost manifold and he even has the 90deg extension for the gate. Why isn't he having boost creep issues? The difference; he has a 0.8#a/r ext. housing on his GT3076R, you have the same ext housing on a bigger turbo that has a bigger ext. turbine. Is it starting to sink in now? Go to ATP, trade your ext. housing for a 1.0#a/r housing and your problems are solved, instead of spending twice as much on a 2nd WG or a bigger WG.

Just to sabve confusion, which there seems to be a bit of :happy: A 3076 and 35R do not run the same exhaust housing, do they? ;) The GT30 series turbo runs a certain sized turbine. The GT35 series turbos run a larger turbine again.

So all being little math buzzards, A/R is only a ratio of cross sectional area in the scroll to the radius of the scroll at the point the area in measured. So whils the housing shatre the same ratio they are not the same housing. They cant be, the larger GT35 turbine is well , of a larger diameter. So that means for the housign to be mounted on it then its "R" measurement is larger to cater the bigger turbine. So to maintain the 0.86 ratio then the cross sectional area of the scroll at that point needs to be larger. So the housign is nto only different.

You wouldnt expect a 0.86 GT28 turbo off an SR20 to be the same as a 0.86 housign off a GT35 or T04Z turbo.

Im not sure the bigger housing on the GT35 will do the trick , its already bigger. Not to mention that that the outlet diam of the GT35 housing is probably bigger to allow for the larger turbine. The reason why a smaller exhaust housing on a big turbine often flows better then a larger housing on a smaller turbine

Don't understand about 50% of what you just wrote Troy, read over it about 5-10 times and still no go, sorry.

As stated previously; speak to the people in the business (turbo dealers: ATP, GCG, etc) and discuss the issue. From my chats with my mechanic i still believe changing the ext. housing will solve the issue.

Just something i just thought of Troy. When a std turbo is hiflowed, they fit bigger wheels inside the std housings, so it just goes to reason that more than one wheel size can fit in a housing. I don't know too much about the engineering or a turbo, but that is why i have stated that Andru speak to a expert.

I do know that the same a/r rating do come in different sized housings, not sure if that is the case between the GT30 and the GT35 as they belong to the same "series/family" of turbos

Don't understand about 50% of what you just wrote Troy, read over it about 5-10 times and still no go, sorry.

A grain of sand can be twice as big as another grain of sand or a planet can be twice as big as another planet, it's still twice as big. GT35 0.86A/R housing is bigger than GT30 0.86A/R housing..

A grain of sand can be twice as big as another grain of sand or a planet can be twice as big as another planet, it's still twice as big. GT35 0.86A/R housing is bigger than GT30 0.86A/R housing..

Genius.......... :nyaanyaa:

Did you continue reading after the first line of my post before posting?

A GT3071, 3076, 3082 and 3582 turbine housing are all identicle, the only difference is the size of the hole bored in them for the turbine wheel, which is bigger for the 3582, all the others have the same size exhaust wheel. You could take a 3071 .63 turbine housing, machine it out to GT35 size and slip it straight on, it would be identicle to buying a GT35 with one already on it.

Secondly to that, the smaller turbo explains boost control. Some people in this thread have said remove the exhaust. This is the worst thing you could do, more back pressure/more retriction will create lower boost, so leaving it on will giv eyou the lowest boost possible. Some of my customers street/race cars pick up 10-15 psi of boost when the drop their 3" exhaust at the track. The 3076 will be holding lower boost because it offers more retriction and back pressure hence more air will exit the gate.

I will reinterrate what I have said 2-3 times now Andrew, I have NUMEROUS RB30, 25/30 and 26/30 engines that have no boost control isues with a 44mm gate. I have at least 10:1 ratio of ones that have No issues to ones that do. You have an issue with the fact that I told you a 44mm gate should be fine, but what would you have me say?? If people are on a budget or doing things as cheap as possible, heck, even if they aren't, do I tell every customer to go and spend another $350 on a bigger gate over a 44 when 95% of people have no issue?? DO I just offer my advise to each person that it MAY work but they should consider a 60??

I empathise with your position, I have been thru this on a customers car myself before, we put 50/50 pump fuel and tolulene in and brought peak boost down from 27psi to 21psi, we then changed the intake manifold to something better and it came down even further again. Other than that, we now run the wastegate from the turbine housing where possible. I understand you feel its dodgy, I think the exact opposite, I'd PREFER to run it off the turbine, and do so on my own car, everyone of my friends cars, and any customer that will listen and let me do it. You have better boost control, more hp, faster spool, and I PERSONALLY don't think it looks dodgy. Each to their own. As I said earlie tho, if the gate isn't a restriction, why does it go up when you fit it back on the manifold?? Theoretically it should stay at 13psi when open. Hope you've removed one of those springs.....

6BOOST

kyle, dont take what i said the wrong way, (i'm andrews mate that spoke to you on the phone) i know it will work welding it to the housing, but the cars got a plazmaman plenum, rocker covers will be painted, compressor cover might be polished, and wiring may also be hidden later on, hes trying to go for a neat engine bay, and trying to keep shit hidden. hes seen a few bays where basically all you can see are the 3 main things, rocker covers, plenum, turbo and i think thats what hes aiming for.

hes also looking at upgrading to a TO4, yes even though the car isnt running properly, an upgrade is already on the cards, and it will be troublesome trying to sell the turbo with the provision for the gate hanging off it

lastly, i dont think its something that should have to happen, he should be able to control boost off the manifold, real question being how we are going to go about doing it

By sending me the manifold and paying the difference to a 60mm gate and letting me modify it to suit. It'll work, no question. I would however like to know if anyone has really pulled the second spring out of th egate, I'd really like a dyno graph to show it also, and if it doesn't go past 21-22si, I'd like to see it run to redline, or to whatever rpm it takes to hit 21-22psi. Its getting too hard to diagnose when I can't see fist hand whats going on, except that others, in large numbers have had no drama's, its gotta be fixable.

6BOOSt

finally the answer ive been searching for

we've finally been able to fix the issue and the car is holding boost =]

below is a dyno chart of our findings

dynopx6.jpg

the above shows a modified manifold with dual ports that lead to a 60mm port that leads to the gate.

one is with a 44mm gate, and the other with no gate.

so in conclusion, we had to increase the diamatre of the manifold and run a 60mm gate.

my only issue now is finding a 60mm gate.

so the search continues.

cheers to everyone especially 6boost and the certain few who knew wat they were talkn about.

look forward to when the car hits the road =]

Edited by R34NRG

that is a print out, nothing drawn as such, they were both the same colour n shit to ray changed the colour of the lines, one just looks chunky. low one is no gate, high one is 40mm gate with no spring

paulr33, one run is with no gate, the other is with no spring in the gate, hence its coming on song so late. the run with the gate but no spring was more to determine if it was big enough, thats why the spring(s?) were left out

edit - i believe kyle was going to do an exchange on gate + mod the manifold, but andrew just wanted to get the car done with as little hassle as possible, so ray modded the manifold, hoping to see it work with the 44mm, but gates too small, so now andrew will be upgrading gate

Edited by VB-

Have sorted Andrew out with a new tial 60mm at cost and will be also refunding him money in return for his used gate as well, if he didn't get it today, should have it tomorrow. Look forward to seeing the final power firgure, we know its flowing some unrestricted air at least;)

6BOOST

  • 9 months later...

Old post but im very glad you guys have sorted this problem. (ive read through the whole lot, and albeit painfull in some places is a very good thread).

Im having exactly the same issue here in NZ with a turbo manifold i had made by a local guy. By all accounts my setup is very similar to Andrews. The manifold builder has now made me another manifold which apparently (i havent driven it yet) holds boost in first and second yet once the car is in third looses the plot.

I was also looking to avoid having a gate stuck out the exhaust housing, however think now that it may be the easiest option.

6Boost (or anyone here), do you have a descent quality picture of a wastegate mounted off the turbo housing?

Edited by SirRacer

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...