Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

HI Charlie, going to have a look at Chavey's build, thanks

I see Piggaz is just ordering the OS88 box , cannot wait to hear how they go as a DD and Paul's car should be a good test and I believe he likes to drive hard as he keeps braking things, sorry Paul :)

I dropped my car into the workshop on Tuesday and now the wait starts :(

After listening to you blokes I ended up confirming some changes to the driveline and will see how the Box goes or when it goes before I change it.Better start putting the $$$$s away

Gone with the Coppermix C Spec Twin(over 700HP), Nismo slave cylinder, Quaife front diff , modifying the Trannie and already have a Nismo 2-way LSD /back.

The boys said to try the Unigroup 260 10.8 cams as they will give me more air, Better springs and retainers, cleaning the head up, oversized valves. Staying with the PT6262 B Turbo (over 700hP), maybe a larger back housing depending on the results.

Just waiting to see how the Walbro 460lph goes when the tune is being done and work off the results

RB30 Block has been modified. Plus all of the other part to go with the Nitto 3.2 Stroker Kit to make it a strong motor all round.

Going to have to make it stop now, Piggaz suggested I look at the Endless Brakes as they are strong and still work OK cold for a DD.

While they are doing the job I am having the Haltech Flex Fuel Sensor tuned in with the build , just in case, well you never know what you are going to want in the future, I was happy with the way it was, well for a few weeks ,haha

It will be around 400awkw, no big turbo/s or big cams, response and linear power from the start to the limiter, well :/

all this and no EFR ?

I guess only time will tell how it all works together, the worst option is to change the turbo, then flog it off to get a couple of $$$s back :)

I just hated the idea of changing it, just put it in and it is good for 700HP + and as the was made a huge difference how the car drives, so I want to see how it goes as I could not find a comparison, so I guess I will be the first with the TP6262 on a 3.2 stroker :)

I'd be interested knowing how many people making big hp on a single use WG on the manifold vs WG on turbo housing. Particularly how it results to boost control/spool times/spool response etc.

I'd be interested knowing how many people making big hp on a single use WG on the manifold vs WG on turbo housing. Particularly how it results to boost control/spool times/spool response etc.

Would be interesting but I don't think it will ever happen. I can't see 2 people having an identical setup (except gate position) to compare, or someone swapping gate position just to compare.

  • 4 months later...

I'm uploading my result here. This is a newly developed SAT ATR45 turbocharger. The engine is fully stock, unopened. Using factory cams, and factory cam gears. This is a single turbo, externally gated on E85 fuel. It is pretty good to drive on road.

Power n Response against factory twins:

powervsstock2.JPG

powervsstock.JPG

no, it is pretty high. I think dynopack might be a hub dyno.

If I am reading the last graph correctly the standard turbo(purple?) is at 18psi which is high for a standard turbo.

my race car makes less than that with r32 n1s at standard boost (12psi).

no, it is pretty high. I think dynopack might be a hub dyno.

If I am reading the last graph correctly the standard turbo(purple?) is at 18psi which is high for a standard turbo.

my race car makes less than that with r32 n1s at standard boost (12psi).

Nah 360ish is normal for 15psi on stock R33 GTR turbos, pushing a bit more boost should see what Stao makes.

In saying that, we had a PTE 5858 on a RB25 NEO that was all over that SAT ATR45 on less boost

In saying that, Stao that turbo

I make 261rwkw on 16psi and 293rwkw on 19psi on a chassis dyno from stockers and with a few 125mph passes would confirm that power

So 275rwkw from 18psi seems about right, though I do believe the Dynapack is a hub dyno so that might be low :/

Would like to see a graph using the same boost level though

I make 261rwkw on 16psi and 293rwkw on 19psi on a chassis dyno from stockers and with a few 125mph passes would confirm that power

So 275rwkw from 18psi seems about right, though I do believe the Dynapack is a hub dyno so that might be low :/

Would like to see a graph using the same boost level though

866FE882-D5CD-41AE-9988-94F6E6A306B9_zps

Was waiting for you to say something. :D

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...