Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Ok chaps, it's like this.....

I have an R32 GTR, I have run 10.6@138mph in full street trim (full exh, street tyres, soundsystem pump fuel etc)... and I wan't to go faster BUT retain the same, if not better response for the street and track. I'm looking for low 10's in full street trim. I don't wan't to sacrifice weight or suspension, or upping the gas..... more power is my only option.

Previous set up: stock rb26 (still quite healthy) 396rwkw, T517Z 10cm's, 260 poncams, PFC, fuel syst, 50hp shot of N2O- at the track only NOT on the dyno, R3C and ppgdogbox, plus all the usual supporting mods... I ran on BFG street drag radials.

I have in stock, Tomei 2.8lt stroker kit, N1 block, ported head, 272 HKS cams etc....

What would YOU use for a turbo kit, maximising response on 98ron fuel, with a total power output around 450-460rwkw... I love my T517Z's but they were running 22psi flat out at 396rwkw.

Cheers

Justin

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/225836-rb28dett-turbo-choice/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

People with 440awkw, stock shift gearboxes etc ... and have have run 10.40 or better, so cut out a few 10ths of a sec due to the dog box, and you *should* be running low 10's already without changing a thing.

So IMO you already have what you need, you just need to drive it to the time the car can run rather than chase power.

You wont get better response by upgrading turbos larger, even if you are going a stroker. Any gain from the kit will be well offset by the turbos.

If anything, just get a T04z, will do over 400rwkw on PULP.

If you can't run a 10.1 with a trap speed of 138mph then more power is not going to help you. You need to improve the vehicles dynamics and maybe driving style. The car has got it in it already, you just gotta bring it out.

What was the 60footer time?

People with 440awkw, stock shift gearboxes etc ... and have have run 10.40 or better, so cut out a few 10ths of a sec due to the dog box, and you *should* be running low 10's already without changing a thing.

So IMO you already have what you need, you just need to drive it to the time the car can run rather than chase power.

You wont get better response by upgrading turbos larger, even if you are going a stroker. Any gain from the kit will be well offset by the turbos.

If anything, just get a T04z, will do over 400rwkw on PULP.

im suprised you didnt point it out.. but twoogle's runs were 10.3 at 134mph with his 2530's and its been 9.7's i believe at 139mph.. so this blokes definately got a low/flat 10 in his car already seeing as he's doin 138mph.. i wonder if he knows about the 140+mph thing with andra which is why paul holds twoogle in third in twoogle across the line for the 139mph

im suprised you didnt point it out.. but twoogle's runs were 10.3 at 134mph with his 2530's and its been 9.7's i believe at 139mph.. so this blokes definately got a low/flat 10 in his car already seeing as he's doin 138mph.. i wonder if he knows about the 140+mph thing with andra which is why paul holds twoogle in third in across the line for the 139mph

this man speaks the truth...sort of...lol

correcting a couple of things said in thread...

Ash i assume the 440kw stock shift etc is me...i never raced with 440kw thats just a dyno comp figure (34psi, when racing we only ran 28psi) the car was raced with around 400-410kw.

rb26s13 you are slightly off the mark with the time stated...9.9's @ 139MPH but thanks anyway. Our car was capable of running quicker but couldnt race it to its full potential due to the ANDRA 140 MPH rule.

I think if you go GT-RS's and are willing to rev it (9500rpm) you could run a 9 with that MPH or at least a very low 10. You would have to get the cars weight including driver to around 1475kg to do the 9 though. Although you do have the dogbox so you might get away with being over 1500kg. Our car was almost as responsive as Racepace's 2.9ltr and was all over it in the midrange and ours was only running a STD nissan crank. So RS's are the proven route i think. Our car also easily made 455KW at the wheels at Newcastle Autosalon on 20psi with BP98 and over 500KW at final battle on Sunoco race fuel.

Edited by DiRTgarage
this man speaks the truth...sort of...lol

correcting a couple of things said in thread...

Ash i assume the 440kw stock shift etc is me...i never raced with 440kw thats just a dyno comp figure (34psi, when racing we only ran 28psi) the car was raced with around 400-410kw.

rb26s13 you are slightly off the mark with the time stated...9.9's @ 139MPH but thanks anyway. Our car was capable of running quicker but couldnt race it to its full potential due to the ANDRA 140 MPH rule.

I think if you go GT-RS's and are willing to rev it (9500rpm) you could run a 9 with that MPH or at least a very low 10. You would have to get the cars weight including driver to around 1475kg to do the 9 though. Although you do have the dogbox so you might get away with being over 1500kg. Our car was almost as responsive as Racepace's 2.9ltr and was all over it in the midrange and ours was only running a STD nissan crank. So RS's are the proven route i think. Our car also easily made 455KW at the wheels at Newcastle Autosalon on 20psi with BP98 and over 500KW at final battle on Sunoco race fuel.

come on.. it had a 7 in it somewhere 9.97 maybe? meh i cbf thinking to hungover i just remember one of your runs was 139mph and was a 9 but had a 7 after the 9. somewhere

come on.. it had a 7 in it somewhere 9.97 maybe? meh i cbf thinking to hungover i just remember one of your runs was 139mph and was a 9 but had a 7 after the 9. somewhere

9.97...spot on...PB is 9.95 @ 139.6 MPH....0.4MPH from being logged for no parachute. The day the ignition DVD was filmed (WSID bracket meeting) ran back to back 9.96-9.97 then when they turned up with the camera's and insisted on massive burnouts the times went 10.0's. The last run of the day the ANDRA stewards allowed me to have one pass that they would turn a blind eye to (in regard to MPH) as it was bleeding obvious that i was holding 3rd too long. So with PB's to the 330 and the 660 in both ET and MPH on the run I looked set for a 9.8* at 140+ MPH i went to shift it into 3rd and the bastard would not go in and rolled over the line with my foot on the clutch....it ended up a 10.1 at 129 MPH.

Thats why you can see me rip my gloves off and throw them in the in-car footage on the DVD

Back on topic...a HKS T51R KAI BB has very similar charateristics to twin HKS GT-RS's in regard to airflow, power output and efficiency. On a 2.8ltr that would be my 2nd choice.

Edited by DiRTgarage
He wants response!

T04Z. On song by 4000rpm for the win.

we have a to4z on our circiut car...its laggier than the drag car and doesnt make the power, might be ok on a 2.8 ltr though.

Edited by DiRTgarage
this man speaks the truth...sort of...lol

correcting a couple of things said in thread...

Ash i assume the 440kw stock shift etc is me...i never raced with 440kw thats just a dyno comp figure (34psi, when racing we only ran 28psi) the car was raced with around 400-410kw.

rb26s13 you are slightly off the mark with the time stated...9.9's @ 139MPH but thanks anyway. Our car was capable of running quicker but couldnt race it to its full potential due to the ANDRA 140 MPH rule.

I think if you go GT-RS's and are willing to rev it (9500rpm) you could run a 9 with that MPH or at least a very low 10. You would have to get the cars weight including driver to around 1475kg to do the 9 though. Although you do have the dogbox so you might get away with being over 1500kg. Our car was almost as responsive as Racepace's 2.9ltr and was all over it in the midrange and ours was only running a STD nissan crank. So RS's are the proven route i think. Our car also easily made 455KW at the wheels at Newcastle Autosalon on 20psi with BP98 and over 500KW at final battle on Sunoco race fuel.

Cheers for all the input guys.

I might look into GT-RS's then. I don't really fancy a big top mount. Even though they look sweeeet!

Mr DGarage, I remember reading somwhere that you run "modified" GT-RS's. Was that for response or for more top end??? who did them?

Do you have a dyno sheet posted up anywhere I can have a quiz at?

Cheers

Justin

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 see you've never had to push start your own car... You could save some weight right now...
    • Sounds good.  I don't 100% understand what your getting at here. When you say, "I keep seeing YouTube videos where people have new paint and primer land on the old clearcoat that isn't even dulled down" do you mean this - there is a panel with factory paint, without any prep work, they paint the entire panel with primer, then colour then clear?  If that's what you mean, sure it will "stick" for a year, 2 years, maybe 3 years? Who knows. But at some stage it will flake off and when it does it's going to come off in huge chunks and look horrific.  Of course read your technical data sheet for your paint, but generally speaking, you can apply primer to a scuffed/prepped clear coat. Generally speaking, I wouldn't do this. I would scuff/prep the clear and then lay colour then clear. Adding the primer to these steps just adds cost and time. It will stick to the clear coat provided it has been appropriately scuffed/prepped first.  When you say, "but the new paint is landing on the old clearcoat" I am imagining someone not masking up the car and just letting overspray go wherever it wants. Surely this isn't what you mean?  So I'll assume the following scenario - there is a small scratch. The person manages to somehow fill the scratch and now has a perfectly flat surface. They then spray colour and clear over this small masked off section of the car. Is this what you mean? If this is the case, yes the new paint will eventually flake off in X number of years time.  The easy solution is to scuff/prep all of the paint that hasn't been masked off in the repair area then lay the paint.  So you want to prep the surface, lay primer, then lay filler, then lay primer, then colour, then clear?  Life seems so much simpler if you prep, fill, primer, colour then clear.  There are very few reasons to go to bare metal. Chasing rust is a good example of why you'd go to bare metal.  A simple dent, there is no way in hell I'm going to bare metal for that repair. I've got enough on my plate without creating extra work for myself lol. 
    • Hi, Got the membership renewal email but haven't acted yet.  I need to change my address first. So if somebody can email me so I can change it that would be good.    
    • Bit of a similar question, apprently with epoxy primer you can just sand the panel to 240 grit then apply it and put body filler on top. So does that basically mean you almost never have to go to bare metal for simple dents?
×
×
  • Create New...