Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey Everyone,

Ive pretty much finished my R33 Build today with the completion of a tune on a DynaPack Hub Dyno, it didnt make as much power as I hoped (was wanting 300RWKW) but the results were 353.08RWHP/263.29RWKW on 19.7PSI with 450NM Torque by 5100RPM tuned on BP Ultimate.

The set up is as follows:

HKS 3037 Pro S with a 0.68 Rear (full bolt on kit)

HKS Induction Piping

HKS Split Dump

Blitz 3" Front Pipe

X-Force 560CFM Highflow Cat

3" Straight Through Exhaust

Low Mount Stainless Manifold

Hybrid Front Mount Intercooler

Turbosmart Stage 3 Plumb Back BOV

Apexi Power FC

Apexi Power FC Boost Control Kit

740cc Nismo Injectors

Z32 Air Flow Meter

Exedy Cushioned Brass Button Clutch

Walbro 255L/h Fuel Pump with 14.4V Relay Feed

Aus Spec Tein Super Street Coilovers

Tein EDFC (Electronic Dampening Controller)

I've included some pics of the car under the bonnet and inside the cabin, the cars still at the mechanic/tuner as one of the rims got bucked and has been sent off for repair but ill post dyno sheets once I have got them (should be Friday) and the pic of under the engine bay was before the Suspension Install ill take another one once the strut brace has been fitted once it arrives.

20h1xjr.jpg

x40u2s.jpg

vwpl4m.jpg

jj1mo2.jpg

2evav6d.jpg

Edited by SLYDA
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/237307-r33-dyno-results-with-hks3037-pro-s/
Share on other sites

chuck up the graph, and i will have a look for you (i have a new dynapack) torque is good but yeah power is a bit low for the boost, a .61 3037s made 289rwkw on my sr @ similar boost.

when is full boost reached?

from what i believe 4500RPM Nizmo_freeks makes full power by 3750RPM however that was at 17PSI. one of the cooler pipes has been reduced in diamater by having a fan blade smashing into it by approx 1/3 (top pipe going across the fan). Would this constitute a significant restriction of flow? I was actually planning on replacing them with a stanless set as they where chrome plated and its starting to peel off anyway.

After replacing the pipe would I need to retune the car? Thats the only thing i could see being a problem as everything else is brand new.

As for unbolting the exhaust, it has a brand new Blitz 3" Front Pipe, Brand new High Flow Cat, a 3.5" exhaust with no mid muffler and only the Canon on the rear so i dont think that would be the problem but an idea ill mention tommorow. Im hoping its still on the dyno as they were meant to be checking the cold start tommorow and it was tuned this afternoon.

Edited by SLYDA

Hmm... Money... haha im so broke right now, theres $14-15K just in parts in that list including the tune and a few other supporting mods, its all pretty much been done in the last 6 - 8 months whilst its been off the road and thats not including installation as ive done everything but the clutch myself. I get my license back in 3 weeks! so looking foward to taking it for a drive.

Jury out but I'm highly suspicious of stainless direct replacement exhaust manifolds for RB20/25 , I think the factory did a good job on the std iron lump and it's not nearly as bad as many would like to think . It's not a competition std manifold but is was designed by people who have the smarts .

I reckon I'd smooth up the std one and refit it for trial purposes .

Again (IMO only) I think I would have opted for the 0.87 A/R ProS turbine housing mainly because HKS go to the trouble of trying to make their spec turbos responsive , things like the nicely designed turbine housing and the port shrouded comp cover .

A .

Jury out but I'm highly suspicious of stainless direct replacement exhaust manifolds for RB20/25 , I think the factory did a good job on the std iron lump and it's not nearly as bad as many would like to think . It's not a competition std manifold but is was designed by people who have the smarts .

I reckon I'd smooth up the std one and refit it for trial purposes .

Again (IMO only) I think I would have opted for the 0.87 A/R ProS turbine housing mainly because HKS go to the trouble of trying to make their spec turbos responsive , things like the nicely designed turbine housing and the port shrouded comp cover .

The .82a/r Garrett ones are perfectly nice to use, and I run a stainless direct replacement and it is definitely a noticeable improvement over the stock one but having said that, the stock one was definitely not bad. I had a look into cleaning up the stock one and using a dremmel there isn't really much more you can do other than port match, unfortunately in NZ we don't have the option of extrude honing these things.

I run in the 270-280wkw on 1bar of boost on a Dynapack hub dyno with mine, so I definitely feel something is amiss with yours.

your making the power of a 2835 but requiring more boost, but im not sure how much hub figures wary from wheel figures? certainly looks like you have all the right supporting mods to make the power.

Sure you havent gone for a little spin around the block yet? :D I know i would have :(

Actually i think i made a mistake, i think its actually on 18PSI. I will have them in my hand friday, however i have to find a scanner :S.. aparantally i have like 6 pages of data. It also seems that i have quite a major vibration (have always felt it) at higher RPMS which has been deemed to be the diff and the vibration can be seen on the back hubs.. would this be affecting power?

Edited by SLYDA

Hmm doubt it but you never know. Most likely the cradel bushes are worn and causing the diff to move slightly. Most skylines have worn cradle bushes after so many years of use. However yeah it could be the diff itself.

Actually i think i made a mistake, i think its actually on 18PSI. I will have them in my hand friday, however i have to find a scanner :S.. aparantally i have like 6 pages of data. It also seems that i have quite a major vibration (have always felt it) at higher RPMS which has been deemed to be the diff and the vibration can be seen on the back hubs.. would this be affecting power?

it will be rear wheel bearings.

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...