Jump to content
SAU Community

Gt35r Vs Garrett T04z - Discussion (just Post In This Thread To Create A Database)


Recommended Posts

It's Cerberas graph.

I used that one instead of Natallottos because Cerbera has no head porting, and just mild 270 degree cams.

The 35R has been scaled 5% to take into account its on a hubber.

It's the closest thing I could get to a fair comparisson between the two, and subsequently, I've just purchased a 35R.

just as a comparison we usually get 20psi by 4000rpm with a t04z and make 370rwkw or more on the same boost

So then of the two who are we believing?

The graph you put in, regardless of correction shows nothing of the response spoken of.

If it was 20psi @ 4000rpm why does it take 1000rpm before it actually makes power if the boost is there... very confusing

2l8j9fc.jpg

Spoolup has a to4z on his rb30det.

There's a few dyno sheets on the link below.

http://www.spoolimports.com/content/SpoolImportsR33.asp

R34 NEO head - HKS 272 / 9.35 cams, Performance Valve Springs

Garrett T04Z turbo 0.96 ex housing

23psi 581rwhp.

The boosts knee so to speak appears to be a little after 4000rpm.

A pair of 272 10.5mm lift cams would work much better on his setup.

As for a GT35 pushing more than a genuine 400rwkw (535rwhp) on the RB with pump fuel. I'm not a believer. :D

Well I went within a couple kw of 400rwkw on tenagah's dyno dynamics with a slipping clutch and delaminating rubber not forgetting there are more powerful gt35 equipped cars getting around...

ie on the same hubber that I made 435odd another properly built 26 (272's etc) has done ~450rwkw.

Ash, I believe Simon is referring to boost on the road loaded up in 4th which, if my car is anything to go by, gives much better results than the dyno.

So then of the two who are we believing?

The graph you put in, regardless of correction shows nothing of the response spoken of.

If it was 20psi @ 4000rpm why does it take 1000rpm before it actually makes power if the boost is there... very confusing

I've gone back and checked the figures, there is a typo in the data from the graph I posted (apologies).

2niunpk.jpg

and here is Simons graph:

l_b7eca4ab19da63cf98eae41ae9b99bfc.jpg

I reckon there is a good chance your 5% difference estimation between the hub dyno and rolling road might be a bit off, almost to the point where they actually probably read about the same. If you look at the plots, notice the T04Z has more grunt at around 3000rpm than the GT3582R when they are just building boost? At pretty much any stage where they are running similar boost levels (the GT35 is actually running more at every point of the graph) the T04Z is making more power than the GT3582R but unless the car with the T04Z has a bigger motor, that is quite unlikely. It would be MUCH more likely for the GT35 to have more power at 3000rpm....

honestly i dont think a comparision from two different dynos with possible different ramp rates, air temps, etc is a true indication of a proper comparision, these two engines are alot different as well with cam choice etc so that doesnt help. The only way to compare is back to back turbo swap on the same engine with the same dyno and same air temps then it might be realistic. There is enough variation in readouts from one dd dyno to another dd dyno, so comparing to a hub dyno as well is pretty hard to get accurate.

I reckon there is a good chance your 5% difference estimation between the hub dyno and rolling road might be a bit off

I've seen quite a few, including my own car, which have shown almost exactly a 5% difference between the Hubber at All-Star and the roller at X-Speed.

By no means am I suggesting this is 100% accurate, but its a decent indication, and all it is is two dyno charts plotted on the same graph.

thanks for the vid. :D

that run was an 11.5

next run was 11.1

cheers very much. :laugh: lol

Hey Michael..

Would you be able to go over the details of your car..

Engine build, supporting mods & complete turbo set-up

Curious.. Id like to compare my build to yours (see if I havn't taken any short-cuts along the way) also curious on your 8,500 redline.. Making power all the way to the cut?

PM me if you like, but I dare say some parties on here would be itching to know also

Cheers

Tomek

Edited by Tomek

Sorry but it seems like my post was either ignored or overlooked.

What would the other determining factors (other than the turbo) as to where/how quick your car builds boost/power?

Eg; if two cars using identical turbos (incl rear housing), what would be the MAJOR things that differntiate their power outputs?

eg

-maifold design

-cams

-exhaust size

OR is it a bit more complicated than that........ :(

because i guess you could get a properly set up GT35 making power nearly as early as a poorly set up T04Z Right?

sorry if this doesnt make sense, im just trying to understand the 'bigger picture'

Sorry but it seems like my post was either ignored or overlooked.

What would the other determining factors (other than the turbo) as to where/how quick your car builds boost/power?

Eg; if two cars using identical turbos (incl rear housing), what would be the MAJOR things that differntiate their power outputs?

eg

-maifold design

-cams

-exhaust size

OR is it a bit more complicated than that........ :P

because i guess you could get a properly set up GT35 making power nearly as early as a poorly set up T04Z Right?

sorry if this doesnt make sense, im just trying to understand the 'bigger picture'

Are you talking about turbos on identical engine types because if not then capacity and rpm's and so forth would also play a great roll. Like, for example, the GT35 and T04z function a lot better on stroked Rb26's as they have higher capacity.......close capacity to the 3.0L on which they're meant to run very well on.

I think you also mean: "you could get a properly setup T04z making power nearly as early as a poorly setup GT35...." ????

(the GT35 is smaller than the T04z).

But yeh, I think you could add the size and shape of your intercooler piping and core to the list as well. The more corners and restrictions you have in the how intercooler system from start to finish, the more lag you will have although this would only be very noticeable when you compare the BEST design (similar to V mount) to the absolute WORST design out there!!!

Dump pipe / elbow piece etc behind the turbo would also contribute I guess.

Induction system into turbo inlet.....hi-flow filter vs factory paper element filter etc. Oh, and if you have some cold air or not....partition/cold air box and snorkle etc.

That's just some things I can think off... ;-)

To add to the mix in this thread, I'm going with a GT3040/76r on my stock-stroke GTR. I'm chasing good response and power but am not using twins. I've been wanting to go with a GT35 or T04z for a long time but I want to keep the response.....not to mention that, with the bigger turbos you'd want to be using external gates which don't fall under any of the mod plate codes (something which is a must these days, especially when you drive your car to the track) If I weren't so concerned about the legal side of things (having been to court and all) I'd be going for a nice GT35 setup.

Edited by tommis85
I've gone back and checked the figures, there is a typo in the data from the graph I posted (apologies).

2niunpk.jpg

and here is Simons graph:

l_b7eca4ab19da63cf98eae41ae9b99bfc.jpg

haha, i noticed that something was wrong with that graph ages ago but kept on forgetting to mention it...

as far as 20psi at 4000rpm, on a flat road in 4th gear... load up from 3000rpm and defi peak reads a touch over 1.5bar and power fc reads peak revs of 4000rpm

done it about 100 times and it comes the up the same every time, in 3rd gear it would get 20psi at around 4300rpm

ps. brockas, now you have seen graphs again are you slitting wrists u didnt go a z :P

hah not at all champ, besides, at least I still have my GT-R.

The GT35 is physically a smaller turbo. It will spool quicker than a T04Z, unless the fabled Z somehow defies the laws of physics. Considering my car is primarily driven on the track, that's exactly what I need.

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



  • 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...