Jump to content
SAU Community

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


Recommended Posts

Cerbera's car has been parted out for about a year, so the T04Z run is a little old.

We're stumped as to why it's restricted. The only thing we can think is the head I'm using (off a 34 N1 motor) has a few imperfections in it which is causing turbulence. I'm using a china manifold, but the same type on Natalotto's car did 630hp with a T04Z. Exhaust is fine, intake is free, plenum is stock, cams are pretty big (270x10.8).

Disco, I'm using the GCG T04 rear for the 35. It's a T4 flanged 0.84 housing. I don't think the rear housing is the issue to be honest.

I would assume that a R34 N1 head stock would be better than or at least on par with my 89 shitter standard head, i'm still thinking it is the manifold. I remember back in the day Natalotto had heaps of problems with his china manifold and they did extensive modifications to it to get it working right. I dont know if Brockas has done anything to his?!?

I agree the boost is all over the shop, ramps hard then creeps and then falls over... which to me points at a manifold issue!!!

my t04z run is about 2 years old, still same dyno, same operator etc etc

Manifold hasn't been touched yet. Simple china shitter ceramic coated and bolted on.

It has a gasket leak on the exhaust side anyways, so the manifold has to come off. May see about modifying it while its off.

i was looking into the to4z with a 3litre bottom end on a 25, personally i think its a bit too large for track, big turbos tend to be slow on track cars, leave larger turbos to the drag racers is my advice. Go Hks GTSS, fantastic turbos for track and relatively tight courses....

I had the pleasure of driving a T04Z'd 25/30 in a 32 GTS4 a couple of weeks ago on the skidpan. Bit laggy compared to the GT30'd R33 I also got to drive, but, when it comes on boost.. HOLY SHIT.

Edited by bubba
I had the pleasure of driving a T04Z'd 25/30 in a 32 GTS4 a couple of weeks ago on the skidpan. Bit laggy compared to the GT30'd R33 I also got to drive, but, when it comes on boost.. HOLY SHIT.

that mikes new settup?!? how much power did he end up making?

Just got back from the workshop.

Compared my GT3582 setup (blue line) with a Cerbera's T04Z setup (green line), which were both run up on the same Dyno Dynamics dyno in shootout mode.

Not sure if Simon's had any issues, but my setup is strangled HARD in the top end. So much so, that adding 5psi and 2 degrees ignition timing gained me a whole 1hp up top. Did gain about 30hp through the mid range though, but I obviously have a large restriction in my inlet/exhaust which isn't allowing any more than 500hp flow.

Anyways, enough ricers excuses, here is the comparison:

11m59gn.jpg

Thats a perfect comparison.

You gain up to 60 hp more through the low - mid range. For a top end trade of of about 70hp.

I actually think you would find the two cars down the 1/4 would be very simular in times.

You have the big advantage though as your car would be more driveable on the street / track.

Be interesting to see once you have the issues sorted out.

How the top end power would compare on the same boost levels.

If you end up only trading 30 or so top end HP for a midrange gain of 60hp you will be well ahead.

Yup, but after 6 months of the car being off the road, I'm not touching it again for a while, so will have to make do with that comparison.

If I get the motivation I will fork out for a 6boost manifold and see if that makes a difference.

The manifold is the cheap solution, the head is not so cheap. I'm hoping that with the boost dropping off, that indicates a manifold issue.

Thats a perfect comparison.

You gain up to 60 hp more through the low - mid range. For a top end trade of of about 70hp.

I actually think you would find the two cars down the 1/4 would be very simular in times.

You have the big advantage though as your car would be more driveable on the street / track.

Be interesting to see once you have the issues sorted out.

How the top end power would compare on the same boost levels.

If you end up only trading 30 or so top end HP for a midrange gain of 60hp you will be well ahead.

yeah 3.5-4.5k about a average of 35hp more but from 4.5-8k about a 50hp average more

i dont know what crack you have been smoking butters, but when do you have revs less than 4.5k down a quarter mile :(

i remember the difference in speed of my car on lowish boost (19psi 510rwhp) and high boost (24psi 574rwhp) was not even comparable... 510 was fvcking fast, 574 was just scary :)

  • 2 months later...

Reviving this one once again. Looking for some opinions on the following, given the choice of a 3582 1.06 twin scroll or the equivalent sized borg warner s300sx (83/75 I think) both on a proper twin scroll t4 flanged manifold - which would be the more responsive while aiming for ~500rwhp.

nick have a look at nytsky's engine build thread

he is using a 3076r on a built 25 and making 485rwhp with e85 and an amazing power curve, i'd imagine your motor could make a little more...

i would be thinking along the lines of a 3076r with a 1.0ish split rear

Edited by Cerbera
Reviving this one once again. Looking for some opinions on the following, given the choice of a 3582 1.06 twin scroll or the equivalent sized borg warner s300sx (83/75 I think) both on a proper twin scroll t4 flanged manifold - which would be the more responsive while aiming for ~500rwhp.

I would be going for the TS Gt35R, definitely. I am not convinced on the BWs yet - they COULD be really good but there are contrasting results for them, while the GT35Rs are a very known quantity.

That was going to be my next question, full race are the only ones I've found so far - and at 6-700 delivered (exh housing only) it's looking like buying a whole new turbo will end up cheaper.

Edited by DCIEVE

i think a 3076r with a 1 housing would be pretty awesome suited as simon suggested. With correct setup in a lightweight r31 it would be nuts, mine seems to be abit better now with new exhuast and in a lighter car i could see it be pretty damn good (ill find out soon enough). Ill have to take you for a spin and show you how it goes and response and then u can decide for yourself and mine isnt even sorted properly. Surely a 450hp setup with awesome response would beat a 500hp setup with a fair bit more lag on a track.

on another note, the sloth (scradly) just made 430(allstarhubberlovehp) the other day on a stock neo with cams and a 3076r 0.82 with only around 17-18psi boost with awesome response

surely a built 26 with another 6psi could smash out 500+

DOOOOOOOOO IT

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 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.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...