Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

firstly.....

i recon you should fix that problem of yours first

you dono how much ur gonna pour out for that yet......

secondly i think TT is a waste of time....

alot of the high horse power cars...single turbo is popular......im not saying large TT isnt.....

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/250252-rb25-twin-turbo/#findComment-4337953
Share on other sites

Marty's one? Honestly man its a lot of work and cash for not much gain. Better off just upgrading your turbo to something bigger. Will work out cheaper, will make more power and be more responsive.

actually it is marty's one but im gonna settle for a g t r s ill ring you anyway and let you know!

its funny you knew that!!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/250252-rb25-twin-turbo/#findComment-4339298
Share on other sites

I think another user is johnbarry88 who has completed the conversion. I'd also suggest the conversion wouldnt cost as much as you think provided you have a forward facing plenum already. The only other difficult thing would be deciding which direction you head turbo manifold wise. From there most of the other factory GTR twin turbo parts will swap over.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/250252-rb25-twin-turbo/#findComment-4341064
Share on other sites

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 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...