Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts



480kw on vp 109 and dash 5s @ 23psi, BACKED UP with repeated 140+mph runs. It can be done, just not by many :D

Mark32 being on powerplus rated at 108 would be pretty damn close to vp race fuel, i dont see why every one is getting their panties in a knot. Edited by linkems

I don't understand what the issue is. e85, increasing boost later in the rpm range, and 'at the limit' tuning probably explain the nice graph

20psi @ 4700rpm sounds very good, but reasonable

700Nm @ 5000 rpm sounds very good, but reasonable

nobody else even talks about, let alone posts graphs, about increasing boost with rpm. that's probably the main reason for the high peak power.

480kw on vp 109 and dash 5s @ 23psi, BACKED UP with repeated 140+mph runs. It can be done, just not by many :D

Mark32 being on powerplus rated at 108 would be pretty damn close to vp race fuel, i dont see why every one is getting their panties in a knot.

Finally someone with some backed up proof.

How much does your car weigh? I suspect you have more than 480kw

the specs from that video:

HKS 2,8l stroker kit + twin GT2860-5 + nismo intake plenum + greddy 264 cams + 1000cc RC injectors + Apexi D-Jetro + Almasi tuning

the scale on the torque curve looks wrong, but the power curve looks accurate

http://www.gtrpwr.co...thread.php?t=62

Skylinebestdynoresult.jpg

Edited by black bnr32

Yeah most people don't, but sometimes it's gotta be done because everyone else around then expects it to be "the norm"... And then we end up with more and more threads like "why am i down on power", when in actual fact they are perfectly fine... They are just expecting something that's not reasonable and trying to explain this to such users can be about as productive as belting ones head against a wall (similar to telling the GTX/500rwkw person that it was not possible, but we were all haters :/)

And for the record, there are no mini-me's running around that i know of :ph34r:

If you think thats BS, i know one person who got "498rwkw" out of -5's on PUMP and when i asked him to back it up with MPH he said its an inaccurate way to calculate power! the fark lol.

There is a guy in NZ that claims mid 500kw on pump on GT2860Rs who is a fairly respected track racer etc, which sounds like crap - even on a high reading dyno. The trap speed argument has come up but he has no interest in drag racing, conveniently.

There is a guy in NZ that claims mid 500kw on pump on GT2860Rs who is a fairly respected track racer etc, which sounds like crap - even on a high reading dyno. The trap speed argument has come up but he has no interest in drag racing, conveniently.

We have no interest in believing him then

There is a guy in NZ that claims mid 500kw on pump on GT2860Rs who is a fairly respected track racer etc, which sounds like crap - even on a high reading dyno. The trap speed argument has come up but he has no interest in drag racing, conveniently.

Dumb comment old boy

Maybe this engine is just more efficient than all the others using the same turbos hence the higher power....

And saying that the 1/4 is the real dyno works to a degree if you have traction. But what if your running street tyres and no traction at all like Marks 32 could be wheel spinning across the line in 5th gear and still run under 120mph....

But we also have nice clean air down here in Tassie....

Edited by WHITER33GTS-T

He also has a 2.8 maybe even a 3.0 bottom end.

Different ball game to the normal 2.6

Yet another keyboard god that knows everything from behind the computer screen just ask him....

Try geting some real world experience old boy instead of just reading the interwebs then thinking your an expert on everything

Maybe this engine is just more efficient than all the others using the same turbos hence the higher power....

And saying that the 1/4 is the real dyno works to a degree if you have traction. But what if your running street tyres and no traction at all like Marks 32 could be wheel spinning across the line in 5th gear and still run under 120mph....

But we also have nice clean air down here in Tassie....

The clean air must help a shit-load Rob, and you know better that anyone a lot of cars have been on that dyno and he's not the sort of bloke to produce stupid unrealistic dyno results.

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 guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
    • Probably not. A workshop grade scantool is my go to for proper Consult interrogation. Any workshop grade tool should do it. Just go to a workshop.
×
×
  • Create New...