Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Just to note, my car with the Hypergear turbo was put on Andy's dyno when it was running BP98 and 350hp on Allstar hub dyno... First run it made 260rwhp, then they strapped it down a bit more 280rwhp and then got told to stop mucking around and it went 320rwhp.

The dyno before the move was totally rooted (retarders seemed to be shagged), I don't know if it has been re calibrated since but might be a issue.

Food for thought...

Yeh it's something I've been considering. Andy hasn't had his dyno for awhile, so it has only been on Ovaboosts dyno since I had the turbo, injectors and AFM done. Now I'm not sure if he didn't strap it down or if he doesn't know what it's doing because apparently the Ovaboost dyno doesn't log boost and he was getting three different boost readings from different gauges.

I've been meaning to get it onto Allstars dyno, but the car has taken a lower priority while I'm moving house and things. So havent got around to it.

I have been waiting to hear if Andy has his dyno running yet but nobody has mentioned. He has tried four times to get more power out of it but nothing makes a difference. You would think he would try strapping it down if he wasn't already. In any case, he believes the problem is the turbo and has advised me to ditch it. If it wasn't for the consitently good results I see on here, I probably would have by now.

What turbo did you have, the G2? Even 320rwhp would be disappointing. It's a bigger turbo than say a Greddy TD-05, surely it should make more power?

Edited by Hanaldo

he believes the problem is the turbo and has advised me to ditch it. If it wasn't for the consitently good results I see on here, I probably would have by now.

And what one did he recommend he sell you instead? :whistling:

What turbo did you have, the G2? Even 320rwhp would be disappointing. It's a bigger turbo than say a Greddy TD-05, surely it should make more power?

It was on an RB20, different ballgame. 320hp is still 240rwkw, which is good for a 20.

He didnt. Just said get rid of the Hypergear turbo and get one of proven quality.

Every single standard high flowed units has a G2 CHRA in it. Every one whom tuned it have managed to make powere even using 21U turbine housing stock injectors and AFM. There are more then enough results from various tuners and cars from various states to prove they've made "at least 200rwkws". Just because he's the only person whom can't tune the power out of it, does not mean every one whom owns this turbo and made the power is BS. But having said that thats assume every thing on your car is 100% normal.

I still got that 345rwkws high flowed turbo sitting on the shelf if you want to swap and give it a shot, I'm just going to have a laugh if he still can't make any thing above 200rwkws with that.

Yea. That was a special high flow that we've did to test out the max amount that I can flow out of a .63 rear housing and it made 345rwkws on 28psi still claming, it didn't get hot or any thing. We ended up with 321rwkws out of that on 20psi. That custom high flow is a bigger turbo then the SS-2.

Thats in page 57. That was with a .63 OP6 rear. Its going to be super laggy with .82 rear, and its about the limit for that comp wheel too. Might want to try those billet wheels I've made for the G3 Alfa version which made 335rwkws on 21psi, which I don't think stock manifold can flow much more either.

Yes Got some interesting result today. It archeived some of the design goals but all of them.

It did make 20psi by 2900RPMs and maxing out 264rwkws on a 9 sec Ramp which is super responsive. (Note: Thats not a high comp engine running cam gears.)

The torque also came in very early and held ok through out the rev rang, which made the car felt very and good at taking off.

So I'm still 16KWs short from my goal of 280rwkws and its lost some mid range from 4000 to 5000RPMs compare to the SS-1 which is likely from heat.

I think the rear housing is abit small for the new CHRA, I will be up sizing the turbine housing hopping to gain some more mid and top range. So more evaluation and testing to come.

Dyno run is based on 9 Sec ramp

atr43ss1billet.jpg

atr43ss1billetboost.jpg

Wait WHOOOT :blink: that is 1000RPMs even more responsive then the SS1 turbo. Ladies and Gents That is a more responsive turbo then stock while making more power and torque every where. Its going to be a killer turbo if you can get the 280rwkws with more mid range while keeping current response and torque. Well done !!

What turbo did you have, the G2? Even 320rwhp would be disappointing. It's a bigger turbo than say a Greddy TD-05, surely it should make more power?

G3 0.63, but it was on a RB20... Also saying that as I said it was making more and more power with every run and Andy didn't want to keep doing runs (there was something really suss going on)

To give you some idea of the power it pulled a bit on a R34 which ran 118mph at the drags

It makes boost early but it is making good but not outstanding power down there so I think Stao has more work to do on this one.

A little bit better breathing from a bigger turbine housing might be the answer.

I'm with Jez, a good first up result.

I just noticed that... It's making boost really early but the power in the midrange is lacking and seems average at best :(

Thats in page 57. That was with a .63 OP6 rear. Its going to be super laggy with .82 rear, and its about the limit for that comp wheel too. Might want to try those billet wheels I've made for the G3 Alfa version which made 335rwkws on 21psi, which I don't think stock manifold can flow much more either.

I will be auto trans limited to 320rwkw, thats what they are happy to rate a built RE401B to. I was going to go SS-2 with pre-turbo water injection. Would do around 300 ish rwkw on 20psi

through a auto by the looks anyway without W/I, that plenty for what i want anyway on a stocky bottom end . My r31 is the fast car, i just want a fast family stagea that traps 115ish mph, they are heavy though, you would probally need that power nearly to do that.

cheers

darren

Edited by jet_r31

Do you guys do much with twin scroll with your turbos?

yes they starts with .84 rear.

Also I'm really happy with the how the current prototype behaved down low, I will draw a small comp wheel profile to be cut suiting that turbine setup, which should still get me the same sort of response and down low torque with more mid range for 250rwkws.

Every single standard high flowed units has a G2 CHRA in it. Every one whom tuned it have managed to make powere even using 21U turbine housing stock injectors and AFM. There are more then enough results from various tuners and cars from various states to prove they've made "at least 200rwkws". Just because he's the only person whom can't tune the power out of it, does not mean every one whom owns this turbo and made the power is BS. But having said that thats assume every thing on your car is 100% normal.

I still got that 345rwkws high flowed turbo sitting on the shelf if you want to swap and give it a shot, I'm just going to have a laugh if he still can't make any thing above 200rwkws with that.

Thanks mate, I'll keep that in mind.

Honestly though, I've seen enough results on here and your support has been such to convince me that the problem is not with your product. I will try taking it to another tuner first and see how it goes. My target is a responsive 360ish rwhp, so if this turbo is indeed capable then I would rather sort it out and get it working properly.

So is an SS2 better than G3 with FNT??? or Billet wheels of the G3 Alfa version???

Prices?? and which is the best response?? I will be happy to get best response and reach 400RWHP..

So is an SS2 better than G3 with FNT??? or Billet wheels of the G3 Alfa version???

Prices?? and which is the best response?? I will be happy to get best response and reach 400RWHP..

The SS2 is more expensive, but the dyno does say it is 'better'.

The G3 seems to have plenty of 300ish kw results, its more of a 3076 contender while the SS2 is something special but not guaranteed to 'piss it in' at that power level... Just need to see a couple more examples to be sure.

MPH would also help tell the tale.

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

    • Yeah i found that alot of parts can be wrong or "very" hard to get the real right one. I already bought some brakes years ago on me "old" GT calipers and they were wrong too 😄  I told them too. Even send them pictures...but they said "EBC catalogue has them on my car... So i dont know what their answer will be. I call monday them and let them know that they are really not on my car. If they were they would be already on a car...
    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
×
×
  • Create New...