Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

It was a joke :) He is a good mate and knows me well enough to know that if we popped the motor from silly boost I wouldn't blame him. I don't think he would be like that with his normal customers :pirate:

If it is tuned safely and correctly what chances are there of you popping a stock 25 making 260-70kw anyway? Keep it rich and nice and cool, safe on timing so it doesn't ever det, surely the pistons aren't going to melt if you keep the AFRs down?

What are peoples thoughts on making this power on the street? I realise on the track where you are WOT for 75% of the time it could be an issue due to excessive temps, but on the street?

The G2 is only a small turbo. Also Its more of the factory exhaust manifold restricting flow so the power figure is well kept around / under 300rwkws mark. Probably not worth investing a turbo that pushes beyond that unless its going to on a high mount ext gated setup, and I'm pretty sure all the current ATR43G3s has no issues making 340rwkws+ on it.

I'm considering of going for a high mount manifold with ext gate once there are nothing left to improve using factory setup. How ever that will not reflect the power figure of those without the same setup.

I'm considering of going for a high mount manifold with ext gate once there are nothing left to improve using factory setup. How ever that will not reflect the power figure of those without the same setup.

Once you finish developement on your stock lowmount stuff you should definitely look into a turbo suitable to an off the shelf 6boost manifold and use a Tial MVR gate.

This is the staple setup for those T67 setups, if you want to get into non stock position that is the item to beat. You will need to work hard because the price is insane :nyaanyaa:

Its actually cheaper making the T67 alike setup as there is not need spending timing in making all those bolton adaptors as well as internal gate setup. Like we only charge $1000 for the internal gated ATR43G3 units.

The G2 is only a small turbo. Also Its more of the factory exhaust manifold restricting flow so the power figure is well kept around / under 300rwkws mark. Probably not worth investing a turbo that pushes beyond that unless its going to on a high mount ext gated setup, and I'm pretty sure all the current ATR43G3s has no issues making 340rwkws+ on it.

I'm considering of going for a high mount manifold with ext gate once there are nothing left to improve using factory setup. How ever that will not reflect the power figure of those without the same setup.

6boost do a low mount setup, i tuned one with a t67 and came up great... 340 @ 19psi

post-34927-0-10157600-1313743608_thumb.jpg

post-34927-0-68878800-1313743630_thumb.jpg

Its actually cheaper making the T67 alike setup as there is not need spending timing in making all those bolton adaptors as well as internal gate setup. Like we only charge $1000 for the internal gated ATR43G3 units.

I know man but if your going to optimise the G3 for a high mount you no longer need all that bolt on crap. Either a simple generic 5 bolt rear or a v band external gate, should bring production cost down.

Fitting the pu 1.5 in the morning. Just going to be road tuned till the injectors arrive. Let ya'll know how it goes :D

Looking forward to it and really curious to see you opinion on this turbo in terms of driveability and power compared to other turbos you've tested :)

Thats one busy looking exhaust side, how do they compair flow wise to the high mount?

identical, high mount is only to package things easy, turbo placement has no bearing on results.

By the way this turbo on the test car is for sale with a discount. PM me if you are interested.

This is a hill climb competition footage sent in from one of our customer's S14 using ATR28G3 (268rwkws from memory) in Switzerland. enjoy

:nyaanyaa: No its not a S14 SR20det. Still a G3 turbo, but on another mighty CA18det 180sx with 310rwkws. He's on NS now.

numrisation0001xn.jpg

Ok pu 1.5 has been installed. Not going to go into detail about the install just yet but a few things had to be modified.

Havent touched the tune yet as customer had to head to sydney. Went for a quick road test not exceeding half throttle and so far very impressed with the near stock response.

This turbo has a very unique and nice sounding spool up.

Will be doing a quic road tune today just to set AFR's then hopefully get on dyno next saturday or possibly during the week.

Im excited for the results

Little update:

This is a from a scrapped blown Ford XR6 turbo that we've rebuilt from scratch with a ATR45 core. Its fitted back on to a Auto XR6 (edit: NA+T) 4L with 3500 convert. Car made 295.5rwkws on 11psi with Caltex E65.

xr6turbo.jpg

Looking back from where we first started, my dynosheet pile is about the same height as a Nissan skyline engine manual :w00t: and it will keep on getting thicker.

2.JPG

1.JPG

Any way, ATR43G3 is back on the drawing board for the 4th time, I'm hopping of gain better response while not losing the consistency, top end power or peek torque.

Tao that XR6 was a NA+t AU ford with std high comp engine.

Really? AU's didn't come with turbo's so was the turbo from another XR6 car? Or was the car a BA XR6 turbo?

Tao that XR6 was a NA+t AU ford with std high comp engine.

Really? AU's didn't come with turbo's so was the turbo from another XR6 car? Or was the car a BA XR6 turbo?

Why would you do it?? Maybe not the same kettle of fish, but my standard NA EL Fairmont feels like its almost got too much power for its chassis :yucky:

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...