Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

It seems like people only get excited with it comes to high No. There are 3x different types of FNT rear housings developed for the G3 which produce better response based on trade off from the top end. How ever max of 290rwkws is where the stock exhaust manifold maxes out. So I will choice type B .82 as default from now on. The G2.5 was also trailed with the same rear housing.

Same G3 core.

Original .82 FNT rear housing:

power.jpg

boost.jpg

.82 Turbine housing .82 with alternative FNT arrangement:

power.jpg

boost.jpg

G3 rear housing 2. This is running a modified FNT .63 rear housing (I think its around .67 after the modifications):

atr43g3power.jpg

atr43g3boost.jpg

I can modify all G3's type .82 A housings to .82 B housings for better response for $30. I dealt it will affect much the top end of 280rwkws which is most of what people are getting out of those on 18psi of boost.

All bolton version G3 and PU high flows made recently are running on Type B rear housing.

Hanaldo its not just in the tune. It has alot to do with the driver.

Also a laggy turbo normally helps fuel economy as the tune can be ran at stoich in more of the driving around part of the map.

Yes, I ignored driving style because if someone wants to drive around on boost all the time, that doesn't mean their setup is getting bad economy. Obviously if you're in the power band then you're using the fuel.

I always try to measure my cars efficiency based on several different driving styles. I've tried boosting around, I've tried putting around, I've tried city driving vs hwy driving, etc. etc. And then I rate it's efficiency based on all of those styles, not just one :)

Which version of the .82 housing is the G2.5 you posted about on the previous page using? The "alternative" fnt arrangement/ type b (second lot of dyno graphs)?

Edited by Mitcho_7

Could the G2.5 Also support a billet wheel (as-well as the type B FNT rear housing)? if so how much extra, and will it produce quicker spool time to be worth the extra money?

I will call you during the week, I am going to come by the workshop on Saturday if you are open, as i want to order a turbo, and you have hit the nail on the head with the G2.5 for me.

Yes the G2.5 can run on SS1PU's billet comp wheel for a responsive outcome while maxing out around the 280rwkws mark.

Since the SS1PU's compressor can not max out type B .82 turbine housing I recommend either the original SS1PU or the G2.5 with the modified .63 (.67) rear for more dynamic power delivery. Billet wheels cost $200 additional on top.

I am after the 0.82 housing as i am doing heavy track work like drifting and circuit, and heat is a major problem I want to reduce. i will be running 44mm external gate, I would like to reach between 280-300 rwkw on 18psi with the best response for this power and thought G2.5 0.82 would be perfect externally gated. I would also like to know if i could have the Nissan dump pipe flange welded on for direct fitment but NO hole or actuator for internal gate (and how much extra this will be). As for the billet wheel it was just an idea.

The G2.5 in .82 should be fine.

The turbo is $950

The Nissan dump pattern adaptor for stock dump pipe cost $250

Oil line: $80

I can have the internal gate welded up, there is no additional charge.

Good result mate, now you won't need to upgrade to the SS1PU...yet...

Super responsive looking too, yours would make an awesome street car with that sort of response.

I noticed you haven't upped the boost for E85...did you try? I know Ethanol is good for timing, I thought it was good at keeping temperatures down too, allowing you to feed more boost (someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Like Arthur said, I could be heading just shy of 300. Clutch going in this week...soon as that's done it's toon time.

I would be surprised if you didn't see 300.

S15 Injectors are reaching their head (duty) @ 14PSI. Putting more boost is just going to push the injectors over the edge.

I would have used 555's, but I couldn't find any up for sale. They were all sold very quick.

Response, well there is no lag basically. The E85 has made the throttle response for all intensive purposes, instant.

It's growing some real balls in the top end now.

This is the G3 we just pulled off the neo motor. Looking at the rear weld on adaptor it looks very restrictive. It has a big lip inside and as u can see by the soot marks the 3inch dump pipe ismuch bigger that the actual outlet

15ad08ca.jpg

Looks like you had fun getting it off, is that 3 snapped bolts still stuck in there?

How old is that version of the g3? I wonder if they are all like that?

Edited by Mitcho_7

I didnt take it off. Mate took it off his own car. Took him ages. It was funny watching him actually. I know he is gonna read this Hahaha.

Tao do ur own turbo's have this lip? Do u Think it will be a restriction?

Hes commented on it before, he uses the exact same product on his own car and doesnt have an issue.

I wonder if it can be bettered, I dunno really. Its an oddly shaped dump.

I would be surprised if you didn't see 300.

S15 Injectors are reaching their head (duty) @ 14PSI. Putting more boost is just going to push the injectors over the edge.

I would have used 555's, but I couldn't find any up for sale. They were all sold very quick.

Response, well there is no lag basically. The E85 has made the throttle response for all intensive purposes, instant.

It's growing some real balls in the top end now.

Fair call on the injectors. Good to hear, when I get tuned on E you'll have to come for a drive and see if the extra lag of the SS1PU is worth it.

Hes commented on it before, he uses the exact same product on his own car and doesnt have an issue.

I wonder if it can be bettered, I dunno really. Its an oddly shaped dump.

I guess the issue is caused by staying with the Nissan 6 bolt rear housing?

If would have to be a restriction to some degree and it'd be interesting to see results if it could somehow be fixed...

Edited by Mitcho_7

It is discharged air After the turbine housing coming out from the turbine wheel, not feeding air into the turbine wheel. it would only be a problem only if it is for reverse, discharged air will follow where ever pressure allowed to escape, and I've taken all areas I can remove suiting the stock dump pipe as you can see from the gasket print.

Below is a rough drawing of the adapter flange, clearance has been created on the far left in compensation to the far right. I've tested this dump flange vs 3.5 inch V-band flange and there is no difference (Nissan flange made 4kws more power. could be variance from day temp or dyno)

dumpflange.JPG

I'm also running the exact same dump flange on mine, the power is at expected level of where the comp is getting maxed out. I've had no problem.

How ever there is a timing difference between stock exhaust manifold and aftermarket exhaust manifold that I'm currently using on the G3. which is the reasons of a huge gain after installing an large external gate on top of the factory manifold.

You will find factory manifold does not match to the ports on the head. Abe2 has port matched and grinned the inner of his own stock exhaust manifold, it apparently made 20kws gain, hence the 358rwkws final result.

Also Jez, I have one of Tao's bored-out G3 rear flange adaptor plates to put on when I get my new dump pipe and change fuel to e85.

Just looking at the base design's lip half obscuring the outlet of the wg compared to the bored out one you can imagine the new one would be much better with a direct flow path into the dump pipe.

This is the G3 we just pulled off the neo motor. Looking at the rear weld on adaptor it looks very restrictive. It has a big lip inside and as u can see by the soot marks the 3inch dump pipe ismuch bigger that the actual outlet

15ad08ca.jpg

There's a lot of area's that need some TLC, could see a few hour's of die grinding in that haha. Also notice the oil on the exhaust wheel?

Edited by 51NNA

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

    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
    • You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...