Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Ah fair enough. I did actually consider it, I was tempted by the price. Unfortunately I'm in the same boat as Trev in that it's not my preferred kit. In any case, I should get my setup working correctly without WMI before I start using it as a bandaid.

What's missing from your setup hanaldo? I saw your powercruise video (sounds great) and can see your mods/output in your sig. Looks pretty good to me, just not running as much boost as some of the other guys are.

What's missing from your setup hanaldo? I saw your powercruise video (sounds great) and can see your mods/output in your sig. Looks pretty good to me, just not running as much boost as some of the other guys are.

When he runs more boost it doesn't make more power unfortunately so he has to find what's causing that

Some further evaluation on a ceramic roller bearing PU high flow running stock compressor housing internally gated. The profile of this turbocharger is identical to a G2.5.

IMAG1096.jpg

I've bought some actuators casings from Taiwan (probably same as Kando ones) and used 18psi high pressure actuator springs in it and it worked well. Best part is that I can add few washers under the diaphragm to load the springs to where I want it to be.

IMAG1097.jpg

It made 341rwkws on E85 with the current manifold. It is 10kws short and 100rpms laggier compare to when it was on the Brae manifold even with more boost. How ever pretty good result from a stock looking turbo.

power.jpg

boost.jpg

Haha thanks for that Kasko, pretty much on the money. Haven't looked into it a lot yet to be honest, graduate from Uni next week and fly out to Europe in 3, so been a bit preoccupied. Intention is to get into it once I get back from Europe next year.

Realistically those actuators are just big casings, the actual diaphragm and spring setups are identical to any other actuators. The best part of it is it allows you to change springs easily and preloading the spring by adding washers under the diaphragm of where the two bolts comes out. But apart from that its no differences to metal casing actuators.

Its probably good for turbos with small compressor housings, But It does run out of room when I tried to use it with a .70 comp housing.

Also our billet 18G compressor is ready, The profile is identical to our SS1PU compressor wheel but smaller in diameter. This wheel is made to flow about 10% higher then original cast wheel, while producing very dynamic on road drivability.

IMAG1109.jpg

Our compressor casting has also arrived.

IMAG1110.jpg

Tomorrow I will machine it up alone with turbine casting to have the turbocharger produced. It is currently available in 8cm rear, with 18G or 20G comp and TD05H and TD06SL2 turbine wheel. Price is still at $800 each. PM if any one's interested.

Also I've re-engineered the sleeve bearings with different oil grove for the ATR43xx turbochargers, tested today, which made them have similar boost building behavior as the ceramic roller bearing CHRAs, will get some dyno readings mid week against my CBB result. Free upgrade to all customers.

This project is mainly for Greddy turbo fans, but I don't like copying them in OEM specifications, so I will mix and match wheels plus some customized profiled billet wheels for them to be different. The goal is for dynamic drivability, Modify housings to fit different types of vehicles, and perhaps adding ceramic roller bearing cartridges.

I've had the T518Z billet version finalized today with every thing machined up nicely.

IMAG1105.jpg

IMAG1107.jpg

It is currently on 18G compressor with a TD05H turbine. I will machine one more housing using SL2 turbine tomorrow

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, 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.
    • 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...