Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Some updates. This is a result sent in from Toshi, based on a Manual Skyline with our high flowed OP6 turbocharger. Made 277rwkws on 17psi, P 98 fuel.

op6hiflow377rwkw.jpg

Little update on the ATR28SS series on sr20det engine.

This particular prototype is a modified SS15 in a .64 rear, how ever the modification did not take effect. How ever still made a reasonably responsive 255rwkws @ 18psi on pump 98 fuel.

power.jpg

boost.JPG

This turbocharger against the most responsive GT2871R in .64 turbine housing run, and beats it in both power and response:
vsgt2871power.JPG

vsgt2871boost.JPG




I also conducted a test evaluating factory 2.5 inches induction pipe Vs a 3 inches induction pipe. Results as shown:
25inchpipeincar.jpg

Differences is 13kws at 255rwkws application: Red is with 2.5 inches induction pipe, while Green is the normal 3 inches induction pipe.
inductionpower.JPG




inductionboost.JPG

  • Like 1

Your still getting a fair bit of boost drop cause you using the 1bar actuator

Your boost is going from 20psi to 17 psi by redline

Mine held 20psi pretty solid with your 20psi actuator you supplied with the normal 1/2 a hole preload as seen in my dyno

I know most people leave the standard twin turbo intake piping on GTR's but has anyone actually done some back to back runs like above to see if there is an increase in power moving to bigger piping or are the turbo's too small to bother?

I was modifying 300zxs for a couple of years and induction pipes on them do make a very noticeable difference. So I believe proper induction pipes can also affect GTR's performance in a positive way.

  • Like 1

I was modifying 300zxs for a couple of years and induction pipes on them do make a very noticeable difference. So I believe proper induction pipes can also affect GTR's performance in a positive way.

When I get home I will post up dyno sheets of z32s 2" vs 2.5" piping...the difference is around the 40rwhp mark. A gtr may not gain that much however, a z32 has around 2.5m of chqrge piping on each bank.

Edited by Super Drager
  • Like 2

Ok as promised:

Piping comparison:

EX000002.jpg

P0003549.jpg

The car was tuned with the ZEM in its original setup with the 2" OEM piping and Stillen SMICs. Once the tune was perfected with this setup and all of the runs were made, the only thing that was changed was the intercoolers and piping. The exact same programs were used in the second test as was used in the first (there were three different programs created along the way to handle pumpfuel, racefuel, and maximum boost).

1.2BAR:
DynoCompare1.2bar.jpg

1.3BAR
DynoCompare1.3bar.jpg

1.4BAR:
DynoCompare1.4bar.jpg

1.5BAR:

DynoCompare1.5bar.jpg

1.6BAR:

DynoCompare1.6bar.jpg

1.7BAR:

DynoCompare1.7bar.jpg

1.8BAR:

DynoCompare1.8bar.jpg

After looking through the data to see where the differences were in the other datalogged pieces of information, it is obvious to see that the engine is simply breathing more air, especially down low with the larger piping/intercoolers. The A/F is a bit different between the runs on the bottom end simply because it is using a different part of the fuel table as a result of the additional airflow. More air = more fuel delivered = richer mixture. On the top-end of things, the A/F is slightly different as well and it will account for some of the improved power. I did not want to change the programming that was used as I felt that this would lead to possible suspicion by some folks. If I had adjusted the program to make the A/F the same, the difference in numbers would have been even more dramatic through the bottom end up to midrange, showing greater improvement in bottom end, and with a slight detriment to top end power as it seems to want to run a tad bit leaner with the new setup, albeit a rather marginal difference though. It would be even nicer to see the difference if Dee's car had 60mm throttlebodies, which are essentially the same size as the 2.5" piping we installed. Even despite this limitation, it was apparent that the piping and intercoolers contributed quite a bit on their own. I believe we were really tapping out though on the benefit of the piping/intercoolers as the power was increased on the top end because of the limitation of the throttlebody. At this peak power level (650RWHP), there is a tremendous amount of air flowing through each throttlebody and I believe the 2.0" OEM throttlebodies started to become our bottleneck.

So, this is the preliminary dynochart data and qualitative review of what I see so far and as soon as I get everything together in the quantitative analysis department, I will be more than happy to share it all.

Just food for though :)


Turbos are GT28RS (2860-5). Pump Fuel until 1.6BAR, C16 from 1.7BAR onwards.

Edited by Super Drager

Thanks for posting it.

The more air= more fuel = richer mixtures comment is a bit odd though.

Possibility he is running AFM(s), so more air "sensored" by the AFM, more fuel is injected - accordingly to the map.. where as a MAP based car will inject as much fuel as required as per the RPM vs. Boost/Vacuum cell.

Possibility he is running AFM(s), so more air "sensored" by the AFM, more fuel is injected - accordingly to the map.. where as a MAP based car will inject as much fuel as required as per the RPM vs. Boost/Vacuum cell.

If anything it would be because the higher load cells are probably richer (assuming a stockish fuel map).

Actually after I replaced the stock R33 rubber induction pipe with a proper 3 inch metal item. My fuel actually went lean in upper revs. It has to be touched up.

When I get home I will post up dyno sheets of z32s 2" vs 2.5" piping...the difference is around the 40rwhp mark. A gtr may not gain that much however, a z32 has around 2.5m of chqrge piping on each bank.

not sure why we're comparing intake piping to cooler piping but its nice to know the difference it makes

was the turbo slightly more laggy with the bigger piping as a trade off from response to more top end power?

Upload a video. Which we machined a bunch of comp housings today using CNC:

The comp housing profile was done by CNC too, except the lathe tip is sprayed with oil that can't be seen. Takes about 10 mints to complete a comp cover from Castings. Which working by hand would roughly be 70 mints.

  • Like 1

Add in another update. This is our latest TD06SL2 based turbocharger, the SLSS-2 in 10cm turbine.

This particular one has the latest low friction trust setup, with slightly larger compressor inducer and slightly more aggressive compressor blade profile. It should be maxing out around 390rwkws mark working with a RB25det engine on E85.

It is made to produce more power, with better response and much better reliability to some of the T67 copies

Will update results shortly.

front.JPG

rear.JPG

.

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 have been being VERY quiet about what you're alluding to, as it is something that ticks me off... The number of cars from factory that run coil overs is HUGE! Most of them these days do... The other part that annoys me, is people saying "Well all the incabin adjustable suspension is illegal by blah blah blah"... If that's the case, then why can I buy a car brand new that can do it if, FULL STOP in cabin adjustable suspension is illegal...   Also, I could just chuck some aftermarket shocks in my car, throw the stock springs on, after my blue slip, dump my super low springs back in. Same shock and spring style setup... Hell, they could also be the same colour springs etc.     I'm voting, BlueSlipper didn't want to touch the above car for some reason. Whether it be some sort of bias against the car, the owner, them maybe having previously done dodgy shit and now they're being super careful in case they get slapped in the face by the Gumbyment again... Find a new blueslip place.   And can confirm as you had said, yes there are holy bibles of vehicle heights, and all sorts of other suspension stuff. Heck your run of the mill mechanic, and tyre shop has access to all of that stuff. It's how they do wheel alignments...
    • Funny story Heading to Sydney this morning on the HWY there was some slow traffic, so I gave it the beans and midway through my overtaking "power run" I lost all power It seems that I missed a hose clamp,  and the MAF and filter went WiFi To make this more problematic, the little tool kit that lives in the boot, is sitting in the sun room at Goulburn......LOL Luckily for me I found a bit of steel on the side of the road that could be used like a rusty and bent flat head screw driver to tighten it up enough that it got me into Sydney, it is now all tight like a tiger with the aid of a 8mm socket Note to self: Use my brain and double check stuff, and always keep that little tool kit in the car for when I have a brain fart
    • Oh, and as for everyone with their fuel economy changes, I switch between E10 and 98 in the company car. Even do when I had personal cars that could run on E10. You know what changed my fuel economy in any noticeable way? How I drove, and where I drove. Otherwise, say on full tanks of just back and forth from work only (So same trips, same sort of traffic), couldn't notice a difference that I can correlate to the type of fuel in use. In the current vehicle, that's over 42L of USABLE fuel. While 98 is all "more energy dense", it also has higher knock resistance as it takes more energy to get it to ignite too. The longer hydrocarbons, typically more tightly bound. So running the same ignition map, can also produce less power, if there isn't enough time to get it all burnt through properly, as yep, the flame propagation speed is different from lower octane fuel to higher (Higher has a lower flame propagation, due to the more tightly bound and harder to self ignite funs. This is also typically where, a vehicle that is designed purely to run on 91 (Whether it be E10 or normal 91) usually sees absolutely no real world difference in fuel economy for the normal man, woman, or dog.
    • We've got some servos around me that have 91 with E10, 91 (no E10), 95, and 98. At those stations the change from 91 E10 to 91, is typically around 8c/L.   But lets not get started on the price of fuel in Oz. It's ridiculous. All the service stations around me, bar one, the price of fuel has been over the $2 mark per litre for the cheapest, 98 being around $2.45. That one service station is a CostCo, fuel from it comes from the same refineries, and makes no pitstops, it runs great, including the 98. In fact, I've had no issues on CostCo fuel, but plenty of issues at other stations!. The CostCo fuel, was $1.65 roughly this week for 94 with E10. $1.88 for 98. Servos directly across from it, $2.10 for 91 E10, and $2.48 for 98. The part I had to laugh at? If I drive multiple HOURS away from Brisbane, say out near Nanango, or Kingaroy, or even out to Goondiwindi, the price of their fuel, is the same as what it is at the CostCo... Oh, and that BP servo at Goondiwindi is HUGE and goes through epic turnover of fuel, so it's not sitting there for weeks going to shit. And what blows me away, my mate is one of the people who drives the Fuel Tanker all around QLD, delivering to all those places. At the same company his previous role was doing the "local haul" deliveries... Same truck, same driver, same pickup point it all comes from. So you tell me, how the hell it is 60c/L CHEAPER for fuel, when nearly all else is equal, except they require a B-Double to drive half a day out of Brisbane, and half a day back, every second day, compared to the delivery that can be under 30 minutes drive from the fuel pickup point... Not to mention, go five blocks down the road, and Ampol to Ampol will vary 30c/L... And I've had this conversation with my mate... The way it's priced, is just typical, pure and utter rubbish... He also does runs from Brisbane, to all over QLD, down to Newcastle, Sydney, Nowra, Melbourne, Geelong, and even out to parts of the NT depending on the companies needs. His main stuff is all the longer distance away from home for a few days at a time, then when he's back, he loves to just pickup extra shifts wherever he can in whichever truck, hence all the weird different places.   Oh, as for getting E10 into all the fuels in Australia... It was very quickly highlighted, that we don't have enough biomass available to use to make E10 sustainably like they require, and it would dramatically cut into our, and the worlds food chain supply...   I vote we all just start running on liquid methane gas... Plenty of that just getting tapped off at tips from underground decay... (Note, this is pure just stupid commenting. I could very easily highlight the reasons its not a good idea especially on scale...)
    • Am I correct in assuming that the R35's are getting the classic skyline haircut off the odometer?  Quick search on carsales, there are 33 08 and 09 GTR's for sale, only 2 of them have more then 100,000km's on them (116,075 and 110,000 respectively).  And somehow there are about 25 for sale with around 60,000kms? Looks like the classic skyline haircut to me =/
×
×
  • Create New...