Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Anyone care to share pics of their SS2 high mounted on an RB25? Preferably on a 6Boost manifold.

Also stao, can you run a rear turbine housing like the one on the T67 (which goes straight to Vband and doesnt have your 5 bolt IWG/EWG adaptor) on the SS2 at all? I test fitted a GT3076 on the 6BOOST manifold and it fitted fine but the SS2 front housing hits the cam covers.

I email'd Kyle (owner of 6BOOST) and sent him some pictures and measurements of the manifold. His response was that all manifolds come off the same jig and mine isnt any different to a standard item. He also said

"At a guess id say the hypergear turbine housing is bigger or the offset of the scroll closer to the flange centerline making it bulge out the rocker cover side more and hit. Borrow a proper Garrett turbo off someone and try it.

Regards, Kyle"
49LqPls.jpg
gFwIJi8.jpg
To527x5.jpg

looks like you've got 3x options really:

  • Get Stao to get you another exhaust housing, something a little shorter so it brings the turbo down
  • Modify the manifold (probably worst option)
  • Get a Garett Turbo (probably close to worst option also)

I email'd Kyle (owner of 6BOOST) and sent him some pictures and measurements of the manifold. His response was that all manifolds come off the same jig and mine isnt any different to a standard item. He also said

"At a guess id say the hypergear turbine housing is bigger or the offset of the scroll closer to the flange centerline making it bulge out the rocker cover side more and hit. Borrow a proper Garrett turbo off someone and try it.

Regards, Kyle"

^^^^

That is BS

Ask him why other people using his Rb25det high mount manifold and this particular turbo fits.

All P Trimmed T3x turbine housings are identical. Its the "Area" over Radius that made up that volume which hits the rocket cover. To space it out, this area will have to be minimized, means no longer .82.

Also look how close this back plate is to the head. There is no way this comp housing can fit even the turbine housing is changed.

I've seen 6 boost manifolds high mounted SS2 with .82 turbine before. This manifold is very wrong.

The only way I see it, is by cutting off the manifold flange and re-weld it in the correct angle.

Surely people can understand my situation. I have 2 reputable people (Hypergear and 6Boost) both telling me that it's not their product that is at fault. I just want to know what my issue is.

That's why I asked for pictures of other people setups to be 100% sure that the turbo is fine.

If you look at thr manifold, the angle seems pretty aggressive so it brings the turbo closer to the head.

Can't be the turbo, all the exhaust castings are the same. If that's the case then every single turbo Hypergear sells would need different manifolds each time, however every turbo fits as it supposed to low or high mounted.

Even look at Cal's SS2, has been mounted in the most unconventional way and fits.

It's no big deal to cut and shut the flange to angle it away from the head, but obviously Kyle is unwilling to do that? Poor service indeed... You could possibly machine it, or weld a wedge shaped flange to the top?

I suggest you take it to another fabricator and never speak of 6boost again.

<p>looks like you've got 3x options really:

  • Get Stao to get you another exhaust housing, something a little shorter so it brings the turbo down
  • Modify the manifold (probably worst option)
  • Get a Garett Turbo (probably close to worst option also)
Another option would be a custom made angle spacer, between turbo and manifold.

Which would be weird! I can help out there if needed.

Edited by superben

383rwkws with 23psi by 3500RPMs standard spec rb25det engine on single scroll high mount and external gate E85. Thats about the limitation of most power and response. any thing more it starts to chock the engine down low and doing opposite. It feels as stock turbo pulling 383rwkws. No point getting any better response beyond this point.

That was with the old SS2 CBB CHRA, the new one can probably fetch 390rwkws.

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

    • Input shaft bearing. They all do it. There is always rollover noise in Nissan boxes - particularly the big box. Don't worry about it unless it gets really growly.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...