Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Tao and all.

just wondering which turbo (or CHRA) you would recommend for a 2L 4-cylinder engine with short stroke & big bore (unlike the SR20DET) for a responsive upto 300rwkw?

I have read the 581 pages (wow what a read) and given the atr28ss2 would give me what i need, would like to know how the ATR28 & ATR43 differ and which one can ideally be suited to my T3 flange.

Hi Tao and all.

just wondering which turbo (or CHRA) you would recommend for a 2L 4-cylinder engine with short stroke & big bore (unlike the SR20DET) for a responsive upto 300rwkw?

I have read the 581 pages (wow what a read) and given the atr28ss2 would give me what i need, would like to know how the ATR28 & ATR43 differ and which one can ideally be suited to my T3 flange.

anyone?

given my manifold has T3 flange it seems i'll need to go for a ATR43 based CHRA. Just not sure how it will perform on my engine.

does anyone know the difference b/w the ATR28 & ATR43 turbine ends?

You can use our Atr43g3sat model in ceramic ball bearing assembly externally gated

thanks Tao.

any guesses when i'll roughly see fullboost?

alos, what would be the next smaller CHRA i could use?

thanks Tao.

any guesses when i'll roughly see fullboost?

alos, what would be the next smaller CHRA i could use?

Also, would it work ok with an A/R .63 turbine housing?

Atr43g3sat would be laggy on sr20 its already quite laggy on a rb25

One size down would be the atr43ss2

No ones tryed it on a sr20 yet

Would be quite good on a t3 highmount manifold and cbb

.63 rear externally gated

Would be quite responsive but may choke the engine over 300kw

On e85 might be ok but pump 98 may get detonation early

Depends what you want the car for

Responsive street setup .63ar or all out power drag .82ar just may be more lag

.63 t3 housings make heaps on 4 cylinders(350+),much more than the little

t2 housings ever will

You havnt got no where near as much backpressure as a rb25.

You could try the 20.5g he builds. Ss2 comp.l2 turbine 8cm housing.

We have one on stock bottom end sr. Does 315rwkw atm on low 20s boost and e85.

We used a china cast mani which had no boost control.

Now gone 6boost and 45mm gate,trying to get it booked in for tuneatm and will be put "on kill" shortly....

Another guy in qld did 370rwkw on one on 27psi ish with a bit left in the tank so be interesting to see what it makes.

We fitted a small water injection nozzle pre turbo this time aswell

Have a atr45sat ss here aswell ..have joked about fitting that..lol

Cheers

Darren

Atr43g3sat is the latest model that is more responsive then the ss2.

Thats the one made 317rwkws with 20psi @ 3550rpm P98 fuel. I think the larger model referred to was the Atr45sat.

Not a Sr, for a short stroke 2L depending on CPR, can run in a .63 or .58 rear.

Atr43g3sat would be laggy on sr20 its already quite laggy on a rb25

One size down would be the atr43ss2

No ones tryed it on a sr20 yet

Would be quite good on a t3 highmount manifold and cbb

.63 rear externally gated

Would be quite responsive but may choke the engine over 300kw

On e85 might be ok but pump 98 may get detonation early

Depends what you want the car for

Responsive street setup .63ar or all out power drag .82ar just may be more lag

thanks for the response.

ultimately the car will be street driven and maybe the odd track day (for some fun) given its heritage.

given this, it will need to stay with the original A/R .63 internal gated housing - i'd also like the engine bay looking factory spec.

and i'll prefer to stay with P98.

.63 t3 housings make heaps on 4 cylinders(350+),much more than the little

t2 housings ever will

You havnt got no where near as much backpressure as a rb25.

You could try the 20.5g he builds. Ss2 comp.l2 turbine 8cm housing.

We have one on stock bottom end sr. Does 315rwkw atm on low 20s boost and e85.

We used a china cast mani which had no boost control.

Now gone 6boost and 45mm gate,trying to get it booked in for tuneatm and will be put "on kill" shortly....

Another guy in qld did 370rwkw on one on 27psi ish with a bit left in the tank so be interesting to see what it makes.

We fitted a small water injection nozzle pre turbo this time aswell

Have a atr45sat ss here aswell ..have joked about fitting that..lol

Cheers

Darren

i'd assume the T3 .63 would flow better than the T28 .64.

the 20.5 (ss2) turbo does look tempting, but per my previous post, i'd prefer to stick with internal gate to keep the factory look.

it seems like i might need to look at the atr43ss2, possibly in CBB.

Atr43g3sat is the latest model that is more responsive then the ss2.

Thats the one made 317rwkws with 20psi @ 3550rpm P98 fuel. I think the larger model referred to was the Atr45sat.

Not a Sr, for a short stroke 2L depending on CPR, can run in a .63 or .58 rear.

so does this ATR43G3SAT have a CBB core?

what size is the turbine wheel because i might look at having my housing machined to suit?

yep, short stroke (over-square) engine with twin cams, forgies, etc, CR will be around 8.0:1.

given it's my weekend street car, response and strong mid-range is important.

it's not a track broad minded person or dyno queen.

so does this ATR43G3SAT have a CBB core?

what size is the turbine wheel because i might look at having my housing machined to suit?

yep, short stroke (over-square) engine with twin cams, forgies, etc, CR will be around 8.0:1.

given it's my weekend street car, response and strong mid-range is important.

it's not a track broad minded person or dyno queen.

What engine exactly are we talking about here? It will help people here to assist you.

What engine exactly are we talking about here? It will help people here to assist you.

Not sure why he hasn't actually said engine, but I'm going to guess a YB* series Ford. Given his name, I'd say he owns an RS500.

Not sure why he hasn't actually said engine, but I'm going to guess a YB* series Ford. Given his name, I'd say he owns an RS500.

i didnt think it would really make any difference, but correct, it's a yb cosworth engine.

CBB will give you day and night difference with transient response compared to its journal bearing brother.

I went from a SS2 journal to CBB (ceramic ball bearing) and the difference is day and night.

  • Like 1

2016 version of SS2 has many changes made to earlier models. The difference in end result would be a combination of alterations made.

Ceramic ball bearing system makes difference in throttle response and becomes very apparent when working with low CPR, None VCT engines as well as cars with Auto transmission. It is definitely recommended for that Cosworth engine.

2016 version of SS2 has many changes made to earlier models. The difference in end result would be a combination of alterations made. Ceramic ball bearing system makes difference in throttle response and becomes very apparent when working with low CPR, None VCT engines as well as cars with Auto transmission. It is definitely recommended for that Cosworth engine.

Speaking of Non VCT, low cr engines, did you ever end up doing any development with an RB20 Tao?

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...