Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

See you make a version of the g25-550 and. 660 aswell. Do you have any test of the smaller turbos on the rb25det for us that not hunt big power but whant a good responsive setup for a unopende engine? Looking for a good upgrade for my rb25 powered Datsun 260z. Whant something around the 350-400whp mark. And dont whant a high flow.

Best regards Stian 

5 hours ago, Genifx said:

See you make a version of the g25-550 and. 660 aswell. Do you have any test of the smaller turbos on the rb25det for us that not hunt big power but whant a good responsive setup for a unopende engine? Looking for a good upgrade for my rb25 powered Datsun 260z. Whant something around the 350-400whp mark. And dont whant a high flow.

Best regards Stian 

Hi I found G25 turbine is too small for a Rb25det motor. I recommend our ATR43SS-2 in T3 .71 turbine, its very similar to a G30-660 with better response. Its supplied as a brand new turbo internally wastgated.  

  • Thanks 1
5 hours ago, hypergear said:

Hi I found G25 turbine is too small for a Rb25det motor. I recommend our ATR43SS-2 in T3 .71 turbine, its very similar to a G30-660 with better response. Its supplied as a brand new turbo internally wastgated.  

How many kws can you see out of it?

Assume the application is for internal gate. 

Far as internal gate concern SS-2 makes around 300rwkws on P98 fuel in either .63 or .71 turbine housing. Response are about the same between the two. 

  • Like 1
22 minutes ago, hypergear said:

Assume the application is for internal gate. 

Far as internal gate concern SS-2 makes around 300rwkws on P98 fuel in either .63 or .71 turbine housing. Response are about the same between the two. 

 

Can you link me to the correct one on your site?

.71 P98 definitely hit 300kws without being to laggy?

Yes correct. Link is at:

https://hypergearturbos.com/product/atr43ssiwg/

SS2 Profile, T3 .71 Turbine housing, Ball bearing upgrade, and oil line kit. Thats pretty much it.

 

Edited by hypergear
  • Like 1
8 hours ago, hypergear said:

Yes correct. Link is at:

https://hypergearturbos.com/product/atr43ssiwg/

SS2 Profile, T3 .71 Turbine housing, Ball bearing upgrade, and oil line kit. Thats pretty much it.

 

Thank you. Was going for a Pulsar g25or30/660 but then i will look at this. 👍

Quick spool up and respons is the main thing in this can aswell as the sweet sound of the g-series turboes.

Hard time to find ppl using in the size cus every one that post dynos is almost only big power.

Dont know if i can manage to fit a new exhaust manifold this year or if i have to use the stock the first year.

  • 4 weeks later...
On 26/06/2024 at 11:36 PM, hypergear said:

Yes correct. Link is at:

https://hypergearturbos.com/product/atr43ssiwg/

SS2 Profile, T3 .71 Turbine housing, Ball bearing upgrade, and oil line kit. Thats pretty much it.

 

How much more power and lag does the ss3 make?

SS3 has very similar to a SS2. It needs to be externally gated for boost control. Performance wise about 60kws more in comparison.

Edited by hypergear
  • Thanks 1
10 hours ago, hypergear said:

SS3 has very similar to a SS2. It needs to be externally gated for boost control. Performance wise about 60kws more in comparison.

Thank you, damn want to stay internal. Just have to replace with forged pistons and rods now. So was going for a few more kws

  • 3 weeks later...
On 26/06/2024 at 11:36 PM, hypergear said:

Yes correct. Link is at:

https://hypergearturbos.com/product/atr43ssiwg/

SS2 Profile, T3 .71 Turbine housing, Ball bearing upgrade, and oil line kit. Thats pretty much it.

 

How much difference going internal to externally gated?

  • 3 weeks later...

ATR43SS-1 is better suited for a RB20det engine. SS-2 is suited for a Rb25det engine. Externally gated kit is highly recommended as it makes more power on less boost pressure with higher power ceiling. I've attached an example of our high flowed OP6 turbocharger running both internal and external gate.  Turbo is boosted to a point that no more power could be made. Car's an R33 with built Rb25det engine. 

op6powerall.jpg

op6boostall.jpg

The SS-2 made 317rwkws V 21U G3 high flowed made 282rwkws at a point that no more power could be made on a built RB25det Neo motor on P98 / Ron 93 fuel. 21U high flow is about 400RPM more responsive making 20psi by 3600RPM, while SS2 made 20psi by 3800RPM.  High flowed Rb25det turbo drives very similar to stock turbo.

My recommendation is still ATR43SS-2 in T3 .71 rear housing with ball bearing core, as it has stronger power delivery with higher power capacity. 

  • Thanks 1
  • 2 months later...

We've been working on all sort of different types of turbos with majority of work load shifting towards Euros in the last few years. The Skylines are more of a hobbie then a daily, at least its like that in Australia. I will update photos from some of our latest RB jobs. Whats recent is G30 turbine housing externally gated plumb back kit using T3 .83 geninue housing. It can be made to suit G35, G40 and G42 units. External gate optional. 

 

IMG20241114115712.jpg

IMG20241114115603.jpg

IMG20241114115614.jpg

IMG20241114115635.jpg

IMG20241114115653.jpg

Edited by hypergear
  • Like 4
40 minutes ago, hypergear said:

majority of work load shifting towards Euros in the last few years

That's great news

Skyline scene is a bit odd (yes I've been following that particular Facebook page), and most of the owners are young boys with no money.

On 8/24/2024 at 12:23 PM, hypergear said:

The SS-2 made 317rwkws V 21U G3 high flowed made 282rwkws at a point that no more power could be made on a built RB25det Neo motor on P98 / Ron 93 fuel. 21U high flow is about 400RPM more responsive making 20psi by 3600RPM, while SS2 made 20psi by 3800RPM.  High flowed Rb25det turbo drives very similar to stock turbo.

My recommendation is still ATR43SS-2 in T3 .71 rear housing with ball bearing core, as it has stronger power delivery with higher power capacity. 

I thought that the high flowed rb25det turbos were a lot more responsive than the stock one? Would that mean better low end torque?

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 i found that alot of parts can be wrong or "very" hard to get the real right one. I already bought some brakes years ago on me "old" GT calipers and they were wrong too 😄  I told them too. Even send them pictures...but they said "EBC catalogue has them on my car... So i dont know what their answer will be. I call monday them and let them know that they are really not on my car. If they were they would be already on a car...
    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
×
×
  • Create New...