Jump to content
SAU Community

Hypergear Turbochargers and High flow Services Development thread


Recommended Posts

Stao why don't you try make the TD06 work with you .82 type B housing?

with a little machine work you could be adding a whole new product to the market.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SS1PU is not a GTRs.

2ndly if you are comparing td06 to a GTRs its never been compared on fair grounds. Install your td06 internally gated in a stock rb20det manifold plus all the EGR and road legal crap you would normally expected to run on a stock setup, The TD06 would not perform any where near a GTRs or a SS1PU.

All supporting mods counts, The turbocharger does not take all the credits.

I hear what you are saying. SO many people carry on that the std manifold is good for 300-350rwkws etc, I have long been an advocate for binning exhaust manifold asap...but others are happy to use it and hold back the performance gains available to them...combined with the fact for the same price of the HKS GTRS you can buy a complete TD06 setup. So based on dollars spent it is a fair comparison.

Anyway , interesting to see more billet results

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I received my JJR 3inch dump today.

It appears that the inlet area of the exhaust is smaller than the outlet area of the turbo. in some places about 0.5cm in width and length about 1cm. I'll try and machine as much as I can but doesnt appear to be that much room.

Thoughts? Will it be much of a restriction?

Heres a pic, not the best

536314_530663926947971_423679572_n.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the corners in the .82 B rear housing has been rounded off, The flange area can't be any bigger, its been traced through the gasket.

For the Billet TDxx series to work probably there is a need for a proper exhaust manifold, external gate, and a front pipe. I'll get them sorted very soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stao why don't you look into getting a spacer plate made which accommodates your external gate?

that way you can offer the turbos in external format and the user just needs to make a dump pipe, which you can supply a v band ring and clamp for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stao why don't you look into getting a spacer plate made which accommodates your external gate? that way you can offer the turbos in external format and the user just needs to make a dump pipe, which you can supply a v band ring and clamp for.

I should imagine that a spacer between the manifold and the turbo that is big enough to have an outlet for the wastegate will start causing problems with pushing the turbo outward/upward/downward enough to make it start hitting other stuff. Certainly on the factory turbo manifold you'll hit the strut tower after only a smallish push outward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ive seen one of those ebay spacers with the 2 bolt flange plate used to mount a precision turbo on a skyline before. It certainly can be done, and if Stao makes the spacer himself Im sure he can also make sure it fits well.

Then again he can just supply housings with a gate port

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dimensionally (in/ex) its the same size as the existing 20g, its blade design that changes. Front cover is the trust style .60

if changes have been made to either inducer or exducer I'm sure stao will correct

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Updates:

I'm getting some steam pipe bolton manifold and high mount manifold made overseas as I'm typing. I should have a prototype received by mid next week for trailing and testing. Those manifolds will be available for $300 to our customers assume they perform as expected.

It appears a larger turbine setups would perform better on factory manifolds, I will trail a SS2 in a .82a rear housing on current std manifold for some comparison.

how these going stao.?.are you still going ahead with a cheap steampipe bolt on jobbie?

i'm keen for another turbo, probally a ss2 with the steampipe bolt on if it goes ahead, and stick a gate on the exhaust

housing, just waiting to see how it pans out

cheers

darren

Edited by jet_r31
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I've fitted the prototype manifold. It is awful, lots of dressing up work required and i'm certainly not impressed with the level of workmanship, the final product I will be selling will be a steam pipe manifold with every thing done to specifications. it will definitely flow much better then a stock Rb25det manifold.

IMAG1019.jpg

I've re-enforced the the joiner, that is where its likely to crack.

IMAG1021.jpg

I'm pretty sure this is what some people sales on ebay. The bolt pattern on the flanges for cyc 4 5 6 are all out. it won't fit unless dressed up.

IMAG1026.jpg

Finally fitted:

IMAG1028.jpg

By the way any one needs their wastegate opened up? we can perform this service for $120.

IMAG1034.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

    • Hi all, I need to get this HKS SLD attached to my stock ECU because I've now got the German autobahn and faster European circuits to contend with.  The car is a manual 2dr ER34 with an AT ECU and I've realised the AT ECU has two pins for speed sensor signals: Pin 29: Vehicle speed sensor signal (Vehicle speed sensor 2) Pin *58: Output shaft rotation sensor signal (Vehicle speed sensor 1) - *RB25DET A/T model only Before I go butchering this harness, is anyone sure of which pin is the correct one for signal adjustment? The attached document from HKS indicates pin 29 but I found this situation mentioned in the following thread on a different forum (R34 GTT Auto Trans Speed Cut Problem | Zerotohundred) mentioning pin 58 needing to be altered by member zephuros, albeit it seems to be for an RSM-GP and the info appears to be old.  R34_All_Workshop_Manual-pages-2.pdf R34_All_Workshop_Manual-pages-3.pdf R34_All_Workshop_Manual-pages-1.pdf HKS SLD Vehicle Pin out P59-P70 ER34-pages.pdf
    • Embrace the freedom of casual encounters on the best dating app in town! Verified Maidens Superlative Сasual Dating
    • Slimline sub on the rear parcel shelf is doable. Pioneer TS-WX140DA is only 70mm high.   
    • People like Johnny Dose Bro might be laughing at my post because I accidentally added 100mm to my numbers. 350-355 is indeed the lower limit. 450 is off-road Skyline spec.
    • What is the "compromise" that you think will happen? Are you thinking that something will get damaged? The only things you have to be concerned about with spherical jointed suspension arms are; Arguments with the constabulary wrt their legality (they are likely to be illegal for road use without an engineering certificatation, and that may not be possible to obtain). A lot more NVH transmitted through to the passengers (which is hardly a concern for those with a preference for good handling, anyway). Greatly increased inspection and maintenance requirements (see above points, both).   It is extremely necessary to ask what car you are talking about. Your discussion on strut tops, for example, would be completely wrong for an R chassis, but be correct for an S chassis. R32s have specific problems that R33/4 do not have. Etc. I have hardened rubber bushes on upper rear control arms and traction rods. Adjustable length so as to be able to set both camber and bump steer. You cannot contemplate doing just the control arms and not the traction arms. And whatever bushing you have in one you should have in the other so that they have similar characteristics. Otherwise you can get increased oddness of behaviour as one bushing flexes and the other doesn't, changing the alignment between them. I have stock lower rear arms with urethane bushes. I may make changes here, these are are driven by the R32's geometry problems, so I won't discuss them here unless it proves necessary. I have spherical joints in the front caster rods. I have experienced absolutely no negatives and only positives from doing so. They are massively better than any other option. I have sphericals in the FUCAs, but this is driven largely by the (again) R32 specific problems with the motion of those arms. I just have to deal with the increased maintenance required. Given how much better the front end behaves with the sphericals in there.....I'd probably be tempted to go away from my preference (which is not to have sphericals on a road car, for 2 of the 3 reasons in the bulleted list above), just to gain those improvements. And so my preference for not using sphericals (in general) on a road car should be obvious. I use them judiciously, though, as required to solve particular problems.
×
×
  • Create New...