Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

sr can be very different depending on cams. On this particular car yes. But either way they all made more power and way better response then the td05H 18g copy that was originally on there.

Car was tuned on a roller dyno with proper configurations.

it still runs off stock 2.5inches induction. I have a feeling it might be restrictive.

While we are on Sr results, I can't remember if I shared this in here or not.

Rps13

S14 motor, with VCT active. Gtx3071 0.82, 6boost, 44mm tial, un1cams.

Boosts are 16/18psi Stock motor, incl head gasket, and it's on p98.

post-76224-13982972611519_thumb.jpg

^ Nice, GTScoTT may sex wee! Would be a little meaningful with rpm though, silly rolling road dynos :(

Will see how the atr28ss2 does on my brothers s13 on pump 98
If that goes well I might be intrested in upgrading

I'm curious - I notice the 18G and your current turbo made almost exactly the power, and you mentioned previously you had full boost by 4000rpm with the 18G.... how does the .86 compare with the 18G in terms of response?

^ Nice, GTScoTT may sex wee! Would be a little meaningful with rpm though, silly rolling road dynos :(

I'm curious - I notice the 18G and your current turbo made almost exactly the power, and you mentioned previously you had full boost by 4000rpm with the 18G.... how does the .86 compare with the 18G in terms of response?

Yup, Scott and I have been chatting away about setups... :)

We only revved it to about 7300rpm if that helps.

It's not too laggy, but it does catch me out now and then on the track getting out of corners. It's mainly a track car.

It's feels as with the 18g it was a big surge of power after 4000rpm

And not much before than

Where as with the ss1.5 it just comes in more linear and smoother power delivery from 3000rpm up but there is no big surge of power

The way the power comes on with the ss1.5 it will be easier to put down but the 18g snaps you back in the seat more once on power

That'll probably be partly just the boost curve of the 18G going up higher in the midrange as much as anything, though the big a/r you have now probably also plays into it a bit. Would have been interesting to have seen how the 16G6 would have gone, we're making similar power to you with one but it's also in the TD06 sized housing - have suspected for a long time (as Stao referred to with his turbo too) the T28 bolton housing and associated bits are probably a bit of a restriction at this level.

Another update this is my latest ATR43SS2 turbocharger.Compare to the current one. Compressor inducer has been increased by 2mms, while the turbine inducer and exducer has been increased by 3mms. This particular one is expected to be maxed out at around 390rwkws on E85.

comp.JPG

Hey Stao, Whats the advantages of the new SS2 ball bearing version over the older journal bearing one? I bought mine mid last year and it is going onto my RB2530 so wondering if its worth getting you to upgrade it while its off.

The newer version has a larger 63mm turbine and a larger compressor inducer. It will make more power.

With the ball bearing part, well it does not make a real lot of differences. Just prettier to look at when I flick it with my fingers.

I though (have done no research) that a ball bearing turbo would be more responsive than a journal turbo. Especially transient response.

Guess I won't worry about it then :)

I was talking to lithium

But the the 2.5 inch comp housing can't be too restrictive as the 180sx before me on the dyno had the 2.5inch bolt on comp housing with the hks2540 and the pulled 280 odd kW and backed it off to 274kw on just 22psi cause the injectors were maxxed and same as a s15 with a greddy t518z made 281kw

The atr28ss2 should make Simlar power to the gtx3071r on pump 98 but with less lag

The same lag I got now with the ss1.5 but 280 odd kw on pump 98

Well, i can run a 2.5inches pipe to it and find out i guess.

Either way. Assume if you had enough fuel and has larger size cams, the ss15 should set around the 280rwkws mark on your car.

Building one more prototype working with the .64 rear.

This thread is already hard enough to follow, but now with the sr20 results in thr mix it's super hard.

Perhaps there should be a separate sr20 results thread.

  • Like 1

Yeah tuner did say there was proberly 5-10kw in it if I replaced the fuel pump to a walbro 460lph

But I can't justify spending $500 plus for the retune and fuel pump to gain 5-10kw

if I was to get a retune I want to gain atleast 20-30kw

But I need to upgrade injectors and fuel pump and turbo if I was to stay e85

But if I stayed with p100 100octane fuel I might get away with just a larger pump and the turbo upgrade which will proberly be my next stage in a few months

The 2.5 inches skyline induction pipe in comparison to a proper 3 inch metal induction pipe was huge in difference. The S14.5 that I currently have also has a 4 inch metal induction pipe.

I have seen some 2.5 to 3 inch expander pipe. Those might comes handy.

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

    • Yes, it is entirely possible to twincharge a Skyline. It is not....without problems though. There was a guy did it to an SOHC RB30 (and I think maybe it became or already was a 25/30) in a VL Commode. It was a monster. The idea is that you can run both compressors at relatively low pressure ratios, yet still end up with a quite large total pressure ratio because they multiply, not add, boost levels. So, if the blower is spun to give a 1.4:1 PR (ie, it would make ~40 kPa of boost on its own) and the turbo is set up to give a 1.4:1 PR also, then you don't get 40+40 = 80 kPa of boost, you get 1.4*1.4, which is pretty close to 100 kPa of boost. It's free real estate! This only gets better as the PRs increase. If both are set up to yield about 1.7 PR, which is only about 70 kPa or 10ish psi of boost each, you actually end up with about 1.9 bar of boost! So, inevitably it was a bit of a monster. The blower is set up as the 2nd compressor, closest to the motor, because it is a positive displacement unit, so to get the benefit of putting it in series with another compressor, it has to go second. If you put it first, it has to be bigger, because it will be breathing air at atmospheric pressure. The turbo's compressor ends up needing to be a lot larger than you'd expect, and optimised to be efficient at large mass flows and low PRs. The turbo's exhaust side needs to be quite relaxed, because it's not trying to provide the power to produce all the boost, and it has to handle ALL the exhaust flow. I think you need a much bigger wastegate than you might expect. Certainly bigger than for an engine just making the same power level turbo only. The blower effectively multiplies the base engine size. So if you put a 1.7 PR blower on a 2.5L Skyline, it's like turboing a 4.2L engine. Easy to make massive power. Plus, because the engine is blown, the blower makes boost before the turbo can even think about making boost, so it's like having that 4.2L engine all the way from idle. Fattens the torque delivery up massively. But, there are downsides. The first is trying to work out how to size the turbo according to the above. The second is that you pretty much have to give up on aircon. There's not enough space to mount everything you need. You might be able to go elec power steering pump, hidden away somewhere. but it would still be a struggle to get both the AC and the blower on the same side of the engine. Then, you have to ponder whether you want to truly intercool the thing. Ideally you would put a cooler between the turbo and the blower, so as to drop the heat out of it and gain even more benefit from the blower's positive displacement nature. But that would really need to be a water to air core, because you're never going to find enough room to run 2 sets of boost pipes out to air to air cores in the front of the car. But you still need to aftercool after the blower, because both these compressors will add a lot of heat, and you wil have the same temperature (more or less) as if you produced all that boost with a single stage, and no one in their right mind would try to run a petrol engine on high boost without a cooler (unless not using petrol, which we shall ignore for the moment). I'm of the opinnion that 2x water to air cores in the bay and 2x HXs out the front is probably the only sensible way to avoid wasting a lot of room trying to fit in long runs of boost pipe. But the struggle to locate everything in the limited space available would still be a pretty bad optimisation problem. If it was an OEM, they'd throw 20 engineers at it for a year and let them test out 30 ideas before deciding on the best layout. And they'd have the freedom to develop bespoke castings and the like, for manifolds, housings, connecting pipes to/from compressors and cores. A single person in a garage can either have one shot at it and live with the result, or spend 5 years trying to get it right.
    • Good to know, thank you!
    • It's a place for non car talk. There's whoretown which is general shit talking. But also other threads coving all sorts of stuff(a lot still semi car related)
    • Looked it up. It sounds so expensive lmao I'd rather not. Awwwww but I just love that sound
    • If you want the screaming "weeeee" sound, just let the gasket between the exhaust manifold and the turbo break a little. It'll go "weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee" everytime its on boost...
×
×
  • Create New...