Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

guys just bought a turboX boost controller,hooked it up and have played with it for hours!!! and the loweset i can get it going it is 13 psi,with spikes up to a 15! car is a r32 gtst full 3 inch, high flow cat , pod,bov,why is it so high and is this safe?

cheers

have you got it setup right ?:S

cause we use turbosmart bleedvalve an we can run what ever boost we want ?

(r33 gtst)

spikes on a bleedvalves are common. their not to good for holding boost either.

have you got a pic of how its setup ?

Here is a pic (attached) of how it is setup. From the picture you can see that the bottom hose goes to the wastegate whilst the hose on the left goes down and to the turbo. It was setup as the instructions said and is set up the same as on my brother's 180. The instructions say to never let the fine adjusting screw more then 2 turns from fully closed otherwise lag will occur. If I set it to 2 or more turns then it spikes past 15psi. So it is now set at less then 2 turns. The coarse adjusting valve is also set as low as it can go. I'm not real sure what the problem is only thing I can think of is that the hoses have some kind of problem ?

u hook 1 to the wastegate line on the turbo and the other to a pressure line on the intake (cooler pipe is easiest), thats how it reads the 2 different pressures

Thats right :thumbsup:

it should look somthing like this. one goes to the actuator and the other hose coming off the bleedvalve should go to the intercooler pipe :(

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,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...