Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey,

got a highflow vl turb with t3 or t4 cartridge and some kind of modified rear housing.

Image0183.jpg

i ran into dramas dummy fitting. ill let pictures explain.

Image0189.jpg

as you can see straight up we have an issue with the dump pipe off on an angle due to the vl turbo mounted horizontal instead of vertical.

now im wondering without making a new dump or modifying the dump can i get it to fit properly.

Image0187.jpg

as you can see if i hold it like so all the oil / water lines will line up, but if i modify the dump and bolt it straight up the oil return is horizontal not vertical.

any ideas... its asif i need to make some kind of t3-t3 90deg piece or if a rb30 turbo manifold would fit im not sure on stud pattern.

any suggestions would be kool, otherwise ill whack the stocker back on.

thanks,

dave

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/305582-trouble-installing-turbo/
Share on other sites

sorry i read it wrong...

have u tried rotating the exhaust housing?

No matter how u rotate the exhaust housing the dump will still stay on the same angle. might need to fabricate a new dump to suit mate.

for the oil feed it should be vertical so just rotate the 2 housings so that you get it in that position then get some braided oil and water lines, you then may have to rotate the turbine housing so you can get your pipe on your snail.

The most costly will be getting a dump pipe made to suit your turbo. probably around $400-$600 from your common exhaust shop.

im gona mod the dump myself. but ill try rotating it all. i knew you could rotate it but i was looking at the dump all the time going wtf !!!. but ill see how i go and then hopefully be able to mod the dump.

as i said this came off a R33 so i have no idea how the dump pipe worked out?

it would have had a custom manifold, possibly a high mount :) thats why the dumps like that

custom maybe, highmount no the dump would then be pointing at the bonnet. if a rb30 turbo manifold fits a rb25 thats what it would of been mounted on.

thanks for help, its on now, and im gona mod the dump on the weekend. factory lines fit, just needed the braided oil line. :down: the first time the rear housing didnt spin, but a whack with a rubber mallet fixed that. :)

if u put a peace inbetween the ex housing and the mani, the turbo would most likly hit the engine mounts when u put it in a car. Mod the dump, should b pritty easy, just cut the pipe off the flange, panel beat it to fit the right way and weld her up : D

if a rb30 turbo manifold fits a rb25 thats what it would of been mounted on.

nope. probs something like a hks cast low mount mani that has the flange facing down.

most important thing is to make sure the oil feed is at the top and drain is at the bottom, as close to vertical as possible

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

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...