Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So I have finally booked the GTR in to get the PT6262 fitted.
I will finally have my own results to post in here..

Not chasing a power figure, will be adding new Cams, Cam Gears, Fuel system & ECU
starting out on 20psi and see how it all goes.

Going in my 34 GTR
6 boost Manifold, 50mm Progate & 6262 with .84
Haltech PS2000 ECU & IQ3 Logger dash to replace the MFD
New fuel system & some cams, cam gears and a few other bits and pieces.
Will post up a before & after run, looking forward to having a bit more power.

Going in my 34 GTR

6 boost Manifold, 50mm Progate & 6262 with .84

Haltech PS2000 ECU & IQ3 Logger dash to replace the MFD

New fuel system & some cams, cam gears and a few other bits and pieces.

Will post up a before & after run, looking forward to having a bit more power.

Capacity?

Comp ratio?

Cams?

Exhaust size?

Going in my 34 GTR

6 boost Manifold, 50mm Progate & 6262 with .84

Haltech PS2000 ECU & IQ3 Logger dash to replace the MFD

New fuel system & some cams, cam gears and a few other bits and pieces.

Will post up a before & after run, looking forward to having a bit more power.

Why the PS2000 and not the Platinum Pro plug-in?

Found this from Jan 25th 2013.

 

Car is 2001 Audi A4 1.8T

 

New 6262 CEA 620rhp @ 42psi (red)

Old  6262         520rhp @ 35psi (blue)

5857                420rhp @ 28psi (green)

Err, no? The different colours are hp, torque and boost, it's just a new 6262 versus and old 5857 in that comparison.

Capacity?

Comp ratio?

Cams?

Exhaust size?

Capacity: 2.6L

Comp ratio: Standard

Cams: HKS step 1's 272 8.7 lift (I think)

Exhaust: 4" dump into custom 3.5" exhaust with no mufflers

Will be tuned on E85 from the drum, the car is not my daily anymore and for $2,50/L I don't have to worry about watching the fuel prices jump up and down.

Why the PS2000 and not the Platinum Pro plug-in?

Because I'm not sticking with RB26 and don't wanna upgrade ECU's again.

Will utilize some of the additional channels from the PS2000 in the future.

A couple of people have also asked why the Logger IQ3, it's for same reason. buying now to setup so I don't have to replace in the future.

My aim is just to have a bit more poke when I press the accelerator down, I'm not chasing a power figure nor am I looking for a world record.

  • 2 weeks later...

My r34 gtr came back from Micks Motorsport making 501AWKW 671AWHP on 28 psi on united e85 with a precision 6766 bb and on bp 98 it made 370AWKW 495AWHP 20 psi

the engine is currently a Nitto 2.7 stroker ,ported head a set of 270 deg cams, Precision 6766 and a Turbosmart hyper gate we will push for more soon, will put a graph up when I go to the workshop the motor was built buy Dahtone Racing

  • Like 1

So I have finally booked the GTR in to get the PT6262 fitted.

I will finally have my own results to post in here..

Not chasing a power figure, will be adding new Cams, Cam Gears, Fuel system & ECU

starting out on 20psi and see how it all goes.

im a bit surprised actually I thought this car was a pretty serious piece of top dollar machinery already. any reason you decided on the precision?

im a bit surprised actually I thought this car was a pretty serious piece of top dollar machinery already. any reason you decided on the precision?

Hmm

Nah, my car is factory stock still. Only mod is the Fat Pipes exhaust.

I went precision to be different, turns out plenty of others have gone down the same road since this thread is 87 pages now.

Got a roller bearing 6262 to go on a mates 25/30 and it doesn't seem to spin as freely by hand as the GT35's I've had in the past. It actually hardly spins at all when idling. Is this normal or is there an issue somewhere

i have only ever seen this on BIG turbos as the air is passing past the turbo but not enough to spin it. Was on a 2J. I am 100% certain this isnt the issue here tho.

Got a roller bearing 6262 to go on a mates 25/30 and it doesn't seem to spin as freely by hand as the GT35's I've had in the past. It actually hardly spins at all when idling. Is this normal or is there an issue somewhere

That's strange, can you show us a video?

JEM tuned a 33 GTR the other week.

RB26+6466+E85+35psi=604awkw.

So it was a 6466!? I saw the pic and figured it might have been a 6466 or 6766 but I got no response when I asked - I *love* 6466, they are clearly an awesome turbo. Any word on how it spools on the RB26? Should beg JEM for a dyno plot post, it would be very very interesting

So it was a 6466!? I saw the pic and figured it might have been a 6466 or 6766 but I got no response when I asked - I *love* 6466, they are clearly an awesome turbo. Any word on how it spools on the RB26? Should beg JEM for a dyno plot post, it would be very very interesting

:dry:

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...