Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Sooo true. This is only one example from each turbo. I am not sure if the dyno I chose for the HKS 3037 is really doing it justice. Found it on page 25 of the rb25 dyno thread so if you have a better one let me know. I try and find stock engines and roughly 17psi tapering off to around 15.

Wow I'm impressed by the 2835. Very smooth curve, more than enough power for a street car and with basically standard response.

PU makes some impressive midrange power after reaching full boost but the trade off appears to be quite a bit of lag and fade off heading towards upper rpm. As long as you keep within that powerband it looks like a good performer.

As said it's not gospel - we don't know the extent of modification on the cars tested but other than that the general shapes of the curves appear to be pretty accurate.

Great idea Harvey. I am freaking out about my turbo selection now, I went and bought a 3071R (real spec) in 0.63A/R, but I keep being told that I should have gone with a 2871R instead for chasing a responsive 250-260kw? Is there any way to add a 2871R (HKS GT-RS) to the chart, just for comparison? And maybe show the exhaust A/R to legend?

Thanks mate!

I run the GT-RS... its a pretty good turbo! Makes 253rwkw on 14psi. Lots of other supporting work as well tho. Either way, I think you will be happy with the 3071R. I cant imagine it would be too different in its spool. The GT-RS offers crazy response for the street tho!

I run the GT-RS... its a pretty good turbo! Makes 253rwkw on 14psi. Lots of other supporting work as well tho. Either way, I think you will be happy with the 3071R. I cant imagine it would be too different in its spool. The GT-RS offers crazy response for the street tho!

Post up (or link) your dyno and I will add it in to the chart.

Post up (or link) your dyno and I will add it in to the chart.

Take your pic as to which one. without over laying them I think they are pretty close for two different dynos :cool:

Keep in mind this car has HKS cams which should increase midrange (plazmaman plenum, some head porting). For that reason its up to you whether you add it or not, considering you are looking more towards stock engine turbo upgrade comparisons? :P

post-41581-1270011897_thumb.jpg

post-41581-1270012502_thumb.jpg

Hey good idea.

I use Excel quite a bit - so i knocked up one of the ones Ash was talking about where you tick the box and it adds/removes the item,

Feel free to use this one if its easier & If it can be uploaded into SAU go for it - if not - don't worr about it :cool:

I know its not a common one but I'll post up my RB25 with HKS 2530 when I get the new Dyno sheet.

Cheers,

Disregard the numbers - they are all made up!

SAU_Turbo_Chart.xls

Ok HKS GTRS added

Interesting granthem your dyno finishes around 175kph or 6200rpm. What happens after that? Just flat?

Nope, thats my limiter! (thats actually my car reving to 7200rpm in 4th gear on both dyno runs). Dont ask me why, but its got short ass gearing. Maybe it has shorter diff gears then the standard 4.11s, or the actual gearbox has different gearing (I think it might have some straight cut gears, whines like a bitch)

Either way, thats all the way to limiter (7200rpm) in 4th on both runs. Something aint stock :P

What exhaust housing are you running Granthem?

Unknown dump, RSR 3.5 front and 3.5 from the cat back from memory. Still running a cat too, but its getting on now and is cracked and shitty. Still, pulling ok figures i guess

With the 2x PU highflowed curves tipping off this is due to the stock actuator been too soft. (didn't have high pressure actuators and wastegate controller back then). They are capable of making lot more power then that at full potential.

Also please try to map kwickr33's ATR43G4 dyno reading. I believe that is a very interesting read out.

Shame there isn't a dyno plot of the GT3076R showing its full strength in there - you see the slight compromise in low down over the GT2835, and not the top end roar.

Fwiw, GT3037 and GT3076R are exactly the same - so really you could just stipulate "GT3037/GT3076R - .xxa/r" as the a/r bit is going to be the only thing which changes the spool and top end flow.

Don Dada - btw, slightly OT threw the Skyline for a power run at a local car event just to test the cars behaviour and determine if its ready for tuning. The internal gate is still a little lazy compared to an external but far better than before, hits 1bar by 3600ishrpm then eases off its aggression in spool (wastegate easing open) to hit 17psi by just over 4000rpm - where it holds flat enough to redline that it could have been done with a pencil and a ruler.

Power figure inconsequential at this point, fat as hell fuelling at that boost level as its not been tuned to do anything other than not pop - hopefully will be sorted very shortly now I know its all good to go... then I might be able to add a revised IG GT30R result :D

With the 2x PU highflowed curves tipping off this is due to the stock actuator been too soft. (didn't have high pressure actuators and wastegate controller back then). They are capable of making lot more power then that at full potential.

Also please try to map kwickr33's ATR43G4 dyno reading. I believe that is a very interesting read out.

Well post up the revised PU high flow on a stock engine and show us.

I am hesitant to post up kwickr33s dyno as he has worked heads, therefore not being equal to the other dynos.

Shame there isn't a dyno plot of the GT3076R showing its full strength in there - you see the slight compromise in low down over the GT2835, and not the top end roar.

Post one up then. I just chose the first one I could find in the dyno thread that had a stock engine and looked like it was running well.

Edited by Harey

Ok now with Hypergear ATR3G4 and updated HKS GTRS. For both of these dynos they hit the rev limiter just after 170kph which earlier than what the other cars here are doing. I have modified the speed per rpm for these two and set 7000rpm = 170kph. They both seem to be have very low power down low which doesnt seem right. Dynosheets with rpm are much preferred. rpm per speed seems to vary quite a bit between cars ??

post-29432-1270084535_thumb.jpg

Hmmm yeh mine does look pretty poor down low. A comparable car to mine is PM-R33, and he has dyno graphs lying around here somewhere I think. It ended up with around 263rwkw on 20psi i think.

Still, I always thought my gearing was shorter, and now i know it is!

Hmmm yeh mine does look pretty poor down low. A comparable car to mine is PM-R33, and he has dyno graphs lying around here somewhere I think. It ended up with around 263rwkw on 20psi i think.

Still, I always thought my gearing was shorter, and now i know it is!

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

    • Meh, I think we're well into a new era of 90s JDM car. The days when spare engines and parts were cheap and plentiful are long gone. Therefore the YOLO approach is now massively difficult to justify, use and maintain. One should start to ponder whether an 800HP build is really justified, using stock parts. My thoughts? If you like/love the car and want to keep it and don't want to ruin yet another one, then be discrete about how much you ask from the stock parts. A 5 or 600 HP build is still a very fast car. If you want to go silly, have to have the 1000HP territory, then just drop all your cash, buy billet everything (or PRP cast block, etc etc) and use a bigger/more modern gearbag, and put a massive retrofit diff and axles into it. If you ruin any of those things then you're either ham fisted and deserve it, or you're pushing waaaay too far for the stock stuff anyway. The (presumably) young guys who are buying 30-35 year old busted arse Jap refugees and thinking they can live the life that was lived by others 20 years ago are deluded. Expectations need to be adjusted somewhat.
    • Just don’t be silly enough to think it’ll never happen either 
    • I take it that you bought the centre to suit the GTR axles? As in there was a plan, not just somehow lucky that it worked? It all looks excellent, by the way.
    • New engine block time. Up to you whether you want to keep going down this road with this project. Unfortunately a lot of these cars are like this. The road to getting these cars into decent shape is long and not fun for reasons that you're discovering. 
    • Essay time. First things first, an RB running stock turbo and boost levels shouldn't get so bad as to stall from reversion if the recirc valve has been deleted. Should get a little fluffy and annoying, but in my experience, not so bad as to stall. Of course, every car is a bit different, so it remains possible that stalling will happen. So, running with no recirc valve is somewhat of an option, for otherwise stock stuff. Atmo BOVs cause all sorts of shit, even on an otherwise stock setup. Only gets worse the higher the boost and the bigger the turbo. At that point you really need to go for a different ECU and no AFM. Rebuilding the stock recirc valve configuration is not hard. You just need a stock or aftermarket BOV with the appropriate adapter for the 2 bolt flange on the back of the J pipe, and to get/make an appropriate ~1" pipe to get the air back to the turbo inlet, and to possibly modify the inlet (if it is not stock) to take the recirc pipe back in. Not hard. Just takes some cutting and welding. Putting an R35 type AFM into the car anywhere is not as simple as just buying the AFM and throwing it in. You will also need to buy the appropriate boss that will then need to be welded onto the pipe where you're installing it. You can clearly see why by looking at the photo posted above. They are not a "simple" swap for a stocker. You can't put on in place of the stock AFM. You can put one in place of the stock AFM, if you get the mounting boss and weld it to some pipe and otherwise make that pipe piece work like the stock AFM housing. Or you can buy such an adapter, either complete with the 4 bolt flange for the air box, or without, for varying degrees of work needed to then make it fit your stock airbox or some pod filter or whatever you have going on. Oh, and the R35 AFM is not plug and play. The wiring is different, but changing that is trivial. The plug is also different so you either end up repinning the original wires onto the new plug, or you just use a short adapter. If you weld a boss to the cold side pipe, the cold side pipe really wants to be 3", otherwise the scaling on the meter can get a bit weird, but whatever the pipe size, it's not as easy as just using the (fully documented in the Nistune doco) simple method for choosing R35 AFM in X" pipe size in the software, because the scaling will already be a bit different. Anyway, all of this has been comprehensively worked through on the Nistune forums, so there is full knowledge available. I would use a Link/Haltech before I would bother putting an AFM into a cold side pipe. That's a lot of effort for a bodge. Nistune is great, can work well even at fairly high power levels, but you are stuck with the limitations of it being the stock ECU, which includes needing to use an AFM, which is not always convenient for every set of modifications. You have to have a think about what you already have, what you want to have, and decide early if you'd be better off jumping ship to an aftermarket ECU. This so you don't waste time and money doing things 2 or 3 times. Never heard of ECUmaster. Sounds like a backyard operation. If there are good tuners for it where you are, and it is a solid product, then it will be fine. We're only talking about an R engine here. Back in the day they all ran on crude nasty early 90s ECUs and they were fine. You don't need a rocket surgeon's ECU to run one.
×
×
  • Create New...