Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Instead of starting a new topic i thought ill post the question in here.... how is everyones fuel economy with the rb26/30 and 25/30 setups? mine is using alot of fuel and cruise ratios are spot on 14.7 and even when babying it around im lucky to get 300km to a tank which is shocking. Im yet to get the cam timing spot on until it goes on the dyno but hoping this is the issue and it will get alot better. I am running 4.3 diff ratio which means its on 2700rpm on the freeway at 100kmh and with the 3076r on it, its just a touch of throttle from being on boost, im thinking maybe the turbo is abit small as well which doesnt help?

So how many km's are you guys getting from a tank and what turbo are you running?

it could be done with internal gates, but an engine thats going to support 2x GT30's reliably isnt going to be cheap to begin with. why skimp on the turbo setup?

only reason is the stealth factor and engine bay room. however am worried bout boost issues...

you wont be able to hide twin GT30's. it just takes up too much space.

stealth comment was refering to the noise when the externals open up...

and gt30's taking up too much room....well no shit, so my original question still stands...can i fit in externals lol ?

  • 4 weeks later...

soooo my motor sounds like a bearing has gone for a little vacation...

was going to throw a wrecker motor in there, but i figure that for around the same price i could do a 3.0 with new cast pistons.

planning to use the 25 oil pump and throwing in some restrictors and a baffled sump.

with a 25/30 you tend to lose vct yes?

car was making 285rwkw on pulp with 20 psi by 3400 with an HKS 2835 pro s

would i be right in assuming that i would acheive full boost by 3000 or even a little less with the 3.0?

also would i be able to get close to the same power on less boost? say 1 bar?

xxx

soooo my motor sounds like a bearing has gone for a little vacation...

was going to throw a wrecker motor in there, but i figure that for around the same price i could do a 3.0 with new cast pistons.

planning to use the 25 oil pump and throwing in some restrictors and a baffled sump.

with a 25/30 you tend to lose vct yes?

car was making 285rwkw on pulp with 20 psi by 3400 with an HKS 2835 pro s

would i be right in assuming that i would acheive full boost by 3000 or even a little less with the 3.0?

also would i be able to get close to the same power on less boost? say 1 bar?

xxx

lose VCT? no you do not have to, you can run an external oil feed or do the internal mod (there is a thread in this section dedicated to it)

GT3076 turbos come on hard around 2500-3000rpm expect similar though you may find its slightly on the small side for a 30

less boost and same power? possibly hard to say how different it will be untill its been done. i haven't seen a 2835 powered 30 before but take a look at AL's setup taking the advantage he has with manifolds/head work the response should be similar.

vct is easy, no way you should lose it.

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/251669-rb2530-rb30det-vvt-internal-oil-control/

with this setup and 25 pump i used 2x1.6mm feeds, worked out to ~20-30% (cant remember exactly) less flow then the standard 25 setup with the vct feed.

standard 25/30 comes out at around 8.3:1, compared to 9:1 for rb25, so you'll lose a little compression but this is obviously outweighed by the extra cubes. 3000rpm sounds about right tho

should be able to make the same power with less boost, but how much less is anyones guess. probs still need more than 1 bar tho

just thinking that with the more cubes that the turbo might be a little prone to creep... spose i'll have to wait till it's built and see ;)

i need to do this on the cheap side unfortunately otherwise i'd just go fully forged.....

at the moment my only option is rebuild my current 25 as stock, drop in a kinder surprise or go a cast build...

i figure that a cast built bottom end will be the strongest of the options ad while doing that it might as well be a 30

are you getting trent to do it? he should be familiar with what needs to be done. dont forget about costs to modify exhaust + intercooler piping etc. there are hidden costs to the 30 that you just dont think of until you run into them

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...