Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

I've currently got a KKR560 turbo on my R33, running at the limit of my stock injectors getting 220rwkw.

I'm planning to get Nismo 555 injectors and a Z32 AFM and a full retune of my powerFC, Gavin Woods said he would tune for 270kw as it's stock internals.

I'm sick of how laggy the car is, I swear I don't get full boost til 5000rpm, before that it doesn't have much, that's what i get for choosing such a cheap turbo :rofl:

Anyway, I had a good look through the Rb25 dyno results, but found that everybody's setups were so different, that I couldn't really compare, so I thought I'd just ask and get an opinion.

My aim is around 275rwkw. What's the most responsive turbo to do this, as that is my goal.

Alternatively, if there is a much more responsive option, that will only get me to 250kw, i would love to hear about that, or if there is a equally-laggy 300kw option, that would be good too!

Once i've got the suggestions, I can do my usual forum searching and googling and see if it's what i'm after

Thanks guys!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/319375-r33-gts-t-turbo-recommendation/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

but isn't the thing stopping you getting to 270kw your injectors, not your turbo?

I run a kkr480, it made 250kw @16psi, also injector limited.

sounds like you have the right size turbo for your target. but yes an old style bush bearing turbo will always be 500rpm laggier than the ball bearing equivalent. that's why the BB one is between 2 and 5 times the cost.

Yea, the turbo could easily boost me to 300kw, i am positive of that :rofl:

That was my original plans, z32 AFM, injectors and a retune with current turbo to get 270, gav said that would be easy, and the most power i should run with stock engine

Then i realised how laggy it already is, and if i'm spending all this money on a tune and parts, it's already > $2000, so maybe I should get a turbo i actually like?

If we are only talking about 500rpm difference, that's definitely not worth it, i was under the impression that it would be alot more responsive than that?

If you want just the turbo - GT3071 without question.

The KKR550 sadly (as you've found), its not the most responsive turbo :rofl:

They make power, yes, however they don't do it with decent response that you would get from a better designed (and more expensive) turbo.

what boost tho? the 3076 will do same power and response times... but less psi needed to make same power.

Ive had both type of turbos on rb25's so bit of experience with them.

My 3071R was a AVO or ATP style rear housing to bolt up to skyline dump. mounted lowmount and made 280 rwkw on 20 psi.. i then ran cams and made same power on 17 psi and spooled earlier.

currently have 3076 but with garret rear and ex gate, full boost at 3500 and makes 310 rwkw on 17-18 psi, stock cams.

I'd definitely prefer internal wastegate if possible, so much easier to install and i feel like there is less chance of me getting defected...

Obviously I'd check out SAU sponsors, is there anywhere else i should be looking when trying to find prices for HKS and Garrett turbos?

You guys have been so helpful, thanks alot! I was expecting a spamming of "do a frikkin search" or the like :thumbsup:

Isaac

depending on your budget i wouldnt worry about a 2nd hand HSK turbo. just grab a new garret and set it all up nicely and it will be a good thing.

you can get the 3076 with garret IW also.. this would be a good turbo if you wanted to retain the internal gate

I think i might be getting a 3071 as well, im over my bush-bearing highflow! like what you guys said to me 2 years ago! "your always gona want more power" so now its to get a bigger turbo!, Also the 3071, how big is the rear on it?

but isn't the thing stopping you getting to 270kw your injectors, not your turbo?

I run a kkr480, it made 250kw @16psi, also injector limited.

sounds like you have the right size turbo for your target. but yes an old style bush bearing turbo will always be 500rpm laggier than the ball bearing equivalent. that's why the BB one is between 2 and 5 times the cost.

not exactly.

But i agree compared to the kkr stuff there are far more responsive gear.

i'd go a 3076 with a .64 rear to be honest. will spool the same as a 3071 and make more top end power. can be lowmounted on stock manifold also.

How can a turbo with larger wheels spool the same as that of a turbo with smaller wheels?

I would have to say, bang for buck, go a hypergear high-flow, G3 profile and power-up option. Good for around 280rwkw+. Go to the Hypergear site and also the Hypergear thread on here (SAU) and check out some dyno printouts and compare them to other similar setups. As far as useable power go's - for a street application - they are pretty hard to beat when you consider response and all that stuff. Also, considering they are a thrust bearing CHRA they spool nearly or just as quick as the garret equivelant (GT 3071). The proof is in the dyno read outs. They will never hold power to redline due to the Nissan housing(s) used, however, used in conjuction with R33 box and diff ratio's i can see this kind of set-up being very formidable on the street (outright power is not always everything)

Otherwise if you have deep pockets go a HKS (like a GT-RS or GT-sports kit) or Trust (something like a TD06S-20G). I have seen some very responsive results with these turbos on dyno sheets.

I would have to say, bang for buck, go a hypergear high-flow, G3 profile and power-up option. Good for around 280rwkw+. Go to the Hypergear site and also the Hypergear thread on here (SAU) and check out some dyno printouts and compare them to other similar setups. As far as useable power go's - for a street application - they are pretty hard to beat when you consider response and all that stuff. Also, considering they are a thrust bearing CHRA they spool nearly or just as quick as the garret equivelant (GT 3071). The proof is in the dyno read outs. They will never hold power to redline due to the Nissan housing(s) used, however, used in conjuction with R33 box and diff ratio's i can see this kind of set-up being very formidable on the street (outright power is not always everything)

Otherwise if you have deep pockets go a HKS (like a GT-RS or GT-sports kit) or Trust (something like a TD06S-20G). I have seen some very responsive results with these turbos on dyno sheets.

dont most of the hypergear stuf like the atr43 renge use .70 a/r comp cover. what size is the standard one

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...