Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Have a read at hypergear's latest update with the ATR43g3. Very reasonable response for 303rwkws. And that is internal gated on a stock standard engine with all factory gears.

That is fairly false, while a good upgrade the majority of results see no where near 300rwkw from the high flows.

Most people see 230-240rwkw from a high flow, dyno results thread to back.

That is fairly false, while a good upgrade the majority of results see no where near 300rwkw from the high flows.

Most people see 230-240rwkw from a high flow, dyno results thread to back.

That depends on the type of rear housing that we get to do the high flow as well as the combination of wheel we use refer to customer's driving ability. I've personally tested a .63 PU high flow maxed at 295rwkws, Roller dyno, 98 fuel, tuned by Dr.drift.

How ever the ATR43G3 mentioned is a brand new turbo that is made and proven for 300rwkws application, with 65kws more mid range then the KKR560. Plus controlled run is based on fully standard setup without boost controller or any thing that could advance its original response and power behavior.

That depends on the type of rear housing that we get to do the high flow as well as the combination of wheel we use refer to customer's driving ability. I've personally tested a .63 PU high flow maxed at 295rwkws, Roller dyno, 98 fuel, tuned by Dr.drift.

How ever the ATR43G3 mentioned is a brand new turbo that is made and proven for 300rwkws application, with 50kws more mid range then the KKR560. Plus controlled run is based on fully standard setup without boost controller or any thing that could advance its original response and power behavior.

yes very good result, these figures are with an aftermarket comp housing, chra and rear housing.... , so as stao said, those are a completely aftermarket turbo... not a highflow

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

its not fair? on who? haha as i said ive had both turbos on rb25's so just posting my experiences.

Its not fair on the poor old 3071 :D

I am challenging this statement:

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

A 3071 will have better response than a 3076 with same rear housing. The 3076 will have more top end power.

true.. i should have been clearer. When we're dealing with the 3071 with a cropped ex wheel and a OP6 style or AVO style rear housing and internal wastegate as opposed to the 60mm garret 4bolt ex gate housing... the 3076 comes out top there.

the 3071 with the same garret 4 bolt rear housing is a different story since it has a 71mm wheel as opposed to 76 it will spool earlier for sure.

just after a rough figure, but 'roughly' what does it cost to highflow and rebuild the rb25 turbos?

Bush bearing combo would be 800-1200

Proper ball bearing unit would be 1600-2200

Many factors involved from who does it, what specs and so on.

Personally, I'd go the ball bearing everytime.

i have a apexi ax53B70, had it tuned the other day and made 240kw on 18psi with 555cc injectors, pfc, z32, 3" exhaust, fmic. but was told i wont get any more out of it. pretty annoyed as i spent just under 2k on it and was told i would see 250 with ease. although i am very happy with the response :D

how much does a 3071 go for?

I got mine from Kudos Motorsports. I wanted the whole kit (dump, lines etc) and theirs was the cheapest i could find

Yeah just had a look, not a bad deal.

ooooo it has an option for the anti-surge compressor housing. did you get that?

Do you have a dyno sheet? I couldnt find one of yours in the dyno thread?

Edited by Harey
Yeah just had a look, not a bad deal.

ooooo it has an option for the anti-surge compressor housing. did you get that?

Do you have a dyno sheet? I couldnt find one of yours in the dyno thread?

no i didn't want to fab up a massive 4" intake pipe, I managed to squeeze my standard one (with metal insert) over the smaller mouth.

dyno sheet is a few weeks away :)

no i didn't want to fab up a massive 4" intake pipe, I managed to squeeze my standard one (with metal insert) over the smaller mouth.

dyno sheet is a few weeks away :)

ah yeah fair enough. its also quite a few extra dollars!

If you want the anti surge compressor housing your prob better off getting the 3076 as that comes with one for no extra dollars.

Keen to see the dyno sheet!

Ah yeah didnt think about that. Once you have a 4" intake, the 3" afm will become a restriction and also annoying changing diameters if you did leave it there.

What options are there to remain with a 3" intake. I know simon you will recommend the 4" intake but think about it from a stealth on the street point of view. Is it possible to get an anti surge housing with a 3" intake on a GT30?

I've got an rb20 turbo highflowed by GCG on my rb25, makes full boost almost the same as a standard turbo but it pulls very hard even on 12psi around 200rwkw. Is currently being tuned with gtr injectors and all that jazz, hoping to see 240kw with almost standard response and spool times. For a street car it is all about response.

Only thing I don't like about the turbo is the service from gcg, if anything goes wrong you will be blamed for it and have to fork out for the bill.

Edited by Rolls
I've got an rb20 turbo highflowed by GCG on my rb25, makes full boost almost the same as a standard turbo but it pulls very hard even on 12psi around 200rwkw. Is currently being tuned with gtr injectors and all that jazz, hoping to see 240kw with almost standard response and spool times. For a street car it is all about response.

Only thing I don't like about the turbo is the service from gcg, if anything goes wrong you will be blamed for it and have to fork out for the bill.

I dont understand, how is that related to "R33 Gts-t Turbo Recommendation, most responsive for 275rwkw"

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...