Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

car went in with blocked fuel filter and some injector warning lights on dash.

made 431 when it went in and came out with 465 with same boost.

nothing else was changed.

Still don't have 500rwkw though? :whistling:

Anyway what happened to this?

im just gonna keep all my info / results to myself from now on.

Either way your initial 500rwkw result was wrong - as we all said - due to the IT sensor fudge & the fact you only ran a MPH to back ~430rwkw (funny on both accounts...)

Least now you can see/realise that for yourself (hopefully)

Still don't have 500rwkw though? :whistling:

Anyway what happened to this?

Either way your initial 500rwkw result was wrong - as we all said - due to the IT sensor fudge & the fact you only ran a MPH to back ~430rwkw (funny on both accounts...)

Least now you can see/realise that for yourself (hopefully)

Unfortunatly Nismoid im not a tunner and work with a dyno everyday so its hard for the regular joe blo to know what is right & what is wrong. I come on here to share results in the GTX thread as i know there are people keen to see results..

and i dont think you are one...

When someone goes to a tuner to have there car tuned how are they meant to know the calibration of the dyno and all the different varibles involved ?

I understand there was something going on different dyno's but how am i meant to know?

All i can do is post my result and get flamed by people like yourself.

We didn't flame you at all.

We simply said the power was probably a little high, and then when you ran the MPH you did, it proved what we said - then you were the one who became all agitated and agro about the situation. Not us.

You should take your own advice really, people here are keen to see results, but also at the same time people know what the results should be (and know when some unrealistic ones are posted). So when everyone does question it, as it wasn't just me, you should perhaps think "hey, maybe they are right and i need to learn/read/research some more", rather than having a hissy fit over being wrong and stating in various threads you were making 500rwkw - when - you were not :)

I'm not a tuner, but i do know what MPH you should have vs the power vs weight, such a thing that will never lie really.

  • 2 years later...

Thanks Scott. Only reason I am going with the gtx35 is it cost me basically nothing. Has a .82 rear on it now. From what I've seen and read they spool up around the 4200 rpm mark. Will get my tuner to try and play with the vct to bring it on earlier on the neo engine. current set up spools up around the 38 to 4000 mark.

Geez mate still need a dozen other blokes to tell you what i told you via pm with that .63 housing?

It simply won't work. 4200 is still bit optimistic getting a 35R on song with a 2.5L. I don't think any amount of vct tinkering will bring it to life that early ;)

  • 1 year later...

This would be probably the most interesting to most people involved in this thread, I'd suspect - looks quite nice for an RB25:

https://turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/turbochargers/gtx3071r-gen-ii

I checked them quickly and to be honest I'm not that excited. They seem to have made tremendous progress in moving the surge line to the left while keeping the choke line where it was or increasing it a little but the efficiency plummeted quite a bit.

my hunch is that they're primarily for V8 applications. hence they flow more, but with substantially worse efficiency at high pressure ratios (20psi+).. not as good for high boost small engines, especially ones on E85... and a reverse rotation option presumably for symmetric twin turbo setups.

 

 

Edited by Skepticism
  • Like 1

lol

i got excited as i looked at the garrett site with a flat phone and dull screen last night and mistook the turbine inducer for the exducer , then i looked again 

today and laughed.

What drugs are garrett on?, the GTX gen2 3582 is basically copying every xr6 turbo highflow from the last few yrs where everyone plonks the KTS 4R04 66.3/84 comp wheel

in it and claims it as there own special thing..

And the GTX3584 is much of the same as again...wheres the 65-66mm turbine it should have?, why cant they fit the 6.35mm shaft GT37 turbine to it..or even better

make a better version of that..

How the f**k you make 1000hp out of a 62mm turbine..lol..is it on a 1.5l motor on million pounds of boost ffs..

comp wheel doesnt even flow 100lb..lol

work out cheaper to buy your own parts and build you own garrett special..chinese will tool up for the gen2 soon enough

and  comp wheel will be on ebay ..lmao, you can already buy all the GTW comp wheels through KTS if you look at the catalogue...

cheers

darren

Edited by jet_r31
  • Like 1
14 hours ago, jet_r31 said:

What drugs are garrett on?, the GTX gen2 3582 is basically copying every xr6 turbo highflow from the last few yrs where everyone plonks the KTS 4R04 66.3/84 comp wheel

And the GTX3584 is much of the same as again...wheres the 65-66mm turbine it should have?, why cant they fit the 6.35mm shaft GT37 turbine to it..or even better

How the f**k you make 1000hp out of a 62mm turbine..lol..is it on a 1.5l motor on million pounds of boost ffs..

comp wheel doesnt even flow 100lb..lol

While my reactions were the same and I still ultimately agree with you (Garrett changing their hp "rating" standard to be more generous while kind of makes sense in the current climate seems VERY conveniently times), I have to add that I just discovered that the GT3584RS actually has some kind of new fancy turbine wheel which a/r for a/r flows a bit more and the 1.22a/r options flows a metric shittonne more than a normal 1.06a/r T3 housing.

That turbo could prove to be a bit more interesting, yet.

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

    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...