Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

On ‎1‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 6:46 AM, Lithium said:

I'm so far relatively impressed with the Gen2 GTX3582R, met a lad with one on his fresh RB26 build at a track day I was at on Monday - running a 1.01a/r twin scroll T3 hotside on BP98.  I don't have much info on it, but I did see a dyno plot at the track and it was near 200kw by 4000rpm and made 460kw @ rear hubs (I'd call that around 410rwkw if you can't understand hub dynos) on 21psi.  It had a beautiful power curve for that level, with peak coming in at just after 7000rpm but holding >450kw all the way up to the 8000rpm they ran it to.

It seems like Garrett may have managed to go to a 66mm inducer without sacrificing too much in the way of response, and clearly have managed to do very good things for flow.  The car had quite a happy wee anti-surge whistle too, a bit less low-key than the Gen1 GTX - I have a soft spot for that noise so a good thing in my books haha.  

Thanks for the info', Lith. Good to see more results from the Gen2 GTX range popping up - a very positive result too. Approximately 410kW at the wheels on a roller dyno running 'only' 21psi and BP98 is a solid result. 

I was chatting to a guy in WA via FB yesterday afternoon about his 1.5JZ + GTX3584RS with 0.83 housing. His combo currently produces 447kW at 27psi through a build auto with 3,000rpm stall. I expect it would make a fair bit more via a 5sp manual.     

  

I saw a recent FB post regarding an RB26 + GTX3584RS fitted to a blue R34 track car in WA. The combination makes 650hp. The only details I could find on this set-up unfortunately. I assume it's a wheel horsepower figure.

My turbine housing is back from ceramic coating and the compressor housing has been polished. I'm hoping to have the housings refitted and ready to bolt it all on in the next week or two.

I've been away with work (beyond network coverage range at times) in recent weeks and extremely busy. Hence the lack of updates of late.

 

 

Update:
The blue R34 is running E85, 0.84 housing, 24psi, and currently produces peak boost at 4800rpm. The owner has plans to bring boost on earlier with cam timing adjustment.

  • Like 1
20 minutes ago, whatsisname said:

Update:
The blue R34 is running E85, 0.84 housing, 24psi, and currently produces peak boost at 4800rpm. The owner has plans to bring boost on earlier with cam timing adjustment.

Guessing that meant .83?   4800rpm sounds realistic for stock stroke and 24psi,  not bad given the flow potential tbh... be interesting to know more.  At that rate it'd be very usable on a 3litre :)

  • Like 1
1 hour ago, Lithium said:

Guessing that meant .83?   4800rpm sounds realistic for stock stroke and 24psi,  not bad given the flow potential tbh... be interesting to know more.  At that rate it'd be very usable on a 3litre :)

I assume so - the owner wrote .84 but probably just a fat fingers moment. I'm hoping to discuss our respective combo's in a further detail.

Mate, I cannot wait to find out for myself! I'm away again for most of the remainder of this week. Then it's Round 1 of the SA IPRA championship. Probably away again after that. Then we're racing at Clipsal. It is a hectic schedule. But hopefully we can squeeze my turbo upgrade in there somewhere.   

I can confirm the WA based R34 I mentioned earlier currently produces 650hp at the rears.

RB26 with GTX3584RS .83 making 485kW at the rear wheels running E85 on 24psi boost. Currently produces peak boost at 4800rpm but expecting this to improve via cam timing adjustments and further tuning.

Combo' has more in it but power capped due to concerns over gearbox longevity - it's a track car.

 

I know there will be a GTX3584RS on a RB26 (R32 GTR) getting tuned in the next few weeks... I'll try and post results if I remember 


Which exhaust housing and any other info on the set up?

As do I. I'm guessing it may end up closer to 4500-4600rpm once sorted. Twin scroll would obviously be even better.

I'm hoping my RB25/30 with the larger 1.01 will see full boost by around 4000-4500rpm.

 

3 hours ago, whatsisname said:

I can confirm the WA based R34 I mentioned earlier currently produces 650hp at the rears.

RB26 with GTX3584RS .83 making 485kW at the rear wheels running E85 on 24psi boost. Currently produces peak boost at 4800rpm but expecting this to improve via cam timing adjustments and further tuning.

Combo' has more in it but power capped due to concerns over gearbox longevity - it's a track car.

 

Did he say which shop's dyno this was on?

Garrett have not developed a twin scroll option (as yet) but I believe ATP were planning to offer suitable twin scroll housings.  

Edit: ATP do indeed. Only available in 1.01 A/R.

It's basically a modified GT/GTX35 housing. I assume any T3 GT/GTX35 housing can be modified to suit the GTX3584RS. The incompatibility warning from Garrett is aimed at existing GT/GTX owners looking to upgrade their current turbo to the RS. Off-the-shelf they aren't reverse compatible. But nothing stopping people from having housings modified to fit.       

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION:
Garrett T3 Twinscroll turbine housing in Ni-Resist material; for GT35, GTX35, and GEN2 GTX35 series turbochargers. The turbine housing is 1.01 A/R and 3-inch Garrett GT V-Band outlet.

** Available for the Garrett GTX3584RS. Choose the required alternate fitment option **

http://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=tp&Product_Code=ATP-HSG-210&Category_Code=GTH

 

ATP-HSG-210_450-1.jpg

Okay, so we've managed to set aside a few days before Clipsal to fit and tune the new turbo. If all goes roughly to plan, should have it on the dyno in two weeks.

  • Like 2
14 hours ago, whatsisname said:

Okay, so we've managed to set aside a few days before Clipsal to fit and tune the new turbo. If all goes roughly to plan, should have it on the dyno in two weeks.

Awesome, keen to see how it goes - good luck :)

Just as a reminder, you are on a 3litre, still VCT and some kind of drop in cams?  You have gone the 1.01 T3 hotside?

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...