Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I bought a r32 gtr and always thought it was too laggy for stock turbos but after checking everything i could think of just decided thats how it was.

I bought a power fc, adjustable cam gears, boost controller and took it to a dyno tuner that was very highly recommended where he informs me that this is not normal so after a full day of him checking everything its making 200awkw on 12 psi which is apparently about right but it doesnt make full boost til after 5,500 rpm it just builds up slowly

Has anyone heard of this? cam timing has been down by the marks and the amount of teeth on the belt, no vacuum boost leaks, turbo actuators have heaps of pressure on them, i have inspected the compressor wheels on the turbos, swapped intercoolers, air filters arent restrictive, really the next thing is to inspect the exhaust wheels and the flaps to make sure they are sealing but because thats not a fun job i thought id see if anyone else has come across this problem and my tuner has never had this happen before

Standard turbos, standard manifolds (no exhaust leaks) im assuming just no brand stainless dump pipes the kind that seperate the wastegate from the exhaust and the plumb back in (which im not a fan of)

cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/344982-unusual-lag-problem/
Share on other sites

Since it's a 32, it's possible you have the 32 Nismo turbos, steel wheel and the laggiest of all the garrett turbos with steel wheels. Even with them though full boost at 5500rpm, should be seeing full boost much earlier maybe about 4000rpm instead if you indeed had them.

Have another play with the inlet cam timing. My mates was doin the same thing and adjusting the inlet cam netted a much better response. About 800rpm difference.

This was with 32 nismo turbos.

His was the same 5500, now 4700rpm and makes 300kw on 19psi

well im pretty sure i didnt have any and the tuner checked too, once it gets to 12 it holds it fine? isnt it still laggy for n1s? and shouldnt it of made more power? i guess the engine could be tired

thanks for everyone input

The fact that it holds 12psi doesnt mean that its not a boost leak, the turbo/s are just working much harder to keep it at 12psi. Mine ran exactly the same boost pressure just took longer to get there for the turbos to overcome the leak. If it was a huge leak then yeah maybe it wouldnt be able to hold 12psi but a smaller leak would.

Can be hard to hear especially if its while the engine is running. I just blocked off the pipe running into the engine and made up a fitting with pvc pipe and used a hand pump to pump air into the system. Was super easy to hear where its leaking out cause there are no other noises. Cost me $20 for a hand pump and $6 for 2 pvc caps.

Might have to compression test it, kind of been putting it off because then i might have to rebuild it! makes sense harey ill give it a go, easier than taking the dump pipes off to check if the flaps are sealing which is all i could think of to do next!

cheers guys

You could also try removing the boost signal to the actuators and give it a very careful run to see if they spool earlier. Boost will keep rising so shut it down as soon as you see boost build so you dont blow the turbos. If they are truly stock turbos you'd want to make sure you didn't push it past 3000rpm. If you're at 4000rpm with still no boost then you can be certain its not a boost controller problem.

My first R32 had a "Hiclone" installed in the intake pipe making it much harder for the engine to breathe and consequently made the car feel very laggy. Once removed it behaved normally. A similar restriction somewhere from the air filters to the intake plenum would cause this problem. Your intercooler is not partially blocked? If you really wanted to get technical you could measure the pressure drop across the intake system.

ive tried another intercooler and lower piping and had the other piping off but i have never heard of a hiclone! one thing is the afms are reading around the same volatge so each turbo should be sucking the same amount of air which is swinging me towards a boostleak/restriction

  • 2 weeks later...

taking vacuum lines off actuators didnt make any difference, i did end up having a inlet manifold gasket gone but that hasnt fixed it. replaced anything thsat looked even half dodgy (hoses etc) still no better!

thinking it has to be turbo related? funny thing is the afm reading is around the same

taking vacuum lines off actuators didnt make any difference, i did end up having a inlet manifold gasket gone but that hasnt fixed it. replaced anything thsat looked even half dodgy (hoses etc) still no better!

thinking it has to be turbo related? funny thing is the afm reading is around the same

remove the cat wire up rest of exhaurst and take for a run around the block, it will be very loud but will remove any possible restriction in exhaurst and help rule out exhaurst, split dumps are better

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

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...