Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

If they're like the 4-9 the exhaust manifold they link the outer and the inner pairs of exhaust ports ie 1+4 aqnd 2+3 .

That way when the inline four cylinder goes through its 1-3-4-2 firing sequence it alternates between each side or outlet port of the exhaust manifold . The idea is that each cylinder vents into an area of low pressure because the last vented into the other side of the manifold and turbine housings scroll . This way more of the exhausting cylinders thermally excited exhaust energy (gas velocity) is screaming into the turbine blades .

Where you have a single outlet manifold and single passage or scroll turbine housing all cylinders vent into the common manifold/housing meaning the average pressure inside it is higher , because of this each venting cylinder is venting into an area of higher pressure and can't exert as much energy or gas velocity into the turbine blades because of the lesser pressure differential .

You can reduce the pressure in a single scroll system by increasing the size of the turbine housing but you lose turbine response by doing it .

Twin scroll systems allow you to use bigish A/R turbine housings without much of the turbine lag so they are a win at low to medium as well as higher engine revs .

Interestingly the Americans have come up with a torque number that they try not to exceed because if they do they bend connecting rods and break pistons - on std 4G63T engines anyway . I think its something like 400-420 ft/lbs they try to torque limit them too and go looking for cams revs and Hp numbers instead .

Personally I like the idea of those sorts of torque numbers at 3-3500 revs because it makes a Lancer with AWD and sort of short closish ratio gearing a slingshot off the line and they pull like buggery in every gear .

My 6 is mechanicaly std ATM but after the first time I chased a bike off at the lights and nearly ran over it I learnt not to do that .

A .

Um BTW , a correctly phased inline six cylinder twin scroll exhaust manifold links 123 and 456 . This is because an inline sixs firing order is 153624 and to alternate evenly between exhaust events thats how the manifold has to be . Its also done this way with parallel twin turbos on an inline 6 for the same reasons .

12cm evo X housing, now were talking business.

I think a call to GTP is in order... I need more info re reverse rotation turbos. There has got to be a reason why they are able to use SL2 and 20G wheels in the reverse rotation housings..

Need to get back on topic, poor Kando!

Try the evo forums mate,

They love those FP turbos !

Good mate of mine is about to put an FP RED onto his V, will be interesting to see the outcome.

At this point thinking around 300WKW with fairly reasonable response.

Will post back when we have data.

those are the ones

massive fan of trust

have had 2530 with a single 20g

WOA, YOU!

How did you find the 20G on power for a 6?

How much power did it push? And what exhaust wheel were you running with what size rear housing?

Sorry for the attack, just trying to gauge as much as I can on the 20G topic.

Thanks,

yea i have heard of people running 270rwkw

but on this engine ( tired a bit... blowby)

the most the poor little sucker could muster was 250rwkw

ran 114mph in a 1650kg car so sounds about right

in the zed it made just over 520rwkw with two of them thorugh a auto( allegedly)

felt dam fast the zed

youve not seen the results from Simon? lol

Im tempted to go the kando SL2 20G but Im not sure if I should try something outrageous and go for an evo twinscoll housing to match.

Your results do give me some confidence that it would be an epic turbo for the RB25, 250kw@12psi and 12psi by 2300 would probably be no more than 1000rpm worse on a 2.5L (more like 500 I think) and would easily push the same figure with an extra 2psi. Evo dudesssss push these things to 1.8 bar NO WORRIES (actually they do that with the stock 16g too).

Majorly considering a simple T3 IW 8cm job when its available.. Kando = winnarr

Love the sound of these turbo's, very impressive!

Finally a turbo that bridges the gap between cheap ebay turbo's and expensive jap ones!

My mate put me onto this thread, but I'm still unsure of which one I should run:

rb30det with stock (healthy) internals....would be happy with 260-310 responsive kw's.....going in an s13 skidder (100% track car)

td06 or t67? 20g or 25g? 8cm, 10cm or 12cm?

If your that excited maybe just read through the thread.

The t67 with 10cm rear that Simon is running would be a great turbo for an RB30 although you will make more than 310rwkw pretty easily. Will you be running an aftermarket manifold and external wastegate?

Just a quick question, as I have recently purchased one of these turbo's (Identical to SimonR32)

One of the first things i noticed after taking it out of the box, was the fact that there was a small amount of shaft play. As in, you can move it from side to side (not enough for the blades to touch the housing) but they come very close.

So my question is, is this sort of thing normal for this type of turbo? SimonR32, was this the case with yours?

Or should I be sending it back for a replacement...

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

    • 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
    • If they can dyno them, get them dyno'd, make sure they're not leaking, and if they look okay on the dyno and are performing relatively well, put them in the car.   If they're leaking oil etc, and you feel so inclined, open them up yourself and see what you can do to fix it. The main thing you're trying to do is replace the parts that perish, like seals. You're not attempting to change the valving. You might even be able to find somewhere that has the Tein parts/rebuild kit if you dig hard.
×
×
  • Create New...