Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

nice plenum :P

that turbos not laggy at all, it has as much power at 3500 as any 3071/76 or 2835

..Brilliant result..

Got mine tuned today :)

t67dyno.jpg?t=1308909591

t67boost.jpg?t=1308909571

t67r.jpg?t=1307875616

333kw

More in it but settled here due to injectors near max and valve springs getting loose up top.

Gotta take it for a decent drive before i say too much about how it drives and if i will push for more. Sounds CRAZY!!!! on boost :)

t67-25g

6boost

tial 44mm

freedy plenum

z32 in cooler piping

power FC

profec B II

740cc highflowed stock injectors

bosch 044

3" exhaust

Adjustable EX cam gear

exceedy 5 puk clutch (gonna have to get a twin plate i think!!)

E85 (trent tested it at E65) springvale stuff

Very nice battery, you are going to love that! What's the difference between the yellow and red runs?

Interesting the difference in low end power and boost between mine and your graphs... Yours hits 15psi at 3500rpm on the dyno where mine hits it at 4100rpm (which accounts for a fair bit more bottom end power/torque on the graph as well) but mine hits it at about 3500rpm on the road in 4th gear, have you tested yours yet? I'm guessing the dynos are on a different load/ramp setting because our set ups are near enough to exactly the same :)

Also worth noting that mine made almost exactly the same power as the same boost level (tiny bit more due to mine revving harder but pretty much spot on). Now you just need more boost :) haha

PS. Do you remember what the cam gear got dialed in at?

Edited by SimonR32

Very nice battery, you are going to love that! What's the difference between the yellow and red runs?

Interesting the difference in low end power and boost between mine and your graphs... Yours hits 15psi at 3500rpm on the dyno where mine hits it at 4100rpm (which accounts for a fair bit more bottom end power/torque on the graph as well) but mine hits it at about 3500rpm on the road in 4th gear, have you tested yours yet? I'm guessing the dynos are on a different load/ramp setting because our set ups are near enough to exactly the same :)

PS. Do you remember what the cam gear got dialed in at?

I wasn't there for the tune so im not sure, but obviously the red one was an earlier run and trent mentioned that the valve issue only showed up after a few runs as you can see from the sheet..

Maybe trent will explain some of the magic when he gets a chance :)

Exhaust is hanging a little low and hitting chassis so i gotta fix that then ill do some testing!

Bet you were happy when you picked it up then! Would be great if Trent could comment on how it all went.

Once again, congrats... Awesome power and response, glad someone else bit the bullet and had a go :worship::)

Edited by SimonR32

Bet you were happy when you picked it up then! Would be great if Trent could comment on how it all went.

Once again, congrats... Awesome power and response, glad someone else bit the bullet and had a go :worship::)

Yeh alot of firsts for me and it went really smooth I was very surprised!

Built the thing on the cheap I already had the power FC and Profec B, cost me close to $3.5k including the tune.

First time i have done any pipe work too did it all with mild steel tube lobster back style and welded with an Oxy!!!

Edited by battery

Was a kent to pull the stock one off!!!

I did a fair bit of port matching with a dremel on it too... came up good, no leaks!

yeah it looked like a prick of a job , thats why i didn't bother..but good on you, got it up and running pretty quick..

surprised your using the stock TB, thought you would've gone bigger..

good results anyway, I would get one myself if it would low mount happily the power looks awesome on paper.....

The welding looks great, and very nice response from the turbo. :thumbsup:

Perhaps I will bump into you at Springvale or Blackburn road, I have never seen anyone else filling up but there must be quite a few of us now.

I would be interested to know what Ramp rate timing its. could be looking at some thing in to the 15 second ish and that won't make it responsive at all. I believe that was 2 runs based on 2 different ramp timings. But congruts on the No.s

nice results, i might have 2 get mine tuned on e85 next time, considering mines auto so i lose a bit, but im still about 80rwkw behind you in power, with almost the same setup on pump fuel, hmms interesting, it makes me wonder how much difference going to 4" all the way from the pod will make and putting my AFM in the piping which im in the process of doing. only thing i do notice which was a big dofference in mine to yours battery is the torque, from memory, i had alot more torque than that, but ioll wait until i get my dyno sheets off trent.

i might have 2 get mine tuned on e85 ... mines auto so i lose a bit ... still about 80rwkw behind ... almost the same setup on pump fuel, hmms interesting

It does appear to be a pretty effective setup overall, and the dyno results at least are great. Looking at the results of the money spent, this particular turbo, manifold, and wastegate combination obviously flow well enough to make the numbers. I do wonder about transient response, away from dyno or drag strip (not intended as a negative comment). Difficult to dismiss, and my interest is how it would compare with either GT3076 or the BW offering if you started with a $3.5K budget and put it together.

Given the widely reported improvements E85 brings, I would like to see how this setup performs on 98 pump fuel.

i had a gt3076 before i went to the t67-25g, differences in setup are:

gt3076 i had

stock low mount

internal gate

.63 rear housing

return flow FMIC.

with the T67:

new FMIC

bigger FMIC pipework(went from 2.25 to 2.5")

XSPOWER HPC Coated highmount

44mm ext gate

and the dump has been modded to suit highmount

on the exact same boost between both turbos(17psi) i saw a gain of nearly 30rwkw just from those changes, granted the difference in rear housing sizes which would make up for a fair bit of it.

turbo response is not bad at all, and thats even with my auto being lazy, im making boost by around 3600rpm. As for e85 vs pump, from what i remember, but dont quote me on this, when i was talking to trent about it, he said there could be up to a 50kw gain from E85 over bp98, which would push me to around the 300rwkw mark + a few more psi, and a few changes in my setup should see me around the 330rwkw mark which was my aim, atm im around 255-260rwkw on bp98.

when i go back for a tune, i might get it done on bp98, and then take it back again later on with the same setup on e85 and record the differences.

I would be interested to know what Ramp rate timing its. could be looking at some thing in to the 15 second ish and that won't make it responsive at all. I believe that was 2 runs based on 2 different ramp timings. But congruts on the No.s

the runs are way less that 15seconds, the red one from memory was with a mega retarded exhaust wheel, i was trying a few things and it just so happens the valve springs did not play up as much on that run. i only included it as a comparo to say it still has alot more in it.

On average we use a relatively short run rate 9-12 seconds.

Final position of the exhaust cam wheel was so close to zero it is irrelevant :P

Thanks for all the comments guys!

Went through a tank of E85 yesterday, mostly hills and it feels great in the twisty stuff was so keen to take it out again today but tyres are on the belts so better not!

As for response well its hard for me to judge as i don't have much experience with anything over 240kw. That and as soon as the gate opens you tend to forget about any downfalls of the setup haha

might have to take you for a spin Arthur could tempt you to slap on a highmount!

It does appear to be a pretty effective setup overall, and the dyno results at least are great. Looking at the results of the money spent, this particular turbo, manifold, and wastegate combination obviously flow well enough to make the numbers. I do wonder about transient response, away from dyno or drag strip (not intended as a negative comment). Difficult to dismiss, and my interest is how it would compare with either GT3076 or the BW offering if you started with a $3.5K budget and put it together.

Im a big fan of bang for buck setups and for between 3.5-4k i got

Tune

Turbo

Manifold

Gate

plenum

injectors

Z32

stack of 2.5",3" and 4" MS pipe

bosch 044

braided oil drain

Bunch of hose, nuts/bolts, joiners, heat shielding, clamps and gaskets

Pod filter

Ex cam gear

Ebay and the classifieds here were the weapons of choice!

I guess there's another 30-50kw left in it but would cost me at least another $1k for springs and some injectors to get there. Then you gotta take into account the extra component stress involved and i don't think its worth it.

with that said i don't think its fair to compare this setup with an IW garret or high flow low mount purely because of the legalities involved..

Edited by battery

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 know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...