Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I can't remember, and i am not searching but don't R34 gtr turbos have smaller exhaust housings? .64 vs .48?

theres enough info on the net with back to back BB versus journal and i've backed to backed it aswell,(BB T28 versus journal) transient response is "slighlty" better, but only really noticed on light throttle openings(1/4 throttle, bringing up a few pounds of boost ), so maybe for a motorkhana car its worth it, for the rest of us it won't make a difference

cheers

darren

they both use the .48 rear housing.

even without seeing jez's results yet, i rekon the td06sl2-20g is already a winner for a rb25 without too much lag.

if i can manage to low mount this and weld the gate straight onto the rear housing (38mm will def fit, not sure about 44mm??) then it will be something i will do.

will wait for ARTZ to see how he goes with low mounting his unit.

I'd be going the 40mm comp gate anyway 1. because it should sound better 2. because its cheaper!

trent seems to use them often with no issues.

yeah i want to cause its a very compact unit..

..but tial comes with 7 different springs TS comes with 7psi only which means I need to buy more springs :(

ill see how much i can score some for.. :)

pipe i have is 46 Outside 40 Inside.. so i measured it up..and although it looks like ti will fit from the outside but when I measured the inside of the turbo housing, because of the thickness of the walls, I think a 40mm hole is going to be the limit as the inside of the housing just wont accomodate a 44mm hole. so even if i have a 44mm gate im only going to have a 40mm pipe feeding it.

DSC03098.jpg

from everything i have read, it is meant to be the best place for it, run it off at an angle less than 90 degree and it should have great boost control..

TS site says to keep the gate at least 100mm away from the housing though, away from the heat as much as possible Guess i will take my chances with it under a heatshield....

wg.png

**Although this setup may work on paper i really have doubts as to its sustainability if it was running hot for extended periods..**

Simon,

what BOV are you running? (If any that is)

cheers

Greddy Type R

Damn beat me to it!

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=345095&view=findpost&p=5748802

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

    • Version 1 aluminium airbox is.......not acceptable No pics as I "didn't like the look.....alot" Even after all my "CAD", and measurements, the leg near the fusebox just didn't sit right as it ended up about 10mm long and made the angle of the dangle look wrong, the height was a little short as well, meh, I wasn't that confident that Version 1 was going to be an instant winner I might give Version 2 another go, there's plenty of aluminium at work, but, after having in on and off a few times, and laying in the old OEM airbox without the new pod filter and MAF, there may be an option to modify the OEM air box and still use the Autoexe front cover and filter.... maybe This >  Needs to fit in here, but using the panel, and not the pod, the MAF will need to fit in the airbox though> I'm thinking as the old OEM box and Autoexe cover that is sitting in the shed is just sitting around doing nothing, and they are relatively abundant and cheap to replace if I mess it up and need another, it may well fit with some modifications to how the Autoexe brackets mounts to the rad support, and some dremiling to move it get in there, should give me some more room for activities, as I don't want to move the MAF and affect the tune Sealing the hole it requires to stick it in the air box is simple, a tight fit and some pinch weld will seal it up tight  I am calling this a later problem though
    • and it ends up being already priced in as though you're just on 91RON without any ethanol. Car will lose a bit of economy as the short and long term fuel trims bring down the AFR back to stoich or whatever it is for cruise/idle for the engine.  
    • Oh, you are right. But, in Australia E10 is based on 91RON fuel and ends up being 94RON. Hence it being the cheaper option for economy cars. The more performance oriented cars go for the 98RON fuel that has no ethanol mixed in. The only step up we have left then at some petrol stations is E85.
    • There is a warning that "this thread is super old" but they ignore that anyway...
    • With 10% Ethanol, we're talking 2-3% fuel consumption difference. The emissions reductions and octane boost in my opinion far outweigh this almost non existent loss.    My tanks sitting at 80%. Luckily that should go down fast as I'm on vacation again for the next two weeks. 
×
×
  • Create New...