Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Received my turbo today, Dam it's a small thing. how do i measure this turbo to see if its actually a 10cm housing and not a 8cm.

The t3 flange has casting imperfections on them and looks shonky. ARTZ housing looks way better condition than mine.

Would it cause any issues and should I say something to Eiji?

looks pretty dodge.

23854006.th.jpg

ARTZ housing;

04112011772.jpg

I wouldn't worry about that "imperfection" too much... It's not going to make any difference, but if you are worried just rub it down a little with a small file.

The housings also look tiny compared with a Garrett, it's just because they are skinny

Edited by SimonR32

ordered boxing day, arrived today.

minus the pub holidays so not too bad.

thanks for the tip Simon!

tune eta, 1st wk of Feb!

so ~14 days

Do u think a TD06 20g internal gate kando would be too big for a 2L 4cyl engine, lag monster ?

nope , sr boys seem to love them :)

Speaking of build quality, I thought I would post some pictures of my turbo because I have just pulled the front cover off!

This is after half a dozen track days, 3 times on the dyno, a trip to the drags, powercruise, a few motorkhanas and about a year of light driving :)

Front Cover Outside

2012-01-09204357Large.jpg

Front Cover Inside

2012-01-09204428Large.jpg

Compressor Wheel

2012-01-09204214Large.jpg

2012-01-09204225Large.jpg

Reason why the front cover is off (Welding on an elbow)

2012-01-09204448Large.jpg

Do u think a TD06 20g internal gate kando would be too big for a 2L 4cyl engine, lag monster ?

apparently the TD06 wheels dont work too well in the internal gate housings.

Ive done a td05h-18g on an SR20DE, tuned by Jez, is very impressive yet Im not confident the internal gate TD06 variant would be the same

best thing to do would be to get a china spec trust 3 bolt manifold, then get the 8cm trust 3 bolt rear housing and a decent gate. you would be laughing then :thumbsup:

Ive done a td05h-18g on an SR20DE, tuned by Jez, is very impressive yet Im not confident the internal gate TD06 variant would be the same

Whats the difference between the TD05 and TD06? I wouldnt think there is enough wheel difference to make a difference. Is it because the TD05-18G you used was the T518Z rip off so has a different design housing?

Well I just ordered my TD05H-18G. Be interesting to see if backed to back with the TD06-20G. I am hoping I still make 250rwkws and hopefully make at least 25rwkws more at 4,500rpm.

I just ordered my TD05H-18G. I am hoping I still make 250rwkws and hopefully make at least 25rwkws more at 4,500rpm.

Isn't that a fairly small setup? Found a Kinugawa chart indicating they are good for ~250 crank kW at max.

Hmmm, maybe a t67 would go well on my 31

Or myabe its a bit too ambitious for a stock bottom end rb30e

Thoughts ?

Sounds pretty normal to me, just stick a small cam in it aswell, (something around 220@.50) and some springs ,and you will make good power ,most people stick 3540's .82 on them at least...

If you don't do cam, it probally won't make more than 240-250rwkw, thats about all you will ever get with stock camshaft, regardless of turbo...

I'd try a TD06H 25G 12cm personally, with a auto it would run 10's on a good condition stock bottom end i would have thought...

cheers

darren

Edited by jet_r31

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...