Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

sounds interesting, although be expensive compared to one big china single, people more commonly use

cheers

darren

yeah i hate singles on 8's im a symmetry kinda guy :P would be happy to pay ten times the amount just to have twins... plus the results are better.

Bit delayed though now, the stupid dry sump setup has gone missing.... DHL are trying to track it down

that looks to be a highflow with stock housings, prepared by sir kando himself. looks to be a new release, nobody has one yet.

i would be interested to see how that performs against the staple GCG or hypergear. Price wise its in line with the hypergear but seems to have very different specs.

A T3 stage 3 rear wheel with a 20G sized compressor. The T3 stage 3 is similar in trim to the TD06SL2 turbine but is larger in inducer diameter.

Would be interested to see the results.

that looks to be a highflow with stock housings, prepared by sir kando himself. looks to be a new release, nobody has one yet.

i would be interested to see how that performs against the staple GCG or hypergear. Price wise its in line with the hypergear but seems to have very different specs.

A T3 stage 3 rear wheel with a 20G sized compressor. The T3 stage 3 is similar in trim to the TD06SL2 turbine but is larger in inducer diameter.

Would be interested to see the results.

Interesting. The stage 3 Sierra wheel was that I've used for high flowing 5 years ago, same as the old school TR44xx turbos. I've also bought some of those bolton turbine castings, They are a modified KKR430 .58 turbine housing. Will be building a new billet bolton turbocharger with it soon and making sure it has the best power/response curve.

it would be good to see you use some smaller trim turbines Stao, your current range all have larger trims than their garrett equivilent which some of them are already on the big side (GT30 v G3 wheel)

Dave it says 15psi actuator and 2.2 bar limit lol

Interesting. The stage 3 Sierra wheel was that I've used for high flowing 5 years ago, same as the old school TR44xx turbos. I've also bought some of those bolton turbine castings, They are a modified KKR430 .58 turbine housing. Will be building a new billet bolton turbocharger with it soon and making sure it has the best power/response curve.

Would you say it's smaller or larger than your pu highflow

So its a sierra rear wheel, usually they use the 58mm V-trim or H -trim comp wheel for those, not a 52mm. Been the staple

diet of hi-flows since jesus was around..still work, with a 58mm comp wheel they will push a barge ass R33 Rb25 to 120mph traps, and

vl manual turbos faster again.

cheers

darren

Edited by jet_r31

Whoa that's a lot of speed out of a liner. I wonder why kando went for the little comp wheel?

to my understanding these old tech wheels are still I'm circulation with some of the biggest name turbo builders out there.

Might talk to a mate and see if he wants to try one of these

it would be good to see you use some smaller trim turbines Stao, your current range all have larger trims than their garrett equivilent which some of them are already on the big side (GT30 v G3 wheel)

Dave it says 15psi actuator and 2.2 bar limit lol

oh yes...i drank a bit yesterday...

:blush:

So its a sierra rear wheel, usually they use the 58mm V-trim or H -trim comp wheel for those, not a 52mm. Been the staple

diet of hi-flows since jesus was around..still work, with a 58mm comp wheel they will push a barge ass R33 Rb25 to 120mph traps, and

vl manual turbos faster again.

cheers

darren

my car is not a barge ass :angry:

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...