Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

All in all it was a fun weekend, got a good video racing a 32 with built 25 tuned by next up performance with a gtx35r/poncams on eflex he makes 531atw 23psi and down back straight we were both neck n neck hard into 4th haha.

my kando turbo has been on for prob 18months and hasn't missed a beat. and shaft play etc still feels like when I bought it.

old time was run with a gt3582r .82 on 22psi

Edited by methz
531 HP or KW?

Lith, you are the only one to document a Kando failure. IIRC it was an Evo item which looked very much like it ingested something. You never updated.

I never got any update on it, and haven't been able to treat it as conclusive one way or another but very aware it's the only case I know of as well so treating it cautiously but not looking like enough to take any conclusion from.... Unfortunately a guy I know now is not above dishonesty to it sell his product was involved and made it seem like a common failure, problem is that could or probably was complete bollux.

Doesn't seem like much first hand experience from owners sharing their failures, the one I mentioned certainly is the only I have heard of.

About Kando failures I have had many came in for repair. It also apply to Greddy, but there were very few of them due to popularity.

It applies to T67 and some of the new large billet T67 alike L2 based turbos in 8/10cm turbines most of them were used on Rb25/26/30 engines running around 20psi of boost.

Have not seen any SR based issues or to any 20Gs.

Every single one had a cracked rear wheel and a rubbed compressor. They are not metal formulation issues, but all of them had a worn thrust and burnt collar. Once the thrust bearing is worn, back pressure forces the turbine wheel spinning against its heat shield. At that point the turbine wheel cracks.

Which is all of our TD06L2 based turbochargers has had its bearing housing modified with a SS2 thrust and collar inserted. From that point there are no problems.

For any one whom has a T67 or larger compressor based L2 TD06, that is going to a Rb25det or larger motor. It is probably worth getting our modified thrust assembly before installation of the turbocharger.

Stao do you think it could be to do with the fact they are oil cooled only and generally making reasonable power on an RB?

Perhaps the SR ones are less likely to fail as MOST 20G's sold by Kando are water cooled?

The feedback could prove valuable to this thread and potential buyers, however, it should be noted that Simon and a few others have done extremely well out of their oil cooked T67s.

Edited by GTScotT

Just a quick followup on Kando service, I ordered a set of lines last week and they arrived today. That was under 5 business days door to door, stellar.

I also messaged on FB as I had lost the tracking number and was quickly helped out.

Service is still great for a company that does the volume they do.

Oil cooled or not doesn't make much differences in turbocharger's life time, except if it is a ball bearing CHRA. How ever running water cooling can significantly lower engine oil temp, and maintain the condition of engine oil. As If i run a oil cooled turbocharger for dyno tune, by the end of the day my freshly changed engine oil would be black with a burnt smell to it. While running water cooling my engine oil remains clean after many dyno days.

With the 25G L2 based turbo failures, The problem is in the back pressure which explains why the 4cyc 8.5:1 SRs and smaller 20Gs combination never had issues.

The thrust friction is explained in Ff = MFn which Fn is by P A. It appears Greedy has made a smaller shouldered racing collar set to reducing A resulting in less thrust friction, that is probably engineered to encounter with Garrett's BB CHRAs. I guess those are suppose to replaced after every race event. The ones in the Kando items are the larger shouldered Greedy collar copies.

To effectively counter back pressure, ideally is by using a bigger turbine housing or more free flowing exhaust wheel, doing any of those results in unwanted lag.

What I'm doing is by increase collar shoulders that results in larger friction area, using oil pump pressure to increases the resistance to turbine pressure. It is not the ideal way, as the compressor and turbine flow is not resulting in a balanced sense, example would be as if I've built a 2582 configuration.

Our SS/GX turbochargers are matched with much bigger wheels and housing depending on compressor flow, in a sense that I will end up reaching maximum compressor efficiency instead of reaching maximum turbine capacity. That way I never encountered any reliability issues.

About our reliable low friction thrust collar and bearing assembly that I did spent alot of time developing, I won't be posting up photos of its components. But end result is:

Good explanation Stao, thanks. Higher pressures result in higher axial loads, putting pressure/wear on the collar.

I understand why you wouldn't want to post up pics of your gear, although if/when you get another Kando in for repairs perhaps you might consider putting up pics of the failure areas ? :unsure:

With the 25G L2 based turbo failures, The problem is in the back pressure which explains why the 4cyc 8.5:1 SRs and smaller 20Gs combination never had issues.

Cheers for discussing this, interesting reading. I've been a bit dubious of the idea of 25Gs on L2 turbines but hadn't considered that they could actually run into reliability issues beyond the fact that things always will wear a bit worse when worked harder. The one person I know who had a Kando failure was running a Kando 60-1 on a small turbine combo, too - which I always thought was a bit of an ugly way of going about it anyway ..... so strictly speaking picking suitable compressor to turbine matches can avoid this issue?

Awesome, good luck. I'll be lying if I said I wouldn't be disappointed if it went under 115mph, but it's really hard to say beyond there - it's got a really difficult to "read" seat of pants feel, its surprisingly quick though. I'd kindof like to see around 120mph, but realistically anywhere between 115-120 would be well respectable for such a basic setup I reckon.

Update on the 16G SR20DET setup, frustrating times for the owner trying to find traction - to be fair he doesn't really drag race (car as built with track in mind)... 2nd gear was quite crunchy too, so made life a bit difficult for him too. Ended up running wastegate (around 13psi) in first to try and make it easier to control wheelspin, and 19psi the rest of the way down and best time was 13.0, and best trap speed was 118.4mph which is pretty much bang on what we had been discussing as a target.

Here is a time slip with the highest trap speed, it's the only one I actually got my hands on to take a pic of :-)

post-11136-13925313643387_thumb.jpg

Not sure. It made 250kw @ hubs on 16psi a Dynapack set up how Trent @ Chequered sets his up - we bumped the boost up to around 19/20psi and just checked over the tune to make sure it seemed safe and sensible, so not sure exactly what power it is making there. The turbo should still have a reasonable amount of flow left in it, we didn't go past 20psi because the car only has a 2.5bar map sensor.

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...