Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

What flange is on your greddy manifold? If its T4 then no.

T3 or 3 bolt then yes.

T67 10cm would be nice on the 2.8, be sure of how much power ur chasing then pick the turbo to suit. Dont concern yourself with picking one to suit your manifold, it doesnt work like that.

+1 a T67 on a 2.8 would be sweet! I would copy SimonR32's setup as much as possible with the 6boost manifold and the Tial MVR 44mm wastegate. Same power with more response would be spaz!

I'm looking for a replacement for my S2 RB25, I've read through this thread but couldnt find a concrete answer, the range of Kandos seems to be a bit tricky. Would something like this (TD06SL2-20g) http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Kinugawa-Turbocharger-RB20DET-RB25DET-2-4-Cover-8cm-T3-V-Band-TD06SL2-20G-/290649134040?pt=AU_Car_Parts_Accessories&hash=item43ac09d3d8#ht_2643wt_922 be ok for a mild setup on my 25? I want an internal gate that will fit on the standard exhaust manifold. Looking for around 250-270rwkw. Would it be alright or am I way off?

I've got a FMIC and exhaust currently but I've got a z32 AFM, injectors, PFC and upgraded in tank pump waiting to be fitted.

Yeah how so? Are they struggling at higher boost levels? I'd be interested to find out. I really want to keep the engine bay looking standard. Id be prepared to sacrifice a little bit of power if it meant keeping an internal gate turbo on the stock manifold. But then again if it's going to be really shit I could just get an external gated one and just try to make it look neat.

Is there anything wrong with the 3" anti surge inlet covers?

Reason I ask is I'm look at getting Eiji to make me a TD05-18G with 10cm (its for an rb20) exhaust housing. And the options are either 2.4" normal cover or the 3" anti-surge. Any negatives for the anti-surge cover or reason to avoid? It'll be internally gated as well against the advice of everyone here.

Interested to see how you go with the TD05-18G. I finally scored an 8cm Trust TD05 housing so will grab a Kando TD05 core with 3" Compressor cover. Will throw it on my external gate / 6boost setup whilst my TD06-20G is being rebuilt. Will be interested to see how the setups measure up.

I need to order either of these by the end of the week. Thoughts? Going on an internally std RB20 with 6boost, Turbsomart 45mm gate, Plazmaman plenum and an 8cm housing.

Anti-Surge Cover

Or

3" Cover

The anti-surge compressor turbo has a slightly different turbine. 11 blade Inconel Wheel

The plain 3" cover is dimensionally similar but 12 blade. I think I will go the 12 blade plain comp cover unless some turbo guru tells me otherwise. Is the 11 blade wheel the TD05 version of the L2 TD06 wheel?

Is there anything wrong with the 3" anti surge inlet covers?

Reason I ask is I'm look at getting Eiji to make me a TD05-18G with 10cm (its for an rb20) exhaust housing. And the options are either 2.4" normal cover or the 3" anti-surge. Any negatives for the anti-surge cover or reason to avoid? It'll be internally gated as well against the advice of everyone here.

Ur brave to go internally gated dude, despite what everyone says- hope it works for u, if it does pple will follow suit, including myself!

Yeah how so? Are they struggling at higher boost levels? I'd be interested to find out. I really want to keep the engine bay looking standard. Id be prepared to sacrifice a little bit of power if it meant keeping an internal gate turbo on the stock manifold. But then again if it's going to be really shit I could just get an external gated one and just try to make it look neat.

Same same, I wana keep it internal too, but i think u can keep the stock manifold if u dont go bigger than TD06SL2-20G 10cm housing.. Which is kinda where im headed, till someone proves that the internal gate works too.. Dont know what the prob is, moreso issues with holding boost n boost creep as u say

If you guys have to have an internally gated turbo then why not go with a proven hypergear??

Exactly.

I really don't understand why people are fussing around with the internally gated Kando turbos when their results aren't great compared to the Hypergears which are working really well IG.

After reading both threads the Kandos SEEM to produce more brutal neck snapping acceleration factor on the street, less issues getting there and seem to love boost and have lot more potential in them, maybe this also has to do with the setups being external gated.. AND theyre half the price of HG turbos (kinda adds up to same with ext gate, custom dump, plumbing etc), but then later down the track u canalways swap a newer better kando turbo cos its cheap!

If you guys have to have an internally gated turbo then why not go with a proven hypergear??

The internally gated TD05-18G 10cm is also available in a Trust kit. Having been passenger in an R32 GTST with one of these and comparing it to my TD06 they are more than enough for the street and deliver a noticeably smoother delivery. But on a 20 still fairly lethal enough to put a smile on your face. The TD05/TD06 really comes alive at 1.2-1.4 bar so screw the boost in I say.

TLDR; nothing wrong with the internally gated TD05-18G 10cm. TD06-20G, id be looking at least at a 45mm external gate (going off the trust kit;s specs)

After reading both threads the Kandos SEEM to produce more brutal neck snapping acceleration factor on the street, less issues getting there and seem to love boost and have lot more potential in them, maybe this also has to do with the setups being external gated.. AND theyre half the price of HG turbos (kinda adds up to same with ext gate, custom dump, plumbing etc), but then later down the track u canalways swap a newer better kando turbo cos its cheap!

wtf?????

Go check out the kando thread on Nissansilvia, few guys have tried the internal stuff with very average results...

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...