Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

ok,

I'm running a pair of Garrett GT 2860 - 7's in my GTR, and i'm getting full boost are 6k, which is way too high in the rev range.

I currently had a Gizzmo MSIbc installed, and I have tried a manual controller and its still lagging.

I fitted the factory boost control solenoid and it ran 8 psi @ 4k which is about right.

Anyone else had a problem with excess lag in a GTR? Or have any idea why its lagging so much?

Mate suggested that the wastegates are opening too early, if this is the case can I restrict them somehow?

Any suggestions welcome

-Michael-

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/355457-car-way-too-laggy/
Share on other sites

I'm running a pair of Garrett GT 2860 - 7's in my GTR, and i'm getting full boost are 6k, which is way too high in the rev range.

I currently had a Gizzmo MSIbc installed, and I have tried a manual controller and its still lagging.

I fitted the factory boost control solenoid and it ran 8 psi @ 4k which is about right.

With proper boost control you should be at 16psi by 4k, not 8.

How did you setup the wastegate actuators?

A friend of mine is having the same problem with his GTR, twin GT-RS turbos, 272 cams, etc... Full boost by 5500rpm. I'll find out whats going on when he gets his car back from the tuner.

GT-RS are far bigger and laggier than -7s. Did you mean GT-SS?

A friend of mine is having the same problem with his GTR, twin GT-RS turbos, 272 cams, etc... Full boost by 5500rpm. I'll find out whats going on when he gets his car back from the tuner.

Sounds spot on for those turbos and cams on a 2.6 or 2.8

he said thats whats under the hood, i havnt seen them myself. the car makes 460 awkw though. Would gt-ss make that power??

No way in hell mate, you have GT-RS x 2 there my friend.

GT-SS are hard out pushing 330KW let alone another 130KW on top of that, definitely GT-RS

The actuator rods have a thread on them so you can tighten / loosen them. This would be the first place to look.

Try tightening them up by screwing the end on so the total rod length is shorter. This means the actuator needs to see more boost before it starts opening the wastegate up further.

A friend of mine is having the same problem with his GTR, twin GT-RS turbos, 272 cams, etc... Full boost by 5500rpm. I'll find out whats going on when he gets his car back from the tuner.

Well GT-RS turbos - what do you expect? 800hp of turbo isn't going to be responsive on a 2.6ltr

Sounds perfectly normal - and totally unrelated to the OP as he is talking about R34 N1 turbos.

I'm running a pair of Garrett GT 2860 - 7's in my GTR, and i'm getting full boost are 6k, which is way too high in the rev range.

I currently had a Gizzmo MSIbc installed, and I have tried a manual controller and its still lagging.

I fitted the factory boost control solenoid and it ran 8 psi @ 4k which is about right.

Anyone else had a problem with excess lag in a GTR? Or have any idea why its lagging so much?

Well you've answered your own question.

The EBC install is incorrect. If you've put the factory setup on there and it was instantly more responsive... Then it's rather obvious where the issue is...

Well GT-RS turbos - what do you expect? 800hp of turbo isn't going to be responsive on a 2.6ltr

Sounds perfectly normal - and totally unrelated to the OP as he is talking about R34 N1 turbos.

Well you've answered your own question.

The EBC install is incorrect. If you've put the factory setup on there and it was instantly more responsive... Then it's rather obvious where the issue is...

Well if the EBC is the issue, it would have to be simply doing nothing. By that I mean having the same effect as no boost controller at all....would that really amount to that the increase in lag? Sure, it's been proven to be the issue by his simple troubleshooting - yet I can't see how a boost controller will be the difference in 2000rpm

The actuator rods have a thread on them so you can tighten / loosen them. This would be the first place to look.

Try tightening them up by screwing the end on so the total rod length is shorter. This means the actuator needs to see more boost before it starts opening the wastegate up further.

+1. After you tighten the actuators, make sure they are both working in unison by applying boost to the signal line, and making sure they move together. Otherwise you could flog out a turbo.

For clarity, it appears you have two boost control problems.

1. Probably actuatory adjustment

2. Boost controller installed incorrectly/broken.

+1. After you tighten the actuators, make sure they are both working in unison by applying boost to the signal line, and making sure they move together. Otherwise you could flog out a turbo.

True this - very important the actuators are configured consistently across both turbos.

OK, i'll take a look at the actuators on the weekend, hope they can be adjusted without removing too much

I'm pretty sure the install is correct, there are 2 lines, one for actuators another from manifold. Boosts to target, just takes too long, old controller did the same thing, that's why I replaced it, thought the unit was faulty.

On the note of take it to a pro, can you recommend someone?

Thanks for the input :)

By target, do you mean higher than your actuator's spring rating? Try running a vac line directly from the boost source off the intercooler piping or wherever you're getting it from to the actuators. Completely remove the boost controller from the equation. You said with the standard boost solenoid in place, it made 8psi? If that's the rating of your actuators, I dare say that's probably the issue. While your turbos aren't HUGE, they're certainly flowing a decent amount of air and therefore exhaust even at that low boost, so I wouldn't be surprised if it was just simply overcoming the wastegate flap and pushing it open.

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...