Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi all... i have conducted a TRUE comparison between the two turbos thanks to Sonic Performance and Garage 7. By true comparison i mean the only thing changed was the turbo. nothing else was touched. The result was suprising and disappointing both at the same time. We found that the GTX version DID spool quicker and hence started making torque and power earlier in the midrange. i now have FULL boost around the 3500 rpm mark which for a turbo like that is impressive. Its highly streetable!

The downside is that for the same boost level peak power is changed by .1 of a kw! its pretty much lineball! the two turbos match each other on the graph pretty much spot on.

runs were done with air temp probe and same correction mode and dyno that STatus uses for real world comparison.

Heres the pics.

Solid pink line is GTX, thin red line is GT.

p1020473s.jpg

p1020471v.jpg

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Question:, is running the GTX at the same boost pressure as the other turbo a true 'fair' comparison? I mean... for example if your comparing a gt2871 with a gt4088 you don't leave them at the same boost.

It's interesting to see it ramp hard @ 3500rpm.

And then @ 4000rpm the GTX suddenly stops making power almost as if it's hitting surge. Was that just a case of the tune?

(ie back to back test, no tune adjust?)

Also interesting that its more responsive when other results all seem to show the opposite thus far.

Question:, is running the GTX at the same boost pressure as the other turbo a true 'fair' comparison? I mean... for example if your comparing a gt2871 with a gt4088 you don't leave them at the same boost.

what do you want me to do? run less or more boost?

i feel same boost level should give a truer comparison yes?

Lithium: no tuning.. was just run up. Declan ran out of time on the dyno but the AFR's were the same as before so its still fine.

It's interesting to see it ramp hard @ 3500rpm.

And then @ 4000rpm the GTX suddenly stops making power almost as if it's hitting surge. Was that just a case of the tune?

(ie back to back test, no tune adjust?)

Also interesting that its more responsive when other results all seem to show the opposite thus far.

yeah it probably needs a degree or two added in one part of the map to bring it back inline. this could be due to different airflow charactoristics of the two turbos.

i have seen other peoples results.. but they often have changed other things in their set ups which couldn potentially cause issues. as i said mine is a back to back. use the info as you please.

If the new turbo can flow more than the old one then potentially without raising the boost and/or adjusting the tune to maximize the new found goodness then potentially not really telling of the real difference. That result suggests to me the old turbo had more on it too...

If it didnt nose over hard, it would be looking to pickup a solid ~40kw @ 4500rpm.

Now that would be very interesting indeed.

Good to see a 18psi comparo too where most comparo's have been on 20-24psi for the most part.

Perhaps with more boost the differential between the two would be more noticeable.

Its a good comparison in that most cars are probably only going to run around this level of boost but this result is exactly what I would expect - apart from earlier spool. If you had of reved it to 7500rpm you may have actually seen some results.

I just dont know why you guys are so dissapointed - you only need to compare the compressor maps to see that there are f**k all gains unless your running around 2bar of boost with the gtx.

PS what type of engine management?

Been waiting for this.....the next step is to tune/map for the GTX but don't lift the boost. I reckon the ramp up will likely maintain its margin over the GT a bit better throughout the rev range . But I have a sneaking suspicion that the peak power [for 18psi] will be very similar.

But the GTX would be a lively package on the street, an extra 30rwkw at 3500!!! I'm almost tempted to sell my GT and try one [but I have other plans involving a dirty 30, so this challenge is not for me].

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

    • Physically, you'd expect it to turn the motor 11/8ths faster than a standard one, but I'm not sure of specifics
    • Ironically the GTT was quite reliable in the 7 years of ownership. From memory I've only had to replace a radiator and coilpacks out of inconvenience 
    • Yes I can see how that would put you off HFM, especially with the price of good quality brake fluid. From what I understand it as you say the BM50 is the standard BMC for a R32 GTR, I must admit I would like to go far a Genuine Nissan BM57, but lack of cash prevents that at present. With the price being so close between the genuine BM50 and BM57 a BM57 New it seems a better choice as you gain that 1/16 bore size with the BM57, I would be interested in how much difference you feel with the BM57 fitted. I am going to take SteveL's advice in the short term and see how much actually comes out of that proportioning valve vent and save up for the Genuine Nissan part. Thanks for clarifying the HFM failure
    • Thanks mate. I just got the post inspection 1/2 done from state roads when the starter motor packed up, either that or the car alarm system is having trouble.  OEM part number 23300-AA112.
    • Hi, I though I was coming to an end in finding a replacement starter motor for a rb25de neo. I came across a starter motor from Taarks and a message below stating: Direct fit. 11 Tooth count. All below part numbers have been superseded to 11 teeth. Can some body shed some light on going from 8 teeth to 11 teeth apart from 36-month / 25,000 km warranty for passenger vehicles to 12 Month Warranty. Compatible with the following Nissan part numbers: 23300-20P00 23300-20P01 23300-20P05 23300-20P10 23300-20P11 23300-AA111 23300-AA112 23300-AA300 23300-08U10 23300-08U11 23300-08U15  
×
×
  • Create New...