Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I always used to love DD because I think they give more realistic figures compared to hubbers, but after using the dynapac lots now I'm converted. The ability to have such repeatable and consistent results so you can actually compare cars and/or modification effects is awesome

Until you have to tune more than 2 cars a day, they are great. I learnt dyno's on a dynapak........ perfect for wheel spin issues as well.

Like an ecu (well most) , its only ever as accurate as the operator.

Edited by HYPED6
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/371179-gt3794r/page/2/#findComment-6410451
Share on other sites

That AWD Motorsports claim of this GT3794HTA being on the GT35R "footprint" is a bit interesting . I suspect they may mean the same mounting flage footpring because the BB GT37 turbos are all larger center section things than a GT3582R/X/HTA .

I hadn't thought Garrett would put together a BB spec GT37 turbine with their GT94 compressor wheel . They did do a GT4094R which people I know of thought was a bit lack luster . Forced Performance seems to be doing quite well with their HTA compressor and port shrouded housing upgrades on Garrett cartridges .

Not knocking what people are doing with these things or GT3788Rs but a little while back David Buschur cranked out from memory 600+ from a stretched 4G63 on E85 with a GT3076HTA , not sure which turbine housing though .

Sorry if slightly OT but there are also 3 variants of the GT37BB series and the mid comp spec one uses the same compressor wheel as the smaller frame GT3582R .

http://www.dieseltru...ew-t288434.html

http://www.completeturbo.com/Dodge02.pdf

http://store.forcedp...TGT3794HTA.html

A .

Edited by discopotato03
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/371179-gt3794r/page/2/#findComment-6411934
Share on other sites

Poor choice of words , what I ment was lacking compared to a GT4294R . From memory HKSs sollution was to use a T51 turbine and a slightly smaller trim 94mm compressor . It may be possible to buy the T51R/94mm cartridge through Garret and source you own housings .

A GT4094R is just a 4088R with a 94mm compressor in a housing intended for an 88mm wheel . The 94 and 102mm compressors usually have larger housings and I think HKS had their own made up for T51R KAi and SPL .

A .

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/371179-gt3794r/page/2/#findComment-6412042
Share on other sites

Not sure why a GT3076HTA making 600whp on E85 would be knocking these? I am not aware of anyone hitting a wall with these yet and people have pulled 900whp on E85 with them on high boost. A DSM in the states has done 8.4 at around 170mph with one.... pretty serious business!

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/371179-gt3794r/page/2/#findComment-6412066
Share on other sites

Sorry still OT but I believe those GT3076HTAs have a lot of potential even on larger than 2-2.4L fourbangers . The GT30 turbine gets a big increase in exhaust flow capacity with even the 1.06 AR T3 flanged turbine housing and FP has already upsized to the larger 0.70 AR T04S compressor housing on this turbocharger .

If I ever built an RB30 and wanted to spend money on turbos this is what I'd use and it'd be on an IW GT30R turbine housing in 0.82 or 1.06 AR .

Anyway back to the GT3788R and GT3794HTA I reckon some of the gains would be from the turbine living in a housing designed for it rather than a GT35 turbine bashed into a bored out GT30 turbine housing a la GT3582R .

Hopefully in time Garrett will make available to the public the large frame ball bearing GT35 turbos using the GT40 turbine housings intended for that turbine .

A .

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/371179-gt3794r/page/2/#findComment-6413143
Share on other sites

Agreed on the 76HTAs, I've mentioned a few times I'd like to see one on an RB25.

In regards to the GT37 vs GT35, in the EVO world the general consensus seems to be the GT3586HTA is an overall better match unless you intend on pushing past 40psi - >800whp Dynojet style with a 4G63. Psi for psi they offer similar power, better spool, better transient response etc - so it doesn't seem like the GT35 turbine is really doing it a huge disservice.

A mate of mine hit 560rwkw on ~25psi using E30 with a GT3586HTA on an RB, with ridiculously good power delivery -fwiw.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/371179-gt3794r/page/2/#findComment-6413155
Share on other sites

Agreed on the 76HTAs, I've mentioned a few times I'd like to see one on an RB25.

In regards to the GT37 vs GT35, in the EVO world the general consensus seems to be the GT3586HTA is an overall better match unless you intend on pushing past 40psi - >800whp Dynojet style with a 4G63. Psi for psi they offer similar power, better spool, better transient response etc - so it doesn't seem like the GT35 turbine is really doing it a huge disservice.

A mate of mine hit 560rwkw on ~25psi using E30 with a GT3586HTA on an RB, with ridiculously good power delivery -fwiw.

On a 2L 4cyl yes I would definitely stay with the GT35 or GTX35. It's only the larger displacement 6 cylinders that seem to benefit from them so much

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/371179-gt3794r/page/2/#findComment-6413643
Share on other sites

So recently one of the American drag DSMs running one of these had a few upgrades and a bit more of a fierce tune recently using a T3 flanged GT3794HTA and lay down 936awhp on a Mustang dyno (read similar to DD/Mainlines).

Its first event it ran 8.48 @ 171mph on E85, and apparently has more in it...

ShopTalonDynoSheet6-7-12.jpg

84slip.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/371179-gt3794r/page/2/#findComment-6422413
Share on other sites

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


  • Latest Posts

    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...