Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I was speaking to AVO and they said they still sell plenty of their housings so someone must like them..

They are not ideal though and you dont really save alot of money doing it.. so i wouldnt recomend it..

A 400-450hp compressor is all I would throw at it.

I was speaking to AVO and they said they still sell plenty of their housings so someone must like them..

yeah my custom Rb25 highflow turbo, built by ATS Adelaide Turbo Services, utilises the AVO .73 rear housing matched to a stock V45 Nissan comp.housing (machined out) with gt3076iw ball bearing core. Rated to around 280rwkw at ~19psi, capable of 22-23psi, and made to look like the Stock Standard turbo.

The AVO exh.housing works well for the application it is intended for. 250-280kw range, auto or manual, bolt-on option.

I wonder wht the .73 housing flows less than the .63???:glare:

Anything that bolts up to the stock dump pipe is a compromise for the 60mm turbine. There has been disappointment from these housings in terms of their power they make at the top end. So while you feel like you are saving some money on the front end you may end up with an expensive lesson if the results aren't what you want.

The GTX3071 'on paper' will make similar power to the older 76mm GT compressor but history has shown that the AVO will probably max out before the compressor has done its best.

The ARR is just what it sounds like and area radius ratio so there is not much joy in comparing the 0.73 to a garrett 0.63 or 0.82 GT30 framed ARR. The 0.73 seems to flow less than the 0.63 (The Mafia has done more to max out a 0.63 than anyone if you search for it).

I think you will get better results if you suck it up and change dump pipes and use a native garrett housing.

Hypergear results recently are showing some really good results that are very similar on paper to HKS2835ProS, plus the Kando Dynamic turbos also are producing good numbers at great prices but also require a little bit of fiddling around, like a Garrett turbo, the first time you install one.

If you are committed already I would ask if you can change to the Garrett turbine housing instead.

I wonder wht the .73 housing flows less than the .63???:glare:

Already answered, the number is the area radius ratio. If the area and/or the radius is different then.....

You are not comparing two GT30 based turbine housings.

So I take it you are going with a non-garrett housing then?

yeah thats what i paid for mate so ill just bite the bullet and see how this setup goes :thumbsup:

Already answered, the number is the area radius ratio. If the area and/or the radius is different then.....

You are not comparing two GT30 based turbine housings.

So I take it you are going with a non-garrett housing then?

yeah mate im hoping you will be around to see what the end result is too :thumbsup:

this is my first RB and i havent driven a skyline with a bigger turbo before so i wont be able to make a comparison to anything else

im sure what ever the power figure ends up its gunna feel much more lively than the 203kw i have now!:nyaanyaa:

HOPEFULLY IM SATISFIED FOR A WHILE ANYWAYS! HAHA

For comparisons sake, here is a picture of my GTX3071R's 5 bolt rear:

see heres a pic of mine old tech 3076 comp with the modified .64 skyline rear..

i can smash the pedal in any gear at anytime and it goes hard

296019.jpg

compared to stock

6june017.jpg

you can almost see by the size of it its going to choke..It is still very quick on the street with full boost 19psi around 3500 and the small housing does give great response it drops to about 17psi by 6500rpm though, as do most IG and once you get in the upper rev range over say 5500rpm it just isn't as exciting as it should be.

Its making around 240kw @ 19psi which is alot of boost for not much result, but it is an old tech compressor. A new GTX one would make more but not much, 260 maybe, tangles makes 250kw ,if i played around with cams and gears etc it might make more, but I'm not going to bother as its easier to just swap it completely..

its still good fun and very driveable on the street with stock like response. The bit of extra lag it does have helps stop it form stepping out or losing traction to early, so its actually quite well balanced in an unbalanced kind of way :wacko:

I was speaking to AVO and they said they still sell plenty of their housings so someone must like them..

They are not ideal though and you dont really save alot of money doing it.. so i wouldnt recomend it..

post-31977-0-12241900-1314451941_thumb.jpg

The housing is much bigger I do prefer the look of the wastegate being separate on the garrett housing too but oh well its a done deal now so see how it goes when she is bolted in an all tuned up with with my hks cam gears and timing belt

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

    • My first car was a HG. I'm very familiar with them. A mild cam upgrade is a good idea. The 186 is a very flexible engine - meaning it has good torque from down low. You can give up a little torque down low for quite a lot more excitement in the mid range, and a bit more up top - but they are not exactly a rev monster. You need to upgrade valve springs at the minimum. For a bigger cam, you'd want to make sure it wasn't still running the original fibre cam gear. That would be unlikely, given that most of them shat themselves in the 70s and 80s, but still within the realms of possibility. Metal cam gear required. Carbies are a huge issue. The classic upgrade was always a Holley 350, which works, but is usually pretty bad for fuel consumption. The 186S had a 2 barrel Stromberg on it that was very similar to the one on the 253, and is a reasonable thing if you can find one, and find someone to help you get it set up (which is the same issue with setting up a 350 to work nice). The more classic upgrade was twin sidedraught CD type carbs, or triples of same, or triple Webers. The XU-1 triple Webers being the best example. You can still buy all this stuff new, I think, but it's a lot of coin to drop. And then the people able to set them up are getting fewer and further in between. There's still some, but it used to be everyone's** dad and uncle could do it. **Not everyone's! But a lot. All in all, I wouldn't get too carried away with the engine. Anything you do to it without a full rebuild for power and revs will only make it slightly faster. I am all in favour of a complete teardown rebuild, with nice rods and pistons, 10 or 10.5:1 compression, and a clean port job with at least a big enough cam to run 98 with that compression, if not bigger. And if I did that to a dirty old red motor, I'd want to inject it too, which I'd struggle to fight against the devil on my shoulder that would argue for ITBs and trumpets. But the bills would start to mount up, and it will still never make stupid power. OK, a few people still know how to build absolutely mental red motors, courtesy of the work that went into HQ racing and modern knowledge being applied. But even a 300HP red motor is no match for an RB20 with a TD06. So you have to decide what it's worth to you. I'd just put a set of 6>2>1 extractors, a 2.5" exhaust and an electronic ignition conversion/dizzy on it and just run the old girl like the fairly slow old girl that she really is.
    • Thank you so much for the comments.  This is very interesting and gives me some great ideas to think about. Keen to keep it simple and relatively classic looking. That said, i am not too worried about staying 100% period correct.  A little extra performance and relatively good (or improved) economy is just what i am looking for. Ill be keeping any parts i swap out so if i get nostalgic i can always swap it all back in.  Right now just trying to get some good ideas from people in the know (I still have a lot to learn in this space). Thank you again!  
    • Wrt the engine, you're very much limited by 'production quality' as to how much extra power you can extract from them (I'm talking i6 red-motor) -- a lot here depends on how 'authentic' or 'period correct' you want the modifications to be... ...I'm too old... <grin>...the first true performance engine Holden made, was in the HD/HR models ~ this was the 'X2' performance pack...it came with twin downdraft strombergs on an otherwise unimproved intake manifold, with a two piece exhaust manifold (reckoned to be as good as extractors)... ....these engines were built upon the '179HP' cylinder block, which included extra webbing in the casting to make it stronger and less susceptible to block distortion... The next performance i6 came out with the HK Monaro (also found it's way into the LJ GTR Torana ... the car I wish I hadn't sold)...it had pretty much the same manifold setup, but was built against the '186S' block...this block retained all the extra webbing of the 179HP block, but added a forged steel crankshaft (instead of the stock cast crankshaft), because it was possible to snap the crank... ...apart from the inherent weaknesses in the stock (cast crank) blocks, the next limiting factor is the cylinder head porting & combustion chamber design, and the actual valve sizes. Back in the day, you could buy a 'yella terra' cylinder head (from stage 1 to stage 5 gradients), and this was the way to get serious power out of them -- with the extra breathing of these heads, you could fit a triple SU or DCOE Weber setup... ...obviously, these mods were a waste of time on a stock cylinder head/camshaft grind. My housemate rebuilt the i6 in his VH dunnydore about 6 months back -- this is a 186S block with the 12port 2850 blue motor head and intake/exhaust manifolds, with a dual throat Weber off an XF Falcon mounted on an adapter plate ; it's not a bad makeup...got more torque & fuel economy just light-footing it about on the first throat, but stand on it and it makes more giddy-up than the standard 2850 blue motor that it replaced. Personal note: I'd just fit an RB30 and be done it it 😃  
    • Thanks for sharing. That's a great video! My buddy is doing the same thing on his build (S chassis struts and towers). He's building an S14 with billet RB30 shooting for 2000whp... a race car with a TH400 just like this video. For a road car I just couldn't go this route as the strut has to be almost vertical and the caster is not going to pivot correctly (let alone camber gain). You think the R32 frontend is bad, wait till you put a MacPherson strut on without modeling it all in Solidworks to check geometry. I'm not saying it's a bad way to do it but I'd be really curious to see how it affects the geometry.
    • Hey Christof and welcome!  Sounds like an awesome project! I'm not sure many of the regular users on here would know much about the HK but I could be wrong.  Looking forward to updates.
×
×
  • Create New...