Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Looking at going a completely different route with my car and getting a dual tune with BP98 and E85.

Currently making 260kw on BP98 on 1.2bar with stock 34 GTR turbos, full exhaust, nismo panel filter.

With 1000cc injectors and bigger fuel pump, do you think its possible to get 300kw on E85. I will be getting N1s or GTSS turbos at a later stage. Financially it isnt possible to get turbos atm due to my savings for another Japan trip being priority.

Edited by sinistaGTR

Don't know if it's possible, but the amount of money your gonna spend for a tune on e85 with stock turbos, ur better off putting that money towards -7/-9 turbos and at a later date get it tuned on e85

Also dunno if it's worth pushing the stock turbos that hard

Not possible safely.

280-290 is do-able... 40rwkw hike wont come from E85 alone. Which means pushing stock turbos further than you already are.

Personally id never go above 1bar with stock items given if they let go, your engine stands a reasonable change to go with it.

for 3000 posts im surprised you have to ask, but i guess SAU is pretty big forum :) listen to ash though, he's got a lot of experience with this :D

you might do looking through guilt-toys thread, that should give you some ideas on where to gain performance without much cost.

for 3000 posts im surprised you have to ask, but i guess SAU is pretty big forum :) listen to ash though, he's got a lot of experience with this :D

you might do looking through guilt-toys thread, that should give you some ideas on where to gain performance without much cost.

If your hinting at me to search, i actually sat here for the past 2 hours looking through different crap on E85 and there was no answer on my specific question. Yes I know ash has the experience hence why I asked the question.

:action-smiley-069: 293rwkw on v-power and stock r32 turbos @ 1.3bar or 19psi for 5 years and still going strong ( i only use that boost for dyno and drags and do not do a burnout ), 300 on 34 turbos with E85 should be easy with the right setup and tuner. scott at insight has said if i go aftermarket injectors and E85 he can get another 20-25rwkw out of my setup

the different design of the 34 turbos makes them stronger then the 32-33 turbos so they will handle a little bit more boost

U sure u got stock r32 turbos? Ur car might have n1's without u knowing...

i have and have played with GTRs for near ten years, there is not much i don't know about them, i changed the turbos about a year ago with the pair that originally came with the car cause the bearings where floged out on the ones on the car( from half cut i put in in 2006 after spinning a bearing at wakefeild), the front housing is .42 and the rear is .48 and a magnet will not stick to the exhaust wheel on either pair

well depends how much he drives, the stockies will do 300kw no problem, just depends on longevity :D

pretty much a daily driver but i don't drive on full boost every where i go and general duties and track use it is on 15psi (261rwkw) and not much more then 1/4 throttle

yea well 261rwkw is much more realistic power for longevity...

one thing im confused about, you say you have stock r34gtr turbos, aren't they N1 already?

No. It's a common misbelief that R34 turbo's have NON ceramic turbines.

R34 GTR turbo's still have Cermaic turbines, N1 turbo's were on the N1 and NUR's only. The V-Spec or V-Spec II's did not have steel turbines.

No. It's a common misbelief that R34 turbo's have NON ceramic turbines.

R34 GTR turbo's still have Cermaic turbines, N1 turbo's were on the N1 and NUR's only. The V-Spec or V-Spec II's did not have steel turbines.

yeah this /\ /\ , the r34 turbos are a completely different turbo to the 32-33, housings and wheels, still ceramic but due to the design of the exhaust wheel they can stand a bit more boost

Thelen, do you mean the ones i have for sale?,only the NUR 34s get N1s

I have tested a known metal turbine with a magnet and the magnet doesn't stick to it.

interesting, i just tested that theory on a brand new TD06-20G i have sitting in shed and not only did a pick up magnet not stick it actually was repealled from it,so thanks to john from UAS for that useless test.

makes no differnce to the fact the turbos on my 32 still stock, the housing are stock size and the numbers match the factory listings, neither pair appear to be modified and from the history i have on the turbos its unlikely that both sets have been upgraded and both sets made same power, within 3rwkw of each other 4 years apart.

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...