Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey all

Up for sale are my -7 turbos off my R33 GTR as I have upgraded to a GT35.

They have done 38,xxxkms and the condition of them both are perfect.

There is NO shaft play at all, not even the slightest and they do not leak any oil what so ever.

They made 398hp on my gtr on 1.25bar.

Im chasing 1700 for them, that includes delivery to your doorstep, anywhere in Australia.

Pics up tomorrow!

Location: Perth, WA

0401 564 822

Cheers

oz

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/377817-fs-2-x-garrett-2860-7-turbos/
Share on other sites

Apologies to those who have contacted me about these turbos.

I have finally got them back from MTQ and are in excellent condition as I thought, paperwork to confirm this is available to those who are interested.

5SAeql.jpg

RhtWTl.jpg

I am chasing 1700 delivered, they are ready for shipment now.

That price also includes the 7psi garrett actuators as per pics.

Thanks

  • 2 weeks later...

Not really mate, that would make the other turbo alot harder to sell! If theres 2 people wanting a turbo each then I will seperate them but not just 1.

Sorry.

Ok i just got yet another person asking me if these are Ball bearing turbos. YES they are BOTH ball bearing turbos with steel exhaust wheels.........

I wasnt aware that any turbo referred to as a -7 was a non-ball bearing unit. :domokun:

  • 2 weeks later...

the -7s and -9s (aka GT-SS) are on the same level in terms of power and response, not sure on the exact differences but id say they are atleast 90% the same.

-5s are bigger and laggier and make more power.

GT-RS are bigger and laggier than the -5s but make more power again.

I had stock cams, stock engine, 700cc inj and pfc DJ. These turbos could have made more if I ran stronger actuators that could hold boost higher till redline (eg HKS 1bar actuators)

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...