Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 158
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

enough talk, overlay the dyno plots.... lets see which has more under the curve...

and not using some demo car thats been tweaked to get a curve.

Problem with that is it’s not always telling the true story.

Take Garrett -9 & -5

-5 being the larger, more power… However…

Loaded in 4th, they come on almost around the same RPM, about 200-300rpm different. However on the street, on/off throttle you can clearly tell there is a massive difference between the two and it is much more than 200-300rpm.

enough talk, overlay the dyno plots.... lets see which has more under the curve...

and not using some demo car thats been tweaked to get a curve.

Trent is a very experienced and reputable tuner here, he's not going to modify his dyno for me getting happy results and this is not what I'm after either. There is no tweaked demo car, what mods has been put into it is clearly listed in my thread. Have a read through it, pretty much every one's getting similar or better end results and there are also few whom are working through their builds.

The SS1PU billet comp wheel FNT layout is also in my thread, its a good idea to read.

Trent is a very experienced and reputable tuner here, he's not going to modify his dyno for me getting happy results and this is not what I'm after either. There is no tweaked demo car, what mods has been put into it is clearly listed in my thread. Have a read through it, pretty much every one's getting similar or better end results and there are also few whom are working through their builds.

The SS1PU billet comp wheel FNT layout is also in my thread, its a good idea to read.

Im not saying the dyno is being happy for you or anything like that, but your setup has obviously been gone over so many times and rejigged to get consistency its better to see results from people who have chosen a turbo, installed it and got it tuned so thats its totally not biased and a real world example, like were not grabbing results from the HKS demo car are we imagine the argument we would have if we did...

no here is saying anything bad about HG turbos themselves... just laying out the differences between the choice in turbo selection and whats involved to get the setups right.

Im not saying the dyno is being happy for you or anything like that, but your setup has obviously been gone over so many times and rejigged to get consistency its better to see results from people who have chosen a turbo, installed it and got it tuned so thats its totally not biased and a real world example, like were not grabbing results from the HKS demo car are we imagine the argument we would have if we did...

no here is saying anything bad about HG turbos themselves... just laying out the differences between the choice in turbo selection and whats involved to get the setups right.

I have never rejiged the car for better result, I always rejiged the turbo for better result.

I specifically did not build a "demo" car for showing, I'm aware no one will get that sort of result with a every day car. My car's mods are basic and clearly listed, its just a healthy motor with stock head, cams, cam gears and manifolds, typical what most people has. Just Every thing working the way they should.

How ever diagnose what causes power lose is some thing that I'm in the process of sorting out, as every one runs different parts and have a mind of their own. Pretty much all customers whom have sorted their issues or followed my modification guide do end up getting similar end results.

Im not having a go at you or your product and I didnt mean it to sound that way at all...

but I did say 'rejigged to get consistency' not better results

whether you like it or not your car that you post up results from using your turbos is your demo car...

and we've all read how you've set it up to be a normal reliable skyline that any run of the mill owner may have, and I thinks thats great.

but I still prefer the HKS turbo, no if or buts, I like what it does and I dont mind paying for what it offers, and no one can put forward and figures or controversy to say Im wrong in my opinion....

but I still prefer the HKS turbo, no if or buts, I like what it does and I dont mind paying for what it offers, and no one can put forward and figures or controversy to say Im wrong in my opinion....

Yeh because you're not.

The HKS 2835ProS is a great turbo, no doubt about it. It's horses for courses, as much as I would love a 2835, I simply can't afford one nor can I find one. So I went with the Hypergear. Simple as that.

I almost went for a hypergear as well...

so why is it that whenever a 'what turbo should I get for my rb25' comes up all the HG fans and mr HG himself come in and diss every other suggestion..???

I think the 2835 pro s looks great,

However price and hard to find.... Also have to change exhast, not that it's a big deal.

Am I wrong in thinking the atr43ss -2 is quite similar as the hks 2835 pro s?

But at the end of the day with either turbo I'm sure it will still go fair well :)

^^^^^^^^^^ this has been my point for months 75 (post 89), glad I'm not the only one who thinks it.

I do kind of feel sorry for Stao in a way, he has in no doubt done great things for the rb25 community, and he often feels as though he needs todefend his product. There is nothing "wrong" with his turbos, I just believe In Some instances you get what you pay for.

I have admitted before that we have paid an inflated price for the hks tag but in the scheme of things it's really not tha much compared to say a Garrett equivalent when you take into account all the extra bits and peices you need to get the car running with a new turbo setup.

If I was to go back and do the whole highflow thing again (which I wouldn't) I would still by a HG, but when you get to a point of chasing bigger numbers I think the hks does come out on top, it's the HG fanboys that seem to get the sh1ts with these types of comments but as ash said above there is sooooooo much more than a dyno graph.

Those of us that are fortunate enough to have been able to get our hands on the 2835 know all too well just how good the car drive with this turbo, VERY fast but still transient and not snappy, and great off boost. IMO and it is just my opinion I believe that is what makes for the perfect turbo, not just having 300 killerwasps and getting thrown back in your seat, you still want a degree of controllability.

and I actually scored a brand new 2835 ProS turbo for $1600 delivered....

I found the HKS intake pipe, for practically nothing (cant remember) and had a dump custom made for $250...

done... search, be patient and you will find...

then I shouldnt tell you about the other bargain parts Ive accumulated over the years, I search forever for the best price on parts.... like really search and wait until it pops up...

I could start a big list of bargin parts seriously

I personally think its wrong to compare the hks and the HG turbos as they arent even remotely in the same price league!:whistling:

No doubt Mr HG offers great bang for ya buck its great to compare dynographs but is it like comparing an R35 to a Lamborgini????:blink: quote name='Irwin123' timestamp='1323337455' post='6144921']

I think the 2835 pro s looks great,

However price and hard to find.... Also have to change exhast, not that it's a big deal.

Am I wrong in thinking the atr43ss -2 is quite similar as the hks 2835 pro s?

But at the end of the day with either turbo I'm sure it will still go fair well :)

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...