Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's almost the same power as mine made on Jez's dyno with 98ron so it must be there or thereabouts. Comparing it to a different dyno in a different state might be bit hit and miss.

i think he is referring to mine on e85 that was a good 40kw higher... so more a blanket statement about fuels and the turbo's capability

that HTA result is nothing short of amazing!

makes me wish i still had my car so I could do a run on the same or similar boost and see the difference.

but I chickened out on 20psi :/

I'm sure Lithium would agree that the GT3073HTA would also be interesting to see wound up on an RB25 . I don't know if FP would ever consider doing a GT3071HTA but that could also have potential . I don't suppose anyone knows which compressor housings they use with the 71 and 73mm HTA wheels ? I think they use T04S 0.70 AR ones on GT3076HTA turbos .

Thinking about it they have a 68mmHTA compressor and I wonder if it could beat the GTX3067R for a razor sharp 300 WKW capable turbo .

A .

FP do a HTA3071 (51lb/min) as well as the HTA3073 you are aware of, there are a few HTA2868s lurking around too. I most definitely do not overlook the HTA3073 at all, I had actually toiled over recommending that unit to 34GeeTeeTee when we first got to discussing upgrades for him which would give him improved response and no loss of power, but it became clear that he'd get a kick out of the extra headroom to go up to the 380-390rwkw (yep - we specifically discussed that power area prior to the tune).

The HTA3071 has a 51.2mm inducer, 71mm exducer so is a smaller compressor wheel than the GT3071R - again like the HTA3076 vs the GT3076R, so you would be looking at something that would make power somewhere between the GT3071R and GT3076R but be stupidly responsive.

After talking to 34GeeTeeTee about his driving impressions the dyno plot doesn't do it any justice (which to be fair I always knew would be the case, but still).... it sounds nuts, I am sure he will make a post at some point on the matter. If what he has said to me so far is anything to go by, then the HTA3071 would be porn for the likes of DiscoPotato and yourself.

I was just looking at an American board and I think they quoted the 71HTA wheel as having same inducer and exducer sizes as the GTX71mm compressor only 7 blades rather than 11 . I think they also quoted these wheels as both having 51 pounds air flow capacity .

A .

They are wrong, the GTX is 54.1mm inducer which is almost the same as the HTA3076 (54.8). The HTA3076 would probably make the GTX3071R feel lazy, the HTA3071 would be something else methinks.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2

Hey guys,

just bought an r33 gts-25t.

makes 330rwkw @ 20psi and was tuned by Unigroup with a Power Fc

Has an unopened rb25det with:

Garrett Gt3582r 0.82

Generic Stainless Highmount

Turbosmart 45mm Gate

3.5" Kakimoto Mega N1 Exhaust w/ no cat

Siemens 750cc injectors & custom fuel rail

Turbosmart FPR

Warlbo 255 internal and Bosch 044 External Fuel pump + Surge Tank

Power FC

Freddy Plenum

Ace Intercooler

Planning to downsize to a Gt3076r 0.82, swap to a low mount steampipe manifold, fit a quieter exhaust + high flow cat.

Hoping to stay around the 280-300rwkw mark.

just food for thought... if it's a street car you would get away with a stock manifold quite easily with that turbo. only time you will see a REAL benefit is if you run e85 and are pushing 350rwkw however then you are also probably going to need slightly bigger injectors.

also look into the FP 3071 for that power

(so we can see some results :P)

Hahaha good old FP :D

Welcome to the club Bennis, when you get the car bring it around so i can have a look :yes:

Hey guys, We have started a dedicated HTA chat so for all info etc please post up in the new thread here -

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/426059-forced-performance-hta-turbos/

  • 3 months later...

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

    • You won't need to do that if your happy to learn to tune it yourself. You 100% do not need to do that. It is not part of the learning process. It's not like driving on track and 'finding the limit by stepping over the limit'. You should not ever accidently blow up an engine and you should have setup the ECU's engine protection to save you from yourself while you are learning anyway. Plenty of us have tuned their own cars, myself included. We still come here for advice/guidance/new ideas etc.  What have you been doing so far to learn how to tune?
    • Put the ECU's MAP line in your mouth. Blow as hard as you can. You should be able to see about 10 kPa, maybe 15 kPa positive pressure. Suck on it. You should be able to generate a decent vacuum to about the same level also. Note that this is only ~2 psi either way. If the MAP is reading -5 psi all the time, ignition on, engine running or not, driving around or not, then it is severely f**ked. Also, you SHOULD NOT BE DRIVING IT WITHOUT A LOAD REFERENCE. You will break the engine. Badly.
    • Could be correct. Meter might be that far out. Compare against a known 5 ohm 1% resistor.
    • @Murray_Calavera  If I were an expert I wouldn't be in here looking for assistance.  I am extremely computer literate, have above average understanding on how things should be working and how they should tie together.  If I need to go to a professional tuner so be it, but I'd much rather learn and do things myself even if it means looking for some guidance along the way and blowing up a few engines. @GTSBoy  I was hoping it would be as simple as a large vacuum leak somewhere but I'm unable to find anything, all lines seem to be well capped or going where they need to be, and when removed there is vacuum felt on the tube.  It would be odd for the Haltech built in MAP to be faulty, the GTT tune I imported had it enabled from the start, I incorrectly assumed it was reading a signal from the stock MAP, but that doesn't exist.  After running a vacuum hose to the ECU the signal doesn't change more than 0.2 in either direction.   I'll probably upload a video of my settings tomorrow, as it stands I'm able to daily drive, but getting stuttering when giving it gas from idle, so pulling away from lights is a slow process of revving it up and feathering the clutch until its moving, then it will accelerate fine.  It sounds like I need to get to the bottom of the manifold pressure issue, but the ignition timing section is most intimidating to me and will probably let a pro do that part.  Tomorrow I'll try a different vacuum line to T off of, with any luck I selected one that was already bypassed during the DBW swap.  (edit: I went out and did it right now, the line I had chosen did appear to have no vacuum on it, it used to go to the front of the intake, I've now completely blocked that one off at the bracket that holds several vacuum lines by the firewall.  I T'd into the vacuum line that goes from that bracket to the vacuum pump at the front of the car, but no change in the MAP readings).  Using the new vacuum line that has obvious vacuum on the hose, im still only getting readings between -6.0 and -5.2.  I'm wondering why the ECU was detecting -5.3 when nothing was connected to the MAP nipple and ECU MAP selected as the source. @feartherb26  I do have +T in the works but wanted to wait until Spring to start with that swap since this is my good winter AWD vehicle.  When removing the butterfly, did it leave a bunch of holes in the manifold that you needed to plug?  I thought about removing it but assumed it would be a mess.   I notice no difference when capping the vacuum line to it or letting it do its thing.  This whole thing has convinced me to just get a forward facing manifold when the time comes though.
    • Update: tested my spark plugs that are supposed to be 5ohms with a 10% deviation and one gave me a 0 ohms reading and the rest were 3.9ohm<, so one bad and the others on their way out.
×
×
  • Create New...