Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Fingers crossed mate! Hasnt been the smoothest start BUT at least you know you have killer performance to look forward too! A nice eye opener for some ;)

The ECU was in the car when I bought it, could've been to the bottom of the ocean for all I know...

Oh dammit, I had assumed it was a mostly fresh build. Back to my initial sentiment, I hope it isn't a major - this is probably my favourite GTS25t build I've caught wind of and is going to be a potent race car when it's sorted, so close!

Thanks Lith, it's my favourite GTST build too! :yes:

Gotta say, I actually prefer the look of it to my 32 when side by side in my shed. It's really starting to appeal to me.

I think my son my have his hands full getting it off me once done!

I actually drove it last weekend at SMSP South in a club day. Still on run in tune and oldish tyres. Enjoyed it, handled well, made it through the whole day without any issues, all good!

Managed a 1:03 which given the power, tyres and the fact I'd never driven the South Circuit before was not too shabby. Reckon it'll be fairly quick once finished.

Thanks again for your help.

That is awesome! So the run in tune was still the 390hp or whatever it was? I assume it feels fairly responsive as per the dyno print out? :D

I really want to try the South circuit, looks like fun!

VCT was off, another part of the glitch. Not really responsive to be honest, needs more powah!!!

I wasn't revving it particularly hard though, nothing over 6000rpm, that wouldn't have helped.

I hated the South Circuit after the first run but kind of warmed to it's little challenges throughout the day. Would go back.

A bit surprised it doesn't seem that responsive, though 6000rpm and no VCT will be keeping it from sharing its best - as you indicate. Hopefully with more rpm, more boost, and it's proper cam timing in effect it will become a different beast :)

And awesome to hear it has had a bit of an outing, well promising!

Well I now know why it felt sluggish last week. It had a hole in the silicon joiner off the turbo. Was only making 225kw.

I drove it again last week on 16psi/280kw and managed a few 1:44s around EC full circuit. Looking forward to a high boost run when it stops blowing up silicon. Managed to destroy 3 hoses in 3 sessions.

That's frustrating, but good to know its not an indicator of the turbo's performance. How was it's response without the leaks? Granted at 280kw it still won't be showing its full magic - but its got to have been a bit better!

Thanks for the updates, looking forward to hearing how it goes with the wick wound up a bit - those sound like really sharp times already! What times does the GTR do there?

Well I now know why it felt sluggish last week. It had a hole in the silicon joiner off the turbo. Was only making 225kw.

I drove it again last week on 16psi/280kw and managed a few 1:44s around EC full circuit. Looking forward to a high boost run when it stops blowing up silicon. Managed to destroy 3 hoses in 3 sessions.

That would explain a few things... I'll keep the silicon joiner thing in mind now :O

That is a damn quick time for EC mate! Wow!

what about the T04z?

They make that power and then some all day, infact it's what Denzo has on his drift s15/RB30 so its good for response

It's an RB30..... Different story!

The numbers and response this turbo is producing will be impressive... If not the HTA3582 would still be considered responsive and make more power again...

If you see the times already done as per the post about you will realise this is one fast and well setup car! That sort of time on low power is a good indication of things to come! :woot:

  • 3 weeks later...

Guys,

About to build another track car and want to go down a different route to my current R32.

This one will be a rear wheel drive GTT

I'm looking for a single turbo/manifold combo that will net around 370kws.

Motor will be kept pretty simple with a built bottom end, drop in poncams, very little headwork, running on E85.

Looking for 20psi by say 4000rpm.

Give me your thoughts please.

If I were building exactly the same thing, going by the things I've seen out and about these days - I'd go for a single entry FP GT3076R HTA with .82a/r hot side on a 6boost manifold.

I'd say your 370kw on E85, and 20psi by 4000rpm should be pretty achieveable with that combination - potentially with change.

I'd like to take this opportunity to say BOOM! headshot. Can confirm the above setup is capable of 20psi by 3700rpm and 391rwkw, so plenty of change - courtesy of R34GeeTeeTee doing everything mentioned bar the built bottom end, and E70 instead of E85. I like being right, especially when I would look like a right douche if I wasn't :D

See the attached dyno plot - has his 360kw GT3076R result to compare with the new HTA result, the old faithful GT3076R has no answer for the HTA anywhere.

post-11136-0-14045500-1369405886_thumb.png

  • Like 1

thats awesome!

148000kms = original?

100% original including the headgasket mate! Car ran 200kw for a while up too 115000km, 250kw up to 150000km and then 360kw to where it is now... The 391kw starts at 148000km with its first actual drive tomorrow...

During the turbo swap we kept this quiet and say back to see what people had to say, it is now proven twice that these turbos are more than capable and as Lith said the old GT3037 had nothing on the new HTA76... That 3037 was maxed 100% too...

  • Like 1

I'd like to take this opportunity to say BOOM! headshot. Can confirm the above setup is capable of 20psi by 3700rpm and 391rwkw, so plenty of change - courtesy of R34GeeTeeTee doing everything mentioned bar the built bottom end, and E70 instead of E85. I like being right, especially when I would look like a right douche if I wasn't :D

See the attached dyno plot - has his 360kw GT3076R result to compare with the new HTA result, the old faithful GT3076R has no answer for the HTA anywhere.

It certainly was a good call lithium, wish id of gone TS HTA now, but im still happy,

looking at the printout, the HTA is running more boost than the GT3076 so is this because the GT3076 is out of efficiency and cant run that same boost?

It certainly was a good call lithium, wish id of gone TS HTA now, but im still happy,

looking at the printout, the HTA is running more boost than the GT3076 so is this because the GT3076 is out of efficiency and cant run that same boost?

We tried more boost in the 3037 bit it had nothing left to give...

how would the HTA 3076 compare to the HTA GT3582R that lithium was advising in another thread

If I were to extrapolate from what I have seen elsewhere I would say prepare to see around around 400rpm more lag and maybe up around 460-470rwkw on E85 with the right setup and the end result shouldn't be too surprising.
  • Like 1

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

    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
    • I know I have to get a wheel alignment but until then I just need to bring the rear tyres in a bit they're wearing to the belt on the inside and brand new on the outside edge. I did shorten the arms a bit but got it wrong now after a few klms the Slip and VDC lights come on. I'd just like to get it to a point where I can drive for another week or two before getting an alignment. I've had to pay a lot of other stuff recently so doing it myself is my only option 
    • You just need a wheel alignment after, so just set them to the same as current and drive to the shop. As there are 2 upper links it may also be worth adding adjustable upper front links at the same time; these reduce bump steer when you move the camber (note that setting those correctly takes a lot longer as you have to recheck the camber at each length of the toe arm, through a range of movement, so you could just ignore that unless the handling becomes unpredictable)
×
×
  • Create New...