Jump to content
SAU Community

Turbo Top Mounts?

Fryday13

By Fryday13,
in Engines & Forced Induction

 Share

Recommended Posts

Fryday13 Collaborator

Fryday13

Posted
Posted

Basically I want to know what the point of having a top mount system for the turbo improves? Do people just get it for look so show off their turbo or does it actually improve any performance? Or is it also a bit like the front facing plenum where some people get it just because they like the ease of access to parts.

Cheers

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/404900-turbo-top-mounts/
Share on other sites
R31Nismoid Grand Master

R31Nismoid

Posted
Posted

Use of space mainly. It's easier to top mount a larger turbo, and cheaper because to low mount you'd generally need a 1-off manifold.

I mean I've seen a GT40 low mounted so it can be done, there is just no room to work on it without major arse ache :)

Centre of gravity/weight distribution and all that shit, low mounting in theory would be better. For street cars it matters not.

And a front facing plenum, generally makes shit harder to work on (save for a plug change). When you split hoses under the plenum, you'll understand the pain that a larger FFP creates hehe. ;)

Fryday13 Collaborator

Fryday13

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ahh thank you very much!!!

I now Understand the Top Mount part, but am more lost ont he front facing plenum, Im assuming you have a front facing plenum so would you say it is still more advantageous to have? I just am nto lookign forward to the day I have to change a plug and have to go through a significant amount of unbolting to do so.

hypergear Grand Master

hypergear

Posted
Posted

A proper top mount manifold with a good waste gating system will make a gain in performance. Same can also he archived using proper low mount. Inlet manifold how ever doesn't gain much or I have seen people went backwards. not much of point changing unless maybe hug power or for looks or intercooler popping installation convenience.

Hanaldo Grand Master

Hanaldo

Posted
Posted

Inlet manifold how ever doesn't gain much or I have seen people went backwards. guess not much of point changing unless maybe hug power or for looks or intercooler popping installation convenience.

Haha well you've certainly changed your mind on that! :P

GTScotT Grand Master

GTScotT

Posted
Posted

I normally like the FFP for giving more flexibility on injector choice. Makes it nice and easy to use a china rail and top feed injectors.

I also believe a top mount is generally beneficial for packaging reasons. If you were to build a nice low mount it would work just as well as the high mount, and as Ash said probably yield better centre of gravity which is a moot point on the street anyway.

in general terms it has been said that the stock plenum has more torque than an FFP due to the longer runners.

also try not to get confused as most people say low mount referring to the stock manifold (because it is a low mount of a sort). as a rule of thumb a quality high mount will have nice gains over the stock lowmount, but if u paid the premium for a custom low mount the performance should match the highmount.

i hope that helps

R31Nismoid Grand Master

R31Nismoid

Posted
Posted

A proper top mount manifold with a good waste gating system will make a gain in performance.

As opposed to a proper low mount manifold/gate setup?

Not one iota of difference between the two at all.

No the opposite - he's saying apart from ease of plug change everything else is harder to get at. You'll get quite good at pulling off the crossover pipe etc after a few goes!

:yes:

Fryday13 Collaborator

Fryday13

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Essentially what I'm reaching for is over 250 rwkw, So I suppose the best question is, Will I require either or both of these to attain this goal? or what are peoples preference to this?

Also is there a quick how to guide for the Crossover pipe removal? Everytime I look at it it just seems a much bigger task than you say

Hanaldo Grand Master

Hanaldo

Posted
Posted

Essentially what I'm reaching for is over 250 rwkw, So I suppose the best question is, Will I require either or both of these to attain this goal? or what are peoples preference to this?

Also is there a quick how to guide for the Crossover pipe removal? Everytime I look at it it just seems a much bigger task than you say

It's two/four clamps, not hard at all!? lol.

Also, 250rwkw is very easily achievable, you don't need a manifold or anything. ECU, injectors, turbo. Assuming you've got the other bolt ons already, exhaust, FMIC, etc.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      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.
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      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.
    • GTSBoy
      DeAgostini 1/8 scale BNR32 Nissan Skyline GT-R Nismo

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      That's hilariously putrid!
    • GTSBoy
      R33 Fuel Pump & Brakes after alarm swap

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
×
×
  • Create New...