Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 66
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

yep and i bought the dump pipe of (the mafia) its not the normal split dump

he made it i think from memory or am performance did but im in the process of getting a bell mouth made as ive got the rear housing machined tried different actuators, flapper travels fine and doesnt foul on anything

post-74999-0-68661100-1351202068_thumb.jpg

my rear housing is the photo stao put up on the 1ST page of this thread

when i removed the turbo there was a fair bit of carbon around the wastegate/screamer hole in the dump pipe so it looked like had trouble

i had to rule out the actuator so i tried a 1 bar 17psi 18 psi 20psi and they all went straight up to 23psi fairly quickly in 3rd/4th/5th

My issue with "split dumps" , particularly for these IW Garrett turbine housings . is that the fabricators often merely holesaw a round hole through the flange plate and weld the seperate tube to that .

This is my theory , the gasses out of a turbine housing are hot and getting real hor by the time the waste gate was to open to regulate turbine speed/boost pressure . Hot gasses want to expand and don't like a passage opening up and then closing particularly into a round hole with sharp edges , a bit like a non matching manifold/port flange .

I think to make a propper split dump you need to have a matching sized and shaped hole through the flange plate and the tube/duct then needs to grow in section to handle the gas flow rate .

I honestly can't say through experience but logic suggests that any restriction between the waste gate and where the seperate duct meets the exhaust down stream will limit how much the waste system flows and if it doesn't flow enough it won't control boost .A restriction doesn't have to be the waste gate itself and you should view the waste section as from the valve to where it rejoints the rest of the system .

If you go the seperate tube particularly with a modest AR turbine housing I think this is somewhere that a little overkill size wise is a good idea .

I don't want to reignite the split vs bell mouth dump debate but with these Garrett GT30 IW turbine housings you already have a partial divider between the turbines outlet and the waste gates valve so the waste flow won't go straight into the main outlets path IMO .

The bellmouth with give a large area for both to vent into and you shouldn't get any pressure rise higher than what the turbines outlet has , if you did with the split duct then you're behind the eight ball boost control wise anyway .

A .

to true from most posts and tuners ive spoke with ive been advised to use a bellmouth as my one from experience isnt the best lol prob would have something todo with getting my head/manifold/turbo flange and turbo all machined and port matched so id assume from those extra gasses are not going to be helping what so ever

im just wanting to know if it could be something else im overlooking or havent thought of

the boost source is of the hotside cooler piping not far from where most of the nipples are on the turbo front housing

it hits 16psi then raises with the rpm upto 23-25psi when i just have the actuator with no boost controller

when i use my gizzmo ebc it shoots straight to 23psi lol

Unsure if its been mentioned but is there anything obstructing the rod from the actuator to the gate? The actuator may be fine but if the rod hits something the flap may not b opening far enough for the gasses to pass through at higher rpm. Might be something free to check.

nothing is stopping it from opening completely and my gt3076 .82 make 289rwkw at 17psi by 5650rpm but that wasnt a complete tune as we were still trouble shooting so theres no real need for a ex gate as im wanting to stay internal

if a xr6 can make 450-500rwkw i think a little gt30 on a 2.5 litre can make 300-320rwkw without the need for a external gate so my next job is to make/fit a bell mouth dump pipe

just a little upset with the forum member off here who sold me the dump pipe and say it was perfect and made 312rwkw

No two setups are the same.

Try running a new hose directly from the boost source to the actuator. If that fails, perhaps try another pressure source? The .82 with a larger wastegate port should flow fine. Only by changing the dump will you know if it's a problem I guess.

My GTX over-boosts with a 45mm external gate hanging off the side, but it is caused by my soft limiter backing out timing at 7300 revs.

It may not suit me personally but for easier power and less regulating issues the mid sized turbine housing may have been a better choice for you .

I feel the big issue with most integral gates is that its hard to get the exhaust gas to turn 90 degrees and flow out the port when the gas speed is high .

The larger the housing AR the lower the gass speed is through the housing for a given output . Externals if located properly make life a lot easier because they tend to be larger and flow better when open - if located properly .

You occassionally see externals plumbed to an IW housings std outlet and you have to ask if its much better than the original flat valve .

Just on those XR6T hybrid GT3582R/GT3576Rs . Ford went with the larger 1.06 AR turbine housing - and like all Garrett IW T3 flanged GT turbos - used a GT35 turbine in a GT30 housing . They went bigish on the hotside and smallish on the compressor housing because it was intended to be a low boost pressure sollution for a reasonably big 250 Cube/4 litre I6 .

I reckon the later versions went back to the 76mm compressor because the overall package better suited their needs and boost control was probably easier as well . Anyway at over 300 Kw they are supposed to pull fairly hard in a guesses 1800 odd Kg barge .

That same Ford spec GT3576R could be an interesting turbo to try on a street RB30 with the right sorts of things done to it .

A .

this prob has nothing to do with much, but last time i tried running my vac source from the hot side i got nothing but spiking, eventually going back 2 inlet manifold for vacum source and it worked perfectly.

Probably not related. I moved my boost source from the vacuum manifold to the top of the compressor housing on the turbo. You don't really want vacuum in that line.

It may not suit me personally but for easier power and less regulating issues the mid sized turbine housing may have been a better choice for you .

I feel the big issue with most integral gates is that its hard to get the exhaust gas to turn 90 degrees and flow out the port when the gas speed is high .

The larger the housing AR the lower the gass speed is through the housing for a given output . Externals if located properly make life a lot easier because they tend to be larger and flow better when open - if located properly .

You occassionally see externals plumbed to an IW housings std outlet and you have to ask if its much better than the original flat valve .

Just on those XR6T hybrid GT3582R/GT3576Rs . Ford went with the larger 1.06 AR turbine housing - and like all Garrett IW T3 flanged GT turbos - used a GT35 turbine in a GT30 housing . They went bigish on the hotside and smallish on the compressor housing because it was intended to be a low boost pressure sollution for a reasonably big 250 Cube/4 litre I6 .

I reckon the later versions went back to the 76mm compressor because the overall package better suited their needs and boost control was probably easier as well . Anyway at over 300 Kw they are supposed to pull fairly hard in a guesses 1800 odd Kg barge .

That same Ford spec GT3576R could be an interesting turbo to try on a street RB30 with the right sorts of things done to it .

A .

Exactly.

Which is why the XR6 Turbo doesn't suffer from these same issues.

Finally someone who agrees with me :D

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

    • There's plenty of OEM steering arms that are bolted on. Not in the same fashion/orientation as that one, to be sure, but still. Examples of what I'm thinking of would use holes like the ones that have the downward facing studs on the GTR uprights (down the bottom end, under the driveshaft opening, near the lower balljoint) and bolt a steering arm on using only 2 bolts that would be somewhat similarly in shear as these you're complainig about. I reckon old Holdens did that, and I've never seen a broken one of those.
    • Let's be honest, most of the people designing parts like the above, aren't engineers. Sometimes they come from disciplines that gives them more qualitative feel for design than quantitive, however, plenty of them have just picked up a license to Fusion and started making things. And that's the honest part about the majority of these guys making parts like that, they don't have huge R&D teams and heaps of time or experience working out the numbers on it. Shit, most smaller teams that do have real engineers still roll with "yeah, it should be okay, and does the job, let's make them and just see"...   The smaller guys like KiwiCNC, aren't the likes of Bosch etc with proper engineering procedures, and oversights, and sign off. As such, it's why they can produce a product to market a lot quicker, but it always comes back to, question it all.   I'm still not a fan of that bolt on piece. Why not just machine it all in one go? With the right design it's possible. The only reason I can see is if they want different heights/length for the tie rod to bolt to. And if they have the cncs themselves,they can easily offer that exact feature, and just machine it all in one go. 
    • The roof is wrapped
    • This is how I last did this when I had a master cylinder fail and introduce air. Bleed before first stage, go oh shit through first stage, bleed at end of first stage, go oh shit through second stage, bleed at end of second stage, go oh shit through third stage, bleed at end of third stage, go oh shit through fourth stage, bleed at lunch, go oh shit through fifth stage, bleed at end of fifth stage, go oh shit through sixth stage....you get the idea. It did come good in the end. My Topdon scan tool can bleed the HY51 and V37, but it doesn't have a consult connector and I don't have an R34 to check that on. I think finding a tool in an Australian workshop other than Nissan that can bleed an R34 will be like rocking horse poo. No way will a generic ODB tool do it.
    • Hmm. Perhaps not the same engineers. The OE Nissan engineers did not forsee a future with spacers pushing the tie rod force application further away from the steering arm and creating that torque. The failures are happening since the advent of those things, and some 30 years after they designed the uprights. So latent casting deficiencies, 30+ yrs of wear and tear, + unexpected usage could quite easily = unforeseen failure. Meanwhile, the engineers who are designing the billet CNC or fabricated uprights are also designing, for the same parts makers, the correction tie rod ends. And they are designing and building these with motorsport (or, at the very least, the meth addled antics of drifters) in mind. So I would hope (in fact, I would expect) that their design work included the offset of that steering force. Doesn't mean that it is not totally valid to ask the question of them, before committing $$.
×
×
  • Create New...