Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys, I posted this on nissansil but i seem to find a lot more people using sau, a lot more mature readers to.

Basically went to get my s15 tuned today, sr20 standard bottom end all the fruit, high mount steam pipe manifold td06sl2 20g 10cm (kando in t2 platform) tial 38mm mvs gate.

Issue is, using a .6 bar spring, as it ramps it's ramping to about 1bar of boost then as it increases from 4grand to red line it boosts to around 18 psi.

My theories are - wastegate size could be to small but from everything i have read, there is no issues using a 38mm wastegate to control 18psi on a turbo of that size (very similar to a 3071r if your not familiar with mitsi ranges)

- wastegate is fingered or fake - did pull it apart, diaphram looks legit and paid quality money for it.

- position of wastegate on manifold isn't getting a decent amount of flow to the actual wastegate

- scrap car and buy an r35 gtr

sorry for the novel, help me sau!

here's a pic of the manifold i got made for an idea of what the gate position is like - doesn't look to bad to me

post-41783-0-17417900-1353507326_thumb.jpg

It should work, ish

Gate pipe positioning is not great, what is the transition like inside the manifold.

Imagaine how hard it is for poor old cylinders 1 and 4 trying to muscle through cylinders 2 and 3 to get out the screamer.

Can you just run 18 PSI? Or run the engine with no gate. I have seen 10 psi doing this on crappy manifolds.

As i'm running an auto I sometimes hit the limiter, so my tuner gave me a soft limit between 7 -7.5k. Every time I hit it my turbo overboosts to over 30psi.

Ethanol is your answer.

First, as other have said primary pipe 90deg to the gas flow is not ideal

Secondly, looks like the primary pipe for the gate is smaller than the v-band and then the screamer pipe is smaller than the v-band?

So while you have a 38mm gate, you are putting a restriction before and after the gate.

I would start by getting a bigger primary pipe and screamer pipe to actually the same size (or slightly larger) than the v-band

Edited by SimonR32

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...