Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Alright guys, I tried searching couldn't find an answer for what I was looking for.

I'm going to run an external gate on my r33, I'm wondering if swapping between plumbing back and running screamer will it affect the tune?

I'd run screamer usually but if I run into trouble with the popo I obviously would have to plumb in.

Everything would be v band to make life easy between swapping a plumb pipe in or swapping to a screamer with a blank on the dump.

Would swapping between the two affect the way the car drives?

Merge the two a decent length down the exhaust and make the merge angle blunt as possible. It shouldn't effect the tune a great deal if the merge is okay.

I know there is guys who have back to backed with external gates and reckon they gain hp venting to atmosphere. I'd like to see how the merge was done in those examples

I didn't notice any difference plumbing mine back in at the cat..

.except the car is a shit load quieter and more enjoyable to drive now...screamers get boring real quik n a street car and the disadvantages far outweigh the benefits

I say yes as back pressure will increase with the plumb back......How much of a difference??? I dont know

If back pressure increases in the exhaust its due to the merge of the two gases not being correct. Not because the waste gate is plumbed back

If back pressure increases in the exhaust its due to the merge of the two gases not being correct. Not because the waste gate is plumbed back

If you plumb the waste gate in, you're pushing more gas down the exhaust, so it will always increase back pressure, even if the merge is perfect. If the exhaust is properly sized the increase will be negligible. If its too small, it will be significant.

The ammount of exhaust gas being bypassed on boost is not that great compared to the ammount required to drive the turbine.

Years ago I did a back to back on my race car with internal GTRS turbos and then the same turbos with external gates/screamers and welded up internal flaps. Made no power differnece but boost control was more steady over a long period (say ec main straight and Bathurst)

We ran it on the dyno twice and the tune was the same. All the lambda logging was the same too. Only differnece was the boost was a steady 28psi instead of a slight wave from 28-30psi.

A waste gate merged at 90deg to the main pipe or even 45deg to the main pipe is not much good but is the normal easiest way to do it.

You won't notice squat difference driving it around on the road if the merge is good.

Mine merges into the front of the cat body. So a 3inch front pipe and 2 inch screamer enter a 5inch body cat seperatly then exit into 3.5 inch exhaust...sound is sex on boost too... :)

Mine merges into the front of the cat body. So a 3inch front pipe and 2 inch screamer enter a 5inch body cat seperatly then exit into 3.5 inch exhaust...sound is sex on boost too... :)

The thing to look at is surface area not diameter.

Your 3in exhaust is 7.06in

Your 2in screamer is 3.14in

Total surface area of 10.20in

A 3.5 system has a surface of 9.62in

I can't see that being a problem as a 2inch screamer pipe is way overkill and you wouldn't be anywhere near its capacity.

Most 1.5in gates are adequate

So 3inch at 7.06in

1.5 screamer at 1.76

Total of 8.82in surface area

A 3 inch exhaust would Sufice and not be a restriction at most people's level if the merge is right

We've regularly used 1.5in gates on 400-450kw engines with no problems so I highly doubt the 1.5 screamer is at capacity on most people's 300ish kw setups

A 3.5 inch exhaust (which is typically what we use for anything 400kw +) would have a greater surface area than the dump and screamer pipe. It couldn't possibly be a restriction if the merge is done right.

My math might be off having done it on an I phone calculator but it appears correct.

area of a circle app(android)ftw!

twin 3" exhaust, nearly identical to 4" single.

also consider what youll use the car for.

alot of tracks in motorsport dont allow gate.

and you may have to run 2 tunes to make the most from it.

Ask your tuner about tunes.

I remember talking once to dvs jez, and he didn't sound confident on tuning a screamer for 95octane.

if it didn't make a difference, it wouldnt matter.

I run mine both ways, no problem.... :)

The Haltech would adjust for it no problem man.

How my old tuner explained it anyway, I asked if it could be done and he said with the Nistune it's a bit difficult but with something like the Link it would be easy.

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


  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...