Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Depends on where you want to compromise and what you think you will get the most reward from, you can definitely save a reasonable amount of money and still get respectable performance - however with this there is less risk you are going to look back and think... Maybe this could be better, but now I have spent the money.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2

Hehe sounds familiar :ph34r:

And if the Mat now could talk to the Mat who was angsting about whether to spend that money, what would you tell yourself?

STFU and buy it!!! ;)

Yeah power to the ground and I can't get full bore with 245 Michelin PSS and supposedly 271 at the wheels .

My gut feeling is that the 3073HTA in an 82 housing should be a good all rounder in an RB25 provided you don't mind having what looks like a GT3582R under the lid .

A .

harden up princess, buy wider tyres. 245 wide was so 1993

harden up princess, buy wider tyres. 245 wide was so 1993

:laugh:

I stick to 265/35 as its close enough to stock speedo reading! AND at 390kw power to the ground doesnt happen..... At 360ish you can get it to grip up at the start of third if you mash the pedal from the get go..... So at 271 there is no excuse OR poor suspension setup...

I stick to 265/35 as its close enough to stock speedo reading! AND at 390kw power to the ground doesnt happen..... At 360ish you can get it to grip up at the start of third if you mash the pedal from the get go..... So at 271 there is no excuse OR poor suspension setup...

Yep, I ran 255s on the back of mine and at the ~270kw area it was fine - maybe you could feel the tyres struggling a bit in 2nd, but only enough to make it obvious they were earning their keep.... nothing that required lifting of the throttle to let hook up or anything, unless it was wet.

harden up princess, buy wider tyres. 245 wide was so 1993

I can't think of a better tyre than a Michelin PSS.... The traction issue described is far from a fault of the turbo or the tyre (size/make)..

Definitely a fault of the current alignment (or lack thereof)

So are all atp housings crap or is it a hit and miss affair?

People have had mixed bag with their luck with them - so far anyone I have heard of (including on forums) I know who have had issues are ones who have been running the turbo HARD. One of my mates has been running his EVO with an ATP TS 1.06 HTA3582 on pump gas for years (~330-360awkw max) as a time attack/hillclimb car with no issues. That case I showed was actually the only case I know of first hand, no one else I know has had a specific issue - and that car had been run to >500kw @ hubs on an SR20VET with a GT35 hotside and typically raced at race events (not time attack, actual laps) at >400kw so it was pushed pretty hard.

Not saying it WILL happen, but the potential is there.

:laugh:

I stick to 265/35 as its close enough to stock speedo reading! AND at 390kw power to the ground doesnt happen..... At 360ish you can get it to grip up at the start of third if you mash the pedal from the get go..... So at 271 there is no excuse OR poor suspension setup...

fo sure!

I keep hearing the same bs about not being able to get traction from a sub 250kW car, it's becoming a broken record disco, get wider tyres, fix up your dated suspension and stop mentioning you have no traction.

There are plenty of guys making over 300kW and I never hear them having traction issues.

fo sure!

I keep hearing the same bs about not being able to get traction from a sub 250kW car, it's becoming a broken record disco, get wider tyres, fix up your dated suspension and stop mentioning you have no traction.

There are plenty of guys making over 300kW and I never hear them having traction issues.

This exactly.

I had 266kw and coming on boost in 2nd it would spin my Kumho 245 KU39's (comforty/sporty) tyres pretty hard. The car would snap out to 45 degrees, and bash the limiter and go nowhere really,

Then I got pineapples fitted and Nitto Invo's at the rear in 255 when the setup changed a bit and now it doesn't spin 304kw when the rubber is warm.

The setup is king.

A decent diff helps too, the viscous LSD is a piece of poo, as it's a viscous coupler there will be always some element of slip between both wheels.

Correction. As it's a viscous coupler there will always be a shit load of slip between the wheels as soon as you have more than standard power available.

got a decent diff? with 255s mine's not toooo bad at 340, retune in a few weeks might be worse after that :D

Nismo diff in my car! love it!

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...