Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Because going straight to a 94HTA might be too much of a jump in one shot? ;)

LOL no no, because of a reason he can't recall :P

Why not super 99? Because of reason cannot recall.

I find it interesting that FP no longer offer twin scroll housings........

E85 and other variants have probably reduced the dependency on twin scroll systems somewhat. This and twin scroll setups are still likely to cap peak outputs....which is no good from a marketing point of view.

Still prefer a twin scroll setup myself on a street car - coupled with E85.

E85 and other variants have probably reduced the dependency on twin scroll systems somewhat. This and twin scroll setups are still likely to cap peak outputs....which is no good from a marketing point of view.

Still prefer a twin scroll setup myself on a street car - coupled with E85.

Yeah, me too. My RB based dream build is pretty much an R33 GTR with an RB30/26 and a TS 3794HTA on the side of it - the concept seems like good thing I get probably a little too happy just thinking about it hahaha

Lol you clowns haha

You get that, because of a reason I can't recall ;)

Yeah, me too. My RB based dream build is pretty much an R33 GTR with an RB30/26 and a TS 3794HTA on the side of it - the concept seems like good thing I get probably a little too happy just thinking about it hahaha

You get that, because of a reason I can't recall ;)

LOL that's the spirit.

P.S. I would say we dream about the same things, but if you were dreaming about my wife I would be worried. So for now it will have to be just our R33 dreams, for reason I can't recall.

Yeah, me too. My RB based dream build is pretty much an R33 GTR with an RB30/26 and a TS 3794HTA on the side of it - the concept seems like good thing I get probably a little too happy just thinking about it hahaha

You get that, because of a reason I can't recall ;)

I cant recall how this all started..... But git farked :P

Quick question - does anyone know whether the HTA turbos use the Garrett cores with the metal bearing cages which I understand are used in the GTX turbo's or the plastic bearing cages as typically found in the traditional GT style turbos.

http://garrettbulletin.com/techcorner/garrett-by-honeywell-ball-bearing-turbochargers

Edited by juggernaut1

I asked FP this question about a year ago and did not get a direct answer. However, they did say the core is an off the shelf GT item and will be the same as what is found in a normal GT3076R.

Thus... Expect it to be a plastic cage.

I sent them an email today .......so will see if the response has changed. Am hoping they are using the gtx cores.

I was looking at the hta 3582 or hta 3586 for my G6E turbo. Otherwise the GTX 3576 would be a punchy performer on the falcon motor.

Edited by juggernaut1

Unless you are ordering this as a 'highflow' alternative to slot into the OEM housing I would definitely be looking at something bigger. Even their 3786 I would say is a better option... Not to go back on the said theme of going 'bigger' but I am sure you could get a local turbo builder to reprofile the OEM housing to accommodate the GT37 turbine, too.

To me I see the barra as wanting a larger hotside than it has a compressor, so if to pick from a 3582 or 3586 logically my theory would say to pick the 3582... BUT results have indicated the 3582HTA packs the usual 3582 punch but sports response closer to that of a garden variety 3076R.

So... It seems like you want a smallish upgrade, but personally I don't think those turbos are good options for the barra. Maybe Lith can chime in and push a super 94 LOL?? Now that would be an interesting upgrade :)

Am unsure if the sheer efficiency of these turbos will mean the 4L motor maxes it out super early (caps power at a low rpm but spools mega quick) or if their said efficiency will mean it can cope.. Perhaps the fact they can cope with 5 bar PR will mean the later... Unsure.

I think HG has also done some XR6 stuff, maybe ask him for a link to some results by PM. (if serious about the small upgrade/highflow path)

Did you see my post a few back of the 3794R on the XR6? There are a few 450-550kw XR6T HTA3794 things lurking in Oz if I understand correctly

450 -500 is gtx 3582 territory on e85 on a stock ford and generally 400 plus on 98. In any case is far more than I am wanting from my daily which has to pull my boat.

Happy to step it down to the gtx 3576 for bit less.

Edited by juggernaut1

I've reconditioned many XR6 BA turbochargers up to date, the highest power level I've seen was 430rwkws on E85 fuel. Probably because there are so many of them, I only found a small percentage of cars been modified. Out of the minority the average power level is between 330~360rwkws, many of them been autos.


On a Rb25det this turbocharger is horribly laggy, throttle response was poor, definitely nothing enjoyable for a daily.

Just for some fun, I dragged a close customer's R33 that currently has a GT3582R .82 turbocharger fitted, with my Kia sportage at his private run way at a farm yard. He's car is "said" to be tuned at 397rwkws, and my Kia has only 176fwkws. He wasn't been able to beat me till 140KM/H, and obviously at that point I could see him flying pass like a rocket.

The 3576 isn't much better then a 3582, which I originally thought it might pickup some response, the difference was very marginal, but it did pull 347rwkws on a stock manifold internally gated at 29psi.

I have finely tuned a ATR45 turbocharger (XR6 BA replacement) to work with a Rb25det, which I will use it for a base map running against those billet SS4 prototypes that I've made. At this point it is pretty derivable unlike the original item. I should have some results tomorrow, and very interested to see if HTA can tackle the lag issue better.

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

    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...