Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys I noticed quite a bit of oil residue around the (aftermarket) blow off valve. So I opened up the intake piping and found a shitload of oil + water in that murky brown looking shit you get from a blown head gasket. Motor hasn't lost much oil at all infact after driving 1,100 Kms the dipstick is only slightly down from the full mark; I wish I knew how many Kms are on the motor but it seems to be in very good condition.

I bought a replacement turbo from Skyline Spares in Wetherill park. Swapped it over, and my problem is still there possibly worse. The shaft on the new turbo had a small amount of play, but made a slight noise when spun and it would just stop rather than spinning for ages. I was told by the guy who served me this is because they use journal bearings not ball bearings and there obviously wasn't any oil in it.

Was I sold a dodgey turbo? or did I have a different problem to begin with

Thanks

Edited by Blackkers
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/427290-swapped-turbo-still-having-problems/
Share on other sites

Sorry I forgot to mention that I was told that it was likely that the seals on the turbo were blown causing oil and water to leak into the intake. Is this correct?

I drained the coolant when I swapped the turbo so I didn't end up checking (there'd be no point in checking the new fluid). Theres no water in the oil though

its more than likely from blow by. do a comp and leakdown test. and install a good catch can so the intake pipe doesnt suck the oil from the head and fill the cooler pipes up.

obviously also clean the piping out

its more than likely from blow by. do a comp and leakdown test. and install a good catch can so the intake pipe doesnt suck the oil from the head and fill the cooler pipes up.

obviously also clean the piping out

seconded.

if the 2nd turbo was making better boost, will also push more oil out of a worn engine.

If hs turbo seals were completely blown he could get water and oil in the pipe work.

There is no water seal in the turbo, the water runs around the core, so there's no way a turbo could leak water internally.

There is no water seal in the turbo, the water runs around the core, so there's no way a turbo could leak water internally.

Is this true? I need to know as I plan to take the turbo off and back to the wrecker today

edit: I still Have water + oil in the intake piping and coming out of the BoV.

WHERE IS THE DAMN WATER COMING FROM!!!?!?

Edited by Blackkers

Coolant is fine, no oil there.

Oil is fine, no water there (hasn't been changed for 4000 kms)

Is a comp test necessary? low compression can't be the cause of water in the intake

When I pulled the first turbo off there was oil sitting in the compressor housing.

edit: I think I need a catch can, previous owner said he removed an ugly looking catch can from the pre-previous owner.

But what about this damn water??

Edited by Blackkers

See how that picture is taken from one of the pipe after the intercooler (i.e between intercooler to throttle body)... Have you inspected the intercooler and or any pipes directly after the turbo to see if there is any build up there?

water is fairly common in catch cans etc. depends on the climate where u are etc.

i have seen catch cans be filled with water from condensation.

for now forget about the water part and treat it as pure oil. diagnose fron there

Is a comp test necessary? low compression can't be the cause of water in the intake

But what about this damn water??

Combustion gases are full of water. Water condenses once it cools down. So worn rings (low compression) let a lot of combustion gases past into the crankcase which then gets into the turbo inlet.

Okay guys tomorrow morning I've booked a compression test. If the motor is fine (which I suspect it is) then I am taking my ORIGINAL turbo to precision turbos out in Wetherill park to get hi-flowed; I was told $1300, has anyone got experience with these guys? does anyone recommend another place for hi-flow with better service or a more competitive price?

I'll search the forums now but I'm wondering if any of you have experience with this.

Thanks

I'd postpone the highflow until you're completely confident you've addressed the current issue. Remember even if the compression test comes back ok, you still have a problem to fix.

Also, dont forget you may need injectors/AFM/programmable ECU and tune = $$$$

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

    • 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...