Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Have you thought about cams - before you go looking at a turbo or while you choose a turbo system?

Yes, just something I haven't done, im happy with it all how it is, my excellent fuel economy, peak power at over 7000, nice idle etc etc

And how about the off boost effort of these mentioned turbo's in regards to say being in 5th at 3k doing 110-120 and flooring it? the t04z makes about 4-5 pound at 3k and 100kw, but 2000 revs later its well over 300kw.. what do these all make by 3k power and boost wise?

Well as an example if i squeeze the throttle on the Freeway at 110km/h it cracks gate :laugh: Takes a few more psi that 5 to do that as the boost controller was set at 20 :yes:

Yes, just something I haven't done, im happy with it all how it is, my excellent fuel economy, peak power at over 7000, nice idle etc etc

Poncams :yes:

Poncams :yes:

Agreed. I think you will be suprised at what a set of mild cams + cam gears will do...

I think you should consider it, because a better cam profile CAN actually give you more lowdown torque.

Agreed. I think you will be suprised at what a set of mild cams + cam gears will do...

I think you should consider it, because a better cam profile CAN actually give you more lowdown torque.

Can get you more wimminz too i believe!

  • Like 1

how does trents hub dyno compare to roller dyno figures around the vic area stao?

not in vic area, but when car was 300kw it made 4kw less going from a dyno dynamics to a dynapack setup on sae, also looked lazy in the mid range on the dynapack

Im still unsure, What could you do to my current turbo for much better response Stao?

And furthermore, I really like the efr 8374, but is it a bit on the big side for my levels?

Just not sure what will come on faster and not be restricting ?? The hta seems promising too

Im still unsure, What could you do to my current turbo for much better response Stao?

And furthermore, I really like the efr 8374, but is it a bit on the big side for my levels?

Just not sure what will come on faster and not be restricting ?? The hta seems promising too

Sure I can. it will cost you $650 including the turbine housing, and if you don't need it back in a hurry I can do some dyno runs with it for comparison for your final decision.

Sure I can. it will cost you $650 including the turbine housing, and if you don't need it back in a hurry I can do some dyno runs with it for comparison for your final decision.

Im quite interested, what will you do to it? New wheels and tighter rear?

Looking at dyno runs my 22psi is on at just over 5k, how much lower can you make this would you say?

Id love it to come on hard at 4 on the dot if your able to do this?

Also a bit more off boost would be mint.

Keep in mind I have a 1.05 rear so that could go .83 with no ill effects?

This just seems smarter if it will work, saves me 1500 bucks too

Im still unsure, What could you do to my current turbo for much better response Stao?

And furthermore, I really like the efr 8374, but is it a bit on the big side for my levels?

Just not sure what will come on faster and not be restricting ?? The hta seems promising too

The EFR8374 isnt that big? Its not really bigger then the HTA3582. Similar powerlevels, but far better transient response.

6262? Didnt mention it because im bored man. They love these things on evos for a reason. They are weapon

6262 is quite big. They love them, but they are laggy compaired to the HTA3582 and the EFR8374.

Edited by Tonba

The EFR8374 isnt that big? Its not really bigger then the HTA3582. Similar powerlevels, but far better transient response.

6262 is quite big. They love them, but they are laggy compaired to the HTA3582 and the EFR8374.

Sounds like you've got specs in a bit of a knot :P

PT6262, EFR8374 and HTA3586 are probably closest to each other in power potential. HTA3582 is a slight step down in potential power from those 3... I'd look at it like this

Power potential (give or take)

1=) PT6262/EFR8374/HTA3586

2) HTA3582

Response (give or take)

1=) HTA3582/EFR8374

2=) PT6262/HTA3586

Again, general thumbsucks extrapolating from results and comments from people who I've spoken to who have driven the setups - I'd not take it as gospel so much as a general idea of where they roughly stand. I actually suspect the HTA3586 would be slightly more responsive than the 6262 but given my lack of direct experience and knowing the following the 6262 has I'll leave it there.

The EFR8374 is a beast for the response it can provide for the power it can make. The HTA3582 would be ultra responsive, potentially a little more so but again - my lack of direct experience with the EFR means i'll leave that there too and say its just the impression I have from extrapolation.

  • Like 1

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

    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
    • You don't have an R34 service manual for the body do you? Have found plenty for the engine and drivetrain but nothing else
×
×
  • Create New...