Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey all

I have a built rb30 bottom end running je pistons, spool rods and nitto pump.

The engine builder is in the process of changing from rb25de head running a t04z to a pretty much standard 26 head with only hks springs.

I also have the -9's, ces dumps and port matched standard 26 manifolds that where on the 26 head.

Now I'm after some advice or suggestions on my turbo options

I can either just use the -9's which will add a fair bit of complexity to it all or

have a new rb26 flange welded to my existing rb25de setup's manifold which is a very high quality jap stainless job or possibly weld, drill and face some tabs on the ex Mani to suit the 26's different pattern.

Motor is in a cefiro and I'm intending now for it to be track only and used for general thrashing, drifting, hill climbs and khana's and will be changing to e85 also.

I'm unsure if perhaps the -9''s will choke it up and be the limiting factor?

I'm running Nismo twin Plate clutch and standard rb25 box and don't really want to have to be replacing boxes all the time so power goal is around the 350-400kw mark

Cheers much

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/432651-2630-turbo-options/
Share on other sites

Dump the dash 9's. The response (provided the engine is built right) would be insanely good but you're going to run out of legs pretty quick. They would be brilliant on a car in a motakhana or tight hill climb but not much chop on an open flowing track with minimal tight slow corners to blast out of.

Get a set of -5's or HKS 2530's (I think that's the right number) which are similar in size and will easily get you 400kw on a well built engine with all the other correct supporting mods.

As for your other option of running a single there's a lot of great options nowadays that will still give you great response but a huge topend, especially on a bigger bottom end that will spool a big single up quicker.

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 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...