Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

E42 (42.5) just happens to be where I can get acceptable injector control and its easy to mix . Now that the United near work has it it's easy to get . Eflex is closer to home but 50 50 with that is E35 and they charge a bit more per litre of ethanol than United does . If you try to make E42 out of Eflex you need 12 of that and 8 of 98 and it gets too easy to screw it up . I have red jerries and black ones and add one of each in the high price cycle times out of my stash , bought when the cycle is low . Fug the Oil co's .

What injectors are you currently running again? I recall something off the shelf Jap ones.

Why not just run straight E85/80 (whatever us coming out of yhe bowser)? I'll put my car on the juice when it's tax return time, that way we can have a better comparison on ignition maps :)

What do you mean OE style Disco?

The short EV14's are 750, 1000 and 2000. There are also the new short 1400cc stainless internal e85 injectors...

If only someone would make an adapter to use top feeds in the side feed rail. You have the Neo rail there though don't you?

Yeah a while back I bought a Neo , Stag actually , fuel rail from Just Jap . I gather later RB Stags are the same as GTt rail wise ?

By OE I meant unmodified standard Bosch , I was wondering if they did anything in the 5-600cc range . I'd like to see the difference spray pattern wise between their biggest standard EV14 and a modified one like an Xspurt or ID . You're probably going to say just buy a set of those , I'm just trying to explore all possibilities to get the best all round result and accurate injector control is part of that . I'd like to be able to have 15:1 petrol type cruise mixtures and to do that I reckon you need injectors with good patterns at low flow rates .

1400cc versions I've only heard mentioned once before , I thought the stainless ones were 1300cc .

Latest update is that slightly more advanced timing did help the up to atmo manifold pressure and low boost torque even at sub 2000 revs . I suppose every time you take restrictions out of a turbo engines hot side you can screw more timing in at least at low boost pressures . Torque wise it's getting more like what the GTRS could do at low revs but mainly at constant loads and speeds , asking it to spin up and make power from low revs/gears and an accelerating engine is a different story . This would be the greater inertia and larger housings causing the turbine to lag behind engine revs until there is enough exhaust energy to kick it in the ribs .

Anyhow I'll give it a bit more advance in the same areas and see if it continues to Improve . Injectors have to wait a bit longer $ wise ATM but that will be the next mod .

A .

Not all the Xspurt injectors are modified, the smaller ones such as 300, 525 are original, they trim the plate off the front to extend the flow rates to 750 and 1000. These still have a great spray pattern though when compared to other 1000's, but they like high fuel pressure.

The 1400cc stainless injectors aren't a Bosch core, they are a new Denso or something. Not even listed under their Xspurt brand... I haven't tried a set yet, although I was thinking of upgrading mine to them at some point. I will be buying a set for the Evo too no doubt, as they are the largest petrol injector they have available, and it's designed for ethanol/methanol.

http://www.injectorsonline.com/indivprod.php?cid=74&scid=11

  • 5 months later...

Have had some interesting conversations with fairly on the know Garrett associated people's.... which made me think of Disco. The impending releases may result in some interesting threads appearing ;)

Let me guess. They're finally releasing the NS111 turbine in GT30 size?

I've made one my self, Its horribly laggy, I then decided to grind it down to 55mm for drive ability. There is a good reason why GT30x was made with an extra blade in the wheel. Take GTRS reading, using identical blade profile, every 1mm increase in diameter = 150RPM of lag, so you can work it out.

  • Like 1

About the only thing the TR30 turbine shared roughly was the exducer diameter at ~ 60mm .

Turbine housings were also unique as were the style of compressor wheel screwed on the other end .

The GT30 UHP turbine , like most in that family , were designed for diesel applications and partly the reason why the trim size is 84 . HKS merely asked Garrett to cast them in higher temp materials and fit a shaft to suit the GT25BB centre sections .

As for the smaller NS111 turbine , I always thought it looked like a development of the one used in the GTiRs T28 turbo . They were 10 bladed and used a larger 79 trim size from memory , both the car and the turbo were a flop effectively .

Everyone including Garretts engineers know they can do better than the GT30 UHP but I reckon they only ever will for an OE high volume app where someone else is paying the development costs .

BW seems to have the best all round turbines ATM so if Garrett is serious about being competitive the materials have to change .

A .

The 48T was the smallest and the 52 the mid trim .

Too busy with other things like working all round the clock and Saturday Sunday are just another day .

When I can get enough days off together it'll eventually go to Insight for a change of injectors rail reg and a tune .

I recently changed back to EFlex because the altered E85 made my car grumpy and gave poor fuel consumption - no matter how I tuned it . Plus I was paying 116.9L for E70 and its closer to home . United is near work but if I changed jobs its a 90 min round trip to replentish my stash - screw that . Getting ~ 400/tank mostly round town .

What I can say for sure is that this 52T is not laggy with a 0.82 IW housing , the engine itself could make a little more bottom end torque but its 148K old now and probably getting tired . 18 year old car with turbo tech that's older than that .

A .

Let me guess. They're finally releasing the NS111 turbine in GT30 size?

Not necessarily that - but possibly to similar effect in terms of frustration for the likes of yourself and Disco. We shall see.

Not necessarily that - but possibly to similar effect in terms of frustration for the likes of yourself and Disco. We shall see.

Something which sits in the 50lb/min flow range would have been my second guess...

Such a tease.

  • 2 weeks later...

You won't find anything, yet - but trust me, there will be stuff soon. I'm figuring you know me well enough that I won't say something like this unfounded :)

As a general idea, expect to see gaps filled in the Garrett turbine range... for sake of arguement, between GT28 and GT30s, GT30s and GT35s and GT35s and GT40s - and where necessary, the compressors to suit the matches.

An interesting one for example will probably be the GTW3476R :)

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 know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...