Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hmmm greaaaaaat, so all or nothing then hhey :/ saw on a thread somewhere that someone was making 200kws with a hks something, I have ... or had 187 with stock turbo so I thought I could get away with something without a tune? Surely you wouldn't tune for 13 kws ?

Might

highflow turbo. low boost

Might as well just run the std turbo at 10 psi. Likelihood of it blowing at that level is low. Likelihood of it taking out the engine if it does blow is also low (unlike on RB26s where it seems to be near certain). Makes more sense than paying for upgraded turbo that will have more lag and make no more power because you're limiting yourself to no tune.

Depending on what the high flowed profile is.

We can highflow it to run on 10 to 22psi reliabily with factory alike response and drive ability on standard ecu.

Highflowed turbocharger is capable of supporting a maximum of 270rwkws on pump 98 and had customers making 320rwkws on e85 With supporting mods.

Depending on what the high flowed profile is.

We can highflow it to run on 10 to 22psi reliabily with factory alike response and drive ability on standard ecu.

Highflowed turbocharger is capable of supporting a maximum of 270rwkws on pump 98 and had customers making 320rwkws on e85 With supporting mods.

This could be read as it is safe to run 22psi on the stock ecu with a highflow, which is very wrong.

Please fix your post so we keep everything accurate.

What is the correct maximum amount of boost you have safely run on a stock ECU with a highflow?

  • Like 1

yes i have massive trust issues with the r33 stock turbo, as it went and the motor ate the compressor wheel and it apparently didnt taste good.
so looks like high flow or nothing at this stage, estimated price to high flow a 33 turbo

also can anyone give me more info on the 34 turbo?

also my 33 turbo went while i was running 9psi, hasnt run anything more in the time that ive owned it either ...

how would the car perform with the highflow turbo and no tune?

I will post a photo of my turbo for more understanding haha

Worse than stock. As I posted above. More lag, no more boost (in fact less boost).

Alright, it might not be that bad, it might even be slightly better. But why f**k about? Just put a bloody ECU in it.

  • Like 1

yeah that would have been the plan if i didnt do some serious motor damage when the turbo went, so now im up for mass coin
thats why hiflow would be good if i got the same or some performance? then later on i can get an ecu, injectors etc and make good power without changing the turbo again

Your ECU wont allow you to make more power with a highflow, it will hit R&R and make the engine hesitate.

What you are after is a standard highflow getting rid of the ceramic wheel. It wont make more power but will live as long as you will own the car.

Will also give you the option of running more boost in the future once you obtain a tune-able ECU.

  • Like 1

Or slap in a highflow and get in touch with Toshi (forums sponsor) for an off the shelf remap using your stock afm, stock injectors, etc. so you can up the boost without falling off the map with your stock tune.

Old turbo died and took out motor... coin spent on new motor, ideally wants more power, but doesnt want to spend more money... hmmmmmmm

I would rather spend $900 on a cheap nistune + tune than getting a different turbo for "reliability".

Your ECU wont allow you to make more power with a highflow, it will hit R&R and make the engine hesitate.

What you are after is a standard highflow getting rid of the ceramic wheel. It wont make more power but will live as long as you will own the car.

Will also give you the option of running more boost in the future once you obtain a tune-able ECU.

This sounds like good advice.

more power isnt really an issue i just dont want another stock turbo to shit itself and dont want to spend even more money on a tune

p.s where can you get a 500 dollar nistune?!?!??!? a friend of mine pain 1200?

also how much would just changing the rear wheel cost ?



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...