Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I am chasing low end torque in my R34GTR, so I am changing the T78(Dyno chart) for a PT6262 and adding poncams Bs on a strong motor.

I am booked in for the work next week and have asked for the car to be tuned for more low end torque. As you can see from the Dyno reading (as I was told) is bad and would be a bitch to drive, it is.

They said with the new turbo and cams they can tune it to the response I asked for and will be happy with the results.

Has anyone got a Dyno readout to show me what more Torque looks like on 338KW so I can compare it.

post-52098-0-06933700-1396423916_thumb.png

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/441405-changing-t78-to-pt6262-for-torque/
Share on other sites

Hi Peter,

I can't comment on the PT6262 as I have no experience with them however would suggest you match the turbocharger to your requirements (power v response). The T78 is far too big a turbocharger for the power you're making and there are far more responsive options that will yield better results.

If you would like options feel free to give me a call.

Regards,

Andrew Sullivan

Kudos Motorsports

(07) 5641 1171

Had a look at posts and it does help me understand it, my curve is very low and slow to rise , just like it is to drive, lots of gear changing and a pig to do step hill starts and goes hard after 5k. If I did not live in the bush I would hardly ever use the turbo.

Thanks everyone for that info and it helps me and it lets me see how laggy mine is.

When they are doing the work I will have them email me a reading, at least now I have some idea if it is going to be OK and I will post it before I go to Sydney to pick it up, hopefully you and others can comment if you think they have done a good job ?

My dyno torque reading just looks so dead compared to most of the others here with similar KW.

They said the motor mods etc will handle more power, maybe need more fuel but I have enough HP, I just want a fun street car not a laggy heap

Had a look at posts and it does help me understand it, my curve is very low and slow to rise , just like it is to drive, lots of gear changing and a pig to do step hill starts and goes hard after 5k. If I did not live in the bush I would hardly ever use the turbo.

Thanks everyone for that info and it helps me and it lets me see how laggy mine is.

When they are doing mine I will have them email me a reading, at least now I have some idea if it is going to be OK and I will post it before I go to Sydney to pick it up, hopefully you and others can comment if you think they have done a good job ?

My dyno torque reading just looks so dead compared to most of the others here with similar KW.

They said the motor mods etc will handle more power, maybe need more fuel but I have enough HP, I just want a fun street car not a laggy heap

Hi Peter,

I can't comment on the PT6262 as I have no experience with them however would suggest you match the turbocharger to your requirements (power v response). The T78 is far too big a turbocharger for the power you're making and there are far more responsive options that will yield better results.

If you would like options feel free to give me a call.

Regards,

Andrew Sullivan

Kudos Motorsports

(07) 5641 1171

Thanks Andrew but the car goes in on Monday for the mods

The car has had a lot done on the motor and was a work in progress, T78 was part of the build but the bloke ran out of money and sold it before he completed the build.

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

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...