Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I know from my experience that torque down lower, built and tuned for response was better for my DD ride.

It seems easier and less expensive to get good HP from a peaky car. I could have just added a new age turbo and cams to my car and would have some impressive HP as the motor was already built to take it. But too laggy for a DD.

But what about on the track,drag and hill climb.

Say a torquey 26/30, 450awkw =approx (600awhp) against a 26, 600awhp Peaky build. Does this mean they are the same.

My car was 338awkw and peaky, change to a smaller turbo and cams only got 7awkw more but much better in every way , well for a DD.

Not sure if I have given an appropriate example, I think whatever makes you smile is the winner :)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/450186-torque-awkw-vs-peaky-awhp/
Share on other sites

If you make the same power, the same power 'earlier' is better.

However if you're out on the track, all that power at 4000 RPM is useless if you are making power between 5000 and 8000 and you're always in that rev range.

Really, you want the power where you're actually going to be using it.

Pete, torque rules. You don't have to get us to tell you that. Wait till your engine is built and report back.

Sound is the least concern of decent power. Coming into boost quickly is either done by smaller turbos or larger displacement. Larger displacement is the winning answer. Fatter power band. Off boost a larger engine will always be nicer than a smaller engine.

Seems like you are getting edgy!

  • Like 1

How often would you drive your car at peak HP ?I would think the best overall Torque for the best overall power.

Only on the race track

And joining the M4-M5-M7-M1, great western highway

And every time I leave my drive way

Boost + 3.0ltr = addiction :D

  • Like 1

Pete, torque rules. You don't have to get us to tell you that. Wait till your engine is built and report back.

Sound is the least concern of decent power. Coming into boost quickly is either done by smaller turbos or larger displacement. Larger displacement is the winning answer. Fatter power band. Off boost a larger engine will always be nicer than a smaller engine.

Seems like you are getting edgy!

Hi Ben

At this stage I am not worried about my car and I am not getting edgy, impatient would be the word :(

I wanted more torque from the first trip home in the car, did a few changes and still wanted more, you blokes gave me enough information about 26/28,29,30 builds and I do not have to worry about it :)

I could not find anyone with my particular mods so I am not sure exactly what I will get out of my combination. I am sure I could have used a more balanced combination, but it will be more than enough for me as a DD to put a smile on my face and scare the crap out of me if pushed, but all good.

But there seems to be other opinions from blokes that keep their cars a 26 and modify from there. It also seems that a well balanced 26 goes like a bullet.

So maybe a few will let me see what a good 26 can do. I know there are threads all over this Forum, but just asked the question??

*waiting for the...

"buy a V8"

"3.0 don't rev"

"Sound like shit"

"2.6 for response"

"But the MINNNNNESSSSS car" #diff ratios

Was gonna say buy an XR6 Turbo if you want the torque from a standstill haha.

Mine only had 400hp and it was bake city from 2000rpm.

^^

I saw one bust a tail shaft stalling it up at the drags. Literally didn't move and it broke.

Try and do that in a Skyline ;)

I'm Sure Luke could figure out a way. That dude has a nack for breaking dielines.

^^

I saw one bust a tail shaft stalling it up at the drags. Literally didn't move and it broke.

Try and do that in a Skyline ;)

Was a common problem in the FG's for some reason, even with a bit of extra power. I never broke one but I killed a diff and box. The engine is still running today with over 400k on the clock, 325kw and 1000nm.

  • 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

    • 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.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
    • So I found this: https://www.efihardware.com/temperature-sensor-voltage-calculator I didn't know what the pullup resistor is. So I thought if I used my table of known values I could estimate it by putting a value into the pullup resistor, and this should line up with the voltages I had measured. Eventually I got this table out of it by using 210ohms as the pullup resistor. 180C 0.232V - Predicted 175C 0.254V - Predicted 170C 0.278V - Predicted 165C 0.305V - Predicted 160C 0.336V - Predicted 155C 0.369V - Predicted 150C 0.407V - Predicted 145C 0.448V - Predicted 140C 0.494V - Predicted 135C 0.545V - Predicted 130C 0.603V - Predicted 125C 0.668V - Predicted 120C 0.740V - Predicted 115C 0.817V - Predicted 110C 0.914V - Predicted 105C 1.023V - Predicted 100C 1.15V 90C 1.42V - Predicted 85C 1.59V 80C 1.74V 75C 1.94V 70C 2.10V 65C 2.33V 60C 2.56V 58C 2.68V 57C 2.70V 56C 2.74V 55C 2.78V 54C 2.80V 50C 2.98V 49C 3.06V 47C 3.18V 45C 3.23V 43C 3.36V 40C 3.51V 37C 3.67V 35C 3.75V 30C 4.00V As before, the formula in HPTuners is here: https://www.hptuners.com/documentation/files/VCM-Scanner/Content/vcm_scanner/defining_a_transform.htm?Highlight=defining a transform Specifically: In my case I used 50C and 150C, given the sensor is supposedly for that. Input 1 = 2.98V Output 1 = 50C Input 2 = 0.407V Output 2 = 150C (0.407-2.98) / (150-50) -2.573/100 = -0.02573 2.98/-0.02573 + 47.045 = 50 So the corresponding formula should be: (Input / -0.02573) + 47.045 = Output.   If someone can confirm my math it'd be great. Supposedly you can pick any two pairs of the data to make this formula.
    • Well this shows me the fuel pump relay is inside the base of the drivers A Pillar, and goes into the main power wire, and it connects to the ignition. The alarm is.... in the base of the drivers A Pillar. The issue is that I'm not getting 12v to the pump at ignition which tells me that relay isn't being triggered. AVS told me the immobiliser should be open until the ignition is active. So once ignition is active, the immobiliser relay should be telling that fuel pump relay to close which completes the circuit. But I'm not getting voltage at the relay in the rear triggered by the ECU, which leaves me back at the same assumption that that relay was never connected into the immobiliser. This is what I'm trying to verify, that my assumption is the most likely scenario and I'll go back to the alarm tech yet again that he needs to fix his work.      Here is the alarms wiring diagram, so my assumption is IM3A, IM3B, or both, aren't connected or improper. But this is all sealed up, with black wiring, and loomed  
×
×
  • Create New...