Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi guys,

There doesn't seem to be a great deal of information how best to mount an external gate off the exhaust housing.

I recently finished building a steam pipe manifold for my SR and deliberately didn't include an external gate as it makes the most sense to me to evenly bleed the exhaust gases from the highest pressure point, which would be the exhaust housing, plus i wanted to be a little different.

It doesn't seem to be all that common to mount the external gate off the housing, i am curious to how far i around on the housing i should weld it onto and also which way to face the pipe. A lot of the housing's i have seen face the pipe in the same direction to gas flow of the housing, but shouldnt the gate be mounted at a 90 so that it isnt the easiest path for the gases to travel?

Thanks

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/451509-external-gate-in-exhaust-housing/
Share on other sites

the most optimal angle to not impede 'flow' i've attached a snipet from turbosmarts installation guide.

How have you managed to mount the gate like that on a standard low mount?

I have got a mate who is going to weld onto the cast housing but he only wants to weld on a 90" off the housing to ensure its strong and to allow the tig to get into there, which is going to make it hard to not impede the flow some what.

The other issue is my manifold is top mount, ideally to limit impeding flow i could come somewhere off where the housing starts to curl around after the straight to the flange, but i might be limited by space.

Mine is mounted off the exhaust housing. It probably could be better angled but I didnt really have the room. All good, seems to work fine:

20131024_173749_zps01749055.jpg

So you have ran this and have no problems? Because it seems to go in an opposite direction to the flow?

The logic is simple. When the wastegate is shut all of the exhaust will go through the turbo. When the wastgate opens if the path is not direct much (or too much) of the exhaust will continue to flow through the turbo leading to overboosting.

Here's how mine goes:

post-49463-0-52442300-1418017474_thumb.jpg

The optimal mounting is to improve gas flow, which increases top end power. Simply venting the pressure at a 90 may hold boost well enough, but the gains won't be as great in my experience.

This setup I do works very well, but I spend a lot of time die grinding the inside to get a smooth path into the gate. External gate housings are obviously preferred.

post-63525-0-05491300-1418045082_thumb.jpg

Thanks for all of the pictures and ideas guys,

It seems since it is a pressure system the angle doesn't greatly affect the ability to hold or vent boost, but isn't giving the best performance, but realistically my biggest issue is going to be space.

Obviously the shorter the runner to the waste gate the better, but should that be a priority over angle?

If you were running a GT30 internal, then switched to an external with optimal flow, power difference atw will be less then 10hp

The internals are at 90 deg, which isn't great but will really only overboost on big engines with a small (relative) turbo/housing, the Xr6t is an example.

  • Like 1

Well the TD06 10cm was good for around 50kw more. Smaller housings will react better to external gates as opposed to the 1.06 Garrett internal, and such a simple way to get the results of a good top mount.

I thought making 430kw from the stock rb25 manifold was proof enough... Don't mistake boost control with the gate's ability to flow.

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

    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...