Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys ..

few weeks ago i asked for some help and got some good response from some ppl here. just wanted to show you guys my results..

so the set up is rather simple..

fuel :am using a aermotive stealth pump with some dw800cc injectors

ignition: stock

engine: arp head bolts , wiseco piston stock compression,extended sump and harden oil pump gears and stock everything else..

extra: am also using a aem water injection kit..actually just using filtered rain water to aid our crappy 91 ron fuel ...

management : haltech plug and play

tuned by me :)

15 psi :336trq & 414whp

21 psi :409trq & 499whp

from the dyno graph i thought this would been lagy ..but i was so wrong ....car pulls and spools just as good as my old precision 6262 bb .makes more power at same boost. at 11 psi with the old 6262 i was making around 340hp & with the 8375 11psi car made around 370hp both without water injection

honestly very impressed for a turbo i paid 580us for compared to the 6262 which cost 1200us..

and all of this was done with a single scroll 8375 and a ebay single scroll $140us manifold..... may be i got lucky with manifold but its just as strong as the one i paid 400us for before.have put countless abuse on it and no cracks yet.

dyno graph and vid

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfhW7fvX-Bg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/452309-rb26-borgwarner-8375/
Share on other sites

No doubt they are an awesome turbo for the price, I would love to see a back to back against the precision. These things spool like a beast and there's plenty more in that turbo for you if you put the money in the right gear.

I've been running mine with the full race twin scroll manifold and made 560rw hp on ethenol with a 2.6. Made 500rwhp at 5500rpm

I've since upgraded the cams and valve train, cleaned up the head, raised compression, stroked to a 2.9 and ceramic coated the exhaust side .. Results should be up within the month

Old graph.. Rubbish photo but its 98 premium vs E85

Note the car made no more power past 50/50 ethenol/98

post-47556-0-70740500-1420352595_thumb.jpg

No doubt they are an awesome turbo for the price, I would love to see a back to back against the precision. These things spool like a beast and there's plenty more in that turbo for you if you put the money in the right gear.

I've been running mine with the full race twin scroll manifold and made 560rw hp on ethenol with a 2.6. Made 500rwhp at 5500rpm

I've since upgraded the cams and valve train, cleaned up the head, raised compression, stroked to a 2.9 and ceramic coated the exhaust side .. Results should be up within the month

Old graph.. Rubbish photo but its 98 premium vs E85

Note the car made no more power past 50/50 ethenol/98

yep they do spool super fast for journal bearing turbos..... i was really worried when i first compared it to a physical size of a 6262 .

as you can see in the vid the moto sits in a s15 silvia which is super light ...the weight difference of a r33 at 3400lbs and the s15 2700lbs makes this car feels like its almost at 650hp...

with some cams and cam gears i should be able to get power in a tad quicker and make a higher peak hp...

looking forward to seeing your updated build results...

yep... but the results with the 6262 would not be applicable to compare because it was done with out water injection ..so the timing when tuning was alot different .but the 6262 did make 415whp at 20 psi where as the 8375 made 499hp at the same boost... but the 6262 was only running on a .63 housing which would make high hp numbers on such a big moto difficult .

i had read some where a guy changed out his .82 ar 6262 for a .63 and the results were minimal difference on his rb26..but i cant confirm that........i know on a 2.0 honda moto moving from .63 to .82 makes no difference ..

only results i have with both turbo is at 11psi without water spraying either ways and the 8375 did make more power then....

Ok thanks mate, would be good to see some more results on this turbo going around.. This night spark a bit more interest

Here is my thread on my results if you are interested

http://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/414766-gtr-joeys-r32-gtr-e-flex-twinscroll-8375-results/

hey.. i used a .88ar back end because i was worried about lag as the turbo was non bb..

your dyno graph is a lil unfair comparison as the bigger ar back ends has 5psi difference .it may not look like much but once these turbo begin to spool the move from 7psi to 21psi in a heart beat... that may contribute to more power lower in the power band..

the twin scroll will help with spool up when combined with a twin manifold..

what moto are these graph from?

  • 9 months later...

Here is my graph on a 6262 by with .84 TS setup and 93 octane gas

611 at 19 psi

550 at 15 psi

I think if I had 9:1 Cr pistons my torque would've been a lot higher

I'm using JE 8:3:1 CR pistons and Tomei 264 cams.

EC990DBB-75E3-4453-89C1-EC9B0C5E4339_zps

Edited by silvianc

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

    • 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
    • I know I have to get a wheel alignment but until then I just need to bring the rear tyres in a bit they're wearing to the belt on the inside and brand new on the outside edge. I did shorten the arms a bit but got it wrong now after a few klms the Slip and VDC lights come on. I'd just like to get it to a point where I can drive for another week or two before getting an alignment. I've had to pay a lot of other stuff recently so doing it myself is my only option 
    • You just need a wheel alignment after, so just set them to the same as current and drive to the shop. As there are 2 upper links it may also be worth adding adjustable upper front links at the same time; these reduce bump steer when you move the camber (note that setting those correctly takes a lot longer as you have to recheck the camber at each length of the toe arm, through a range of movement, so you could just ignore that unless the handling becomes unpredictable)
×
×
  • Create New...