Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

TD05 is a smaller turbo than TD06. In Garrett terms think of them as T25 or T28 vs T3 frames. Although they don't line up the same as those, the change in frame size is what's important.

16g, 18g, 20g are progressively bigger versions.

Roy uses his car on the track though...I'm not sure a TD-05 or D-06 RB20DET is going to be that much fun on the street.

For the street the smaller HKS turbos are going to be more responsive.

LOL, my car is a street car first, track car second and is a huge compromise on the track because of it. What makes good usable power on the street makes for good usable power on the track. Its not like a slow street car will make a good track car!!!

A TD05-16G may work ok but frankly...lottery dip stuff.... IF you are going to go anything after your RB25 turbo its a GTX2860 or grab a used 2530.If you are going to spend the money dont do it with one arm tied behind your back. Like i said, dont tune the RB25 turbo setup and go straight to the better turbo and you have just saved yourself the difference between a cheap lottery dip turbo and a better turbz that will give you a good result. But i get the reason why the poster wants to run his RB25 turbo for a while.

The 2530/2860 is a good bolt on option...but dont think its massively more responsive than a bigger turbo that is a proper full setup. All different dynos and tuners but here are a bunch of plots but reckon it paints the correct picture

med_RB20_Comparo1.JPG

the hks and garrett turbos arent looking a whole lot more responsive in terms of power but they boost up much faster than the other turbo's, and in the power graphs the garrett has got about 20kw's more than the hks turbo in top end, garrett turbo is definitely seeming like the way to go although i would like to find out more about the kinugawa turbos because if i can get similar performance to the garrett turbo for $400 less i'll take it in a heartbeat

So cliff notes. TD05 and TD06 are referring to the turbine type and size. 16G, 18G or 30 , 25G are all referring to the size of the compressor.

So, if you are going std internal gate bolt on turbo I personally would stay away from anything as big as a TD06. That is the same size turbine as I am running and can make 300-330rwkws. So waaaay over what you are after and in turn will be bigger and heavier for the exhaust gas to spin so...laggier than you need

So the compressor side of things...if you go for as late a model 16G based turbo you will be in the window of the power and response you are after.

IMO stay away from 20G or even 18G as the 18G is really the same size as the 20G , just a different trim. So again on 98 fuel it is a 270rwkws turbo.

So, for me and what I understand your needs to be...I would be looking at getting Kando to price up the following turbo for you.

T3 TD05H turbine housing

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Kinugawa-Turbo-Turbine-Housing-Nissan-Skyline-RB20DET-RB25DET-8cm-TD05H-T3-/271807706353?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_15&hash=item3f490074f1

Cartridge

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Kinugawa-Turbo-Cartridge-CHRA-TD05H-Small-16G-Oil-Cooled-49178-54700-46-60mm-/271531508287?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_15&hash=item3f388a023f

And run a 2/4" Compressor cover.

Effectively that is an old EVO turbo

If you want to go to basically an 18G sized wheel, just the smallest trim then get the 16G6 (in Mitsubishi world they call it a Big 16G)

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Billet-Turbo-Compressor-Wheel-Mitsubishi-EVO-3-TD05H-16G-48-30-68-01-mm-6-6-/291401525948?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_15&hash=item43d8e26abc

And run that with the T3 Skyline housing from above. DO NOT take thei std T3 turbone housing as they are POS! ie this

$_57.JPG

They are horrible on the exhaust side for flow

the hks and garrett turbos arent looking a whole lot more responsive in terms of power but they boost up much faster than the other turbo's, and in the power graphs the garrett has got about 20kw's more than the hks turbo in top end, garrett turbo is definitely seeming like the way to go although i would like to find out more about the kinugawa turbos because if i can get similar performance to the garrett turbo for $400 less i'll take it in a heartbeat

They are just spreadsheet dumps of peoples dyno sheets over the years. God it was from about 2004-2005 :( So there are differences in dyno types, dyno operators adn importantly wheel sizes. The rolling diameter of a 16" wheel is a lot smaller than an 18" so if going by road speed you can think something is more responsive than it really is because of the smaller wheel size.

So, the important take away IMO is arming yourself with a reasonable expectation and then speak to your tuner. Your tuner is paramount and get them to show you different graphs all from the same dyno so you can compare apples to apples.

If you are in your states SAU club jump in cars and go for rides. And lastly, dont rule out the Hypergear turbos I guess. From what was posted his T3 offering for his SR20 turbo is a bit of an abomination with buts welded on here and there to make work, but if there are some good results out there for an RB20 then it should be on your consideration list. But the RB20 result he posted was not all that promising, though that may be that particular car and not the turbos fault

From RB20 dyno results thread

1993 R32 GTST

Stock RB20DET

TD05-18G (EG 8cm)

Nismo 555cc (with GTR Resistor Pack)

Nistune

3" Turbo Back

Walbro 255

FMIC

Z32 AFM

United 100 RON

Stock engine, stock manifold, stock cams/gears..

post-38094-0-55798100-1383264883.jpg

With some cam gears dialled in you woudl expect to pick up a little bit in response. Not sure what T3 housing he has

OP's asking for a good bolt on turbo for his R32, by reading this thread there are whole lot of unrelated information that I'm confused.

The photo shopped result contain a mixed batch of E85 results, pump results, externally gated results, internally gated results, cam moded, plus results of a NA+T Rb25.

Filtering out all the unrelated. Take unopened Rb20det engine on pump fuel. I'm seeing hypergear's atr43ss has the best curve which made the most power on based boost level given. Turbo is direct bolt on that required little/none modifications, that will be the turbo I will be voting for.

I would personally go for the 2.4" compressor cover, rather than the 3" anti-surge cover. But importantly they are the wheels and turbine housing to go for

OP's asking for a good bolt on turbo for his R32, by reading this thread there are whole lot of unrelated information that I'm confused.

The photo shopped result contain a mixed batch of E85 results, pump results, externally gated results, internally gated results, cam moded, plus results of a NA+T Rb25.

Filtering out all the unrelated. Take unopened Rb20det engine on pump fuel. I'm seeing hypergear's atr43ss has the best curve which made the most power on based boost level given. Turbo is direct bolt on that required little/none modifications, that will be the turbo I will be voting for.

Just scrolled through the RB20 dyno results thread. The Hypergear turbos all seem very laggy, but there are so many versions of the things perhaps they are older versions

Hypergear OP6 Hiflow may be more suited to an RB25

P5072736_zps94ab41fa.jpg

rb20det225rwkw.jpg

Stock RB20

HyperGear ATR43SS1 (none PU version) turbo internally gated bolton to stock manifold.

3" Turbo Back Exhaust

Nistune tuned

Pump 98 Fuel

FMIC

480cc Injectors

Bosch 040 Fuel Pump

3inches hard intake pipe with Pod

227rwkw (green) @ 18psi

It doesnt seem a bad option if you want a bit of headspace

c34a8e1b7560133cf49874642ca671da.jpg

FJ1600s results

92' gts-t

Stock Internals - SSS Automotive Wrecker Engine

Bosch ev14 750cc injectors

Z32 AFM

Walbro pump

Sard FPR

Red jacket coils

Bellmouth dump and 3' exhaust + decat

GRedy Profec B II

FMIC

Hypergear RB20 Highflow Turbo

PULP 98

224.8kw on 17psi

post-87220-0-93534700-1327671114.jpg

Stock RB20

RB20 Turbo Hypergear Highflow

3" Turbo Back Exhaust

Nistune tuned on V-Power 98 Fuel

GTR Intercooler

555cc Nismo Injectors

Walbro Fuel Pump

Splitfire Coil Packs

Greddy Profec b Spec II

Stock Airbox and KN Panel Filter

201rwkw @ 20psi (High), dropping a bit to 19psi and 174.6rwkw @ 14psi(Low). Did 206 with the cat removed, but the engine started pinging as the timing got advanced, so had to leave it with the 201 tun

They are the same A/R so not likely to make a big difference. 3" means more changes to inlet piping vs std vs 2.4". But more importantly there is reason to believe anti-surge covers take a bit away from response so 2.4" is easier to package and make look std. If you go 3" just go std 3", not anti-surge

Few RB20det owners buys a high flowed Rb25det / Neo turbo and replaces their blown Rb20 standard turbos with it. Those high flows are not made for RB20det motors. It will be very laggy. And not so relevant.

We usually run a different combination of wheels for RB20det standard turbocharger high flows, those are Rb20det "high flowed" turbocharger results.

post-87220-0-21686900-1350095842.jpg

and

post-87220-0-93534700-1327671114.jpg

For power and response, its not bad for a high flow using stock housings.

The current ATR43SS1 per the black back ground read is made for a Rb20det, it makes reaches full boost about 4000RPM, and makes 227rwkws @ 17psi. That is turbo is engineered for a Rb20det engine, that bolt on to your factory manifold, dump pipe, and all lines.

My Rb20det dyno readings are limited, Based on SR20det, the response of a SS15 is slightly laggier to a GT2860Rs but more responsive then GT2871R. This turbo is also efficient enough to peek 281rwkws on pump fuel at 24psi internally gated. Taking accounts if installation, response, power to boost ratio, and ability of performance gain on future modifications. This is a my recommendation.

Anti surge comp cover reduces surge issues, which you are unlikely to see that on a RB20det motor. It also reduces power to boost ratio in some cases. I don't machine surge slots in unless there is a surging problem.

its going to be much more effort to get all the pieces individually and have a turbo made rather than just buying a kit ready to bolt in, on a td05 16g will the anti surge really make much difference? because its just much less hassle to buy the kit and bolt it all in and that kit by the sounds of things is perfect for me except for the anti surge part, my intake piping is already 3" so thats not really a problem either

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...