Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

If it's the turbo selection that is causing these issues.... Everything else is irrelevant. See what the new tuner says.

You're dreaming its not out of puff & i don't know how you're jumping to that conclusion?! As history repeats you can bet these blokes haven't done their job properly AGAIN! Odds are the boost control hasn't been played with properly or they have piss weak springs in the wastegates. But falling on its ass like that at 5500 isn't showing the 6262 being all in IMO pretty sure itd taper off more gradually then just drop off the planet like that. It is a 705hp turbo FFS and hes using over 500 of it currently.
  • Like 4

You're dreaming its not out of puff & i don't know how you're jumping to that conclusion?! As history repeats you can bet these blokes haven't done their job properly AGAIN! Odds are the boost control hasn't been played with properly or they have piss weak springs in the wastegates. But falling on its ass like that at 5500 isn't showing the 6262 being all in IMO pretty sure itd taper off more gradually then just drop off the planet like that. It is a 705hp turbo FFS and hes using over 500 of it currently.

Thats your conclusion.

Thats your conclusion.

While I don't think that turbo is necessarily the best option for this setup, I tend to agree that the turbo is not the most likely cause of what is being seen. Again a shame that there appears to not be better communication from the previous tuner.

  • Like 1

how does it go starting at low temp?

Is that not the reason xklaba didn't take his?

Never had an issue. Even down at Cootamunda in the middle of winter, left outside at the hotel. That was bloody cold that morning too.

Get the tuner to do a PROPER cold start.

The problem I have is my car was tuned to in summer where the mournings are still over 15deg so setting it up for 0 deg is a guess at best, it starts 6 deg with a bit of whinding, less then 10 seconds

It just wasn't looking like starting and at 5:30am with my fuel pump I didn't want to sit there whinding for however long it would have taking to start upsetting my already dickhead neighbours

I also have cold Denso race plugs which wouldn't cold starts

You're dreaming its not out of puff & i don't know how you're jumping to that conclusion?! As history repeats you can bet these blokes haven't done their job properly AGAIN! Odds are the boost control hasn't been played with properly or they have piss weak springs in the wastegates. But falling on its ass like that at 5500 isn't showing the 6262 being all in IMO pretty sure itd taper off more gradually then just drop off the planet like that. It is a 705hp turbo FFS and hes using over 500 of it currently.

Maybe, would be pretty disappointed if the workshop didn't sort that out.

And boost can drop like that if the the rear is beyond its VE especially if manifold pressures were to rise and this would obviously crack open the gate amongst other things. I still think the .82/62 rear is way too small for a 3.2.

Pete, seriously....Don't worry about all this response rubbish, just go and buy yourself a GT42 and be done with it. Rev the f@$king thing past 3000 and be happy with the face stretch when it comes on. Been done hundreds of times before and it just works.

  • Like 1

Fair enough.

Now, I need availability near my work or home.....

or, stick with 98.

I know what you mean, I would have to drive about 200Klm to get it and it would be just about 3/4 empty when I got home.

Different deal if you are doing something special with it, fill a few cans. Thats were the flex fuel sensor will come in, use it when it suites you :yes:

I so agree

Maybe, would be pretty disappointed if the workshop didn't sort that out.
And boost can drop like that if the the rear is beyond its VE especially if manifold pressures were to rise and this would obviously crack open the gate amongst other things. I still think the .82/62 rear is way too small for a 3.2.
Pete, seriously....Don't worry about all this response rubbish, just go and buy yourself a GT42 and be done with it. Rev the f@$king thing past 3000 and be happy with the face stretch when it comes on. Been done hundreds of times before and it just works.

I so agree

Pete, seriously....Don't worry about all this response rubbish, just go and buy yourself a GT42 and be done with it. Rev the f@$king thing past 3000 and be happy with the face stretch when it comes on. Been done hundreds of times before and it just works.

No worries mate, all good.

Had a 80klm drive this morning to get the cobwebs out, good stuff!

Take car to Jez

End thread

Yep well this thread will only ever be more supposition until the car goes to another dyno to find out what is really going on. At least if it goes to DVS Performance he can read some of the history behind it here.

Yep well this thread will only ever be more supposition until the car goes to another dyno to find out what is really going on. At least if it goes to DVS Performance he can read some of the history behind it here.

SORRY, it cannot be over until the " Final Tune " after this 3.2 build is finished, so hopefully, very soon :)

Probably will not be too much KW difference but might change were it starts kicking in ?

And boost can drop like that if the the rear is beyond its VE especially if manifold pressures were to rise and this would obviously crack open the gate amongst other things. I still think the .82/62 rear is way too small for a 3.2.

Pete, seriously....Don't worry about all this response rubbish, just go and buy yourself a GT42 and be done with it. Rev the f@$king thing past 3000 and be happy with the face stretch when it comes on. Been done hundreds of times before and it just works.

Never heard of an external wastegate opening due to exhaust pressure tbh, I'd consider it a design issue if it did - by function definition they are meant to block any flow until the reference pressures met targets - especially if it had both ports utilised.

In regards to VE dropping, that's just going to mean boost pressure will go up for a given airflow - the 62mm hot side is proven to flow much much more than Pete's setup is asking of it... so while I agree it's hotside is way too small for that setup (.8x twin scroll 62mm on a 3.2 - what the actual f**k? I didn't realise...) IMHO I think that explanation doesn't add up. In saying that, it's making good power and if Pete is happy with it then really all that really seems to be needed is making sure the mechanical and tune situation is on point and enjoy.

Things don't seem to be necessarily optimal, but I'm not expecting to see miraculous improvements in power - perhaps some improvement in power delivery if it turns out the intake cam proves to be excessively retarded in practice.

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

    • Getting the setup right, is likely to cost multiples of the purchase price of the vehicle.
    • So it's a ginormous undertaking that will be a massive headache but will be sorta cool if pulled off right. And also expensive. I'm sure it'll be as expensive as buying the car itself. I don't think you could just do this build without upgrading other things to take the extra power. Probably lots of custom stuff as well. All this assuming the person has mechanical knowledge. I'm stupid enough to try it but smart enough to realize there's gonna be mistakes even with an experienced mechanic. I'm a young bloke on minimum wage that gets dopamine from air being moved around and got his knowledge from a Donut video on how engines work.]   Thanks for the response though super informative!
    • Yes, it is entirely possible to twincharge a Skyline. It is not....without problems though. There was a guy did it to an SOHC RB30 (and I think maybe it became or already was a 25/30) in a VL Commode. It was a monster. The idea is that you can run both compressors at relatively low pressure ratios, yet still end up with a quite large total pressure ratio because they multiply, not add, boost levels. So, if the blower is spun to give a 1.4:1 PR (ie, it would make ~40 kPa of boost on its own) and the turbo is set up to give a 1.4:1 PR also, then you don't get 40+40 = 80 kPa of boost, you get 1.4*1.4, which is pretty close to 100 kPa of boost. It's free real estate! This only gets better as the PRs increase. If both are set up to yield about 1.7 PR, which is only about 70 kPa or 10ish psi of boost each, you actually end up with about 1.9 bar of boost! So, inevitably it was a bit of a monster. The blower is set up as the 2nd compressor, closest to the motor, because it is a positive displacement unit, so to get the benefit of putting it in series with another compressor, it has to go second. If you put it first, it has to be bigger, because it will be breathing air at atmospheric pressure. The turbo's compressor ends up needing to be a lot larger than you'd expect, and optimised to be efficient at large mass flows and low PRs. The turbo's exhaust side needs to be quite relaxed, because it's not trying to provide the power to produce all the boost, and it has to handle ALL the exhaust flow. I think you need a much bigger wastegate than you might expect. Certainly bigger than for an engine just making the same power level turbo only. The blower effectively multiplies the base engine size. So if you put a 1.7 PR blower on a 2.5L Skyline, it's like turboing a 4.2L engine. Easy to make massive power. Plus, because the engine is blown, the blower makes boost before the turbo can even think about making boost, so it's like having that 4.2L engine all the way from idle. Fattens the torque delivery up massively. But, there are downsides. The first is trying to work out how to size the turbo according to the above. The second is that you pretty much have to give up on aircon. There's not enough space to mount everything you need. You might be able to go elec power steering pump, hidden away somewhere. but it would still be a struggle to get both the AC and the blower on the same side of the engine. Then, you have to ponder whether you want to truly intercool the thing. Ideally you would put a cooler between the turbo and the blower, so as to drop the heat out of it and gain even more benefit from the blower's positive displacement nature. But that would really need to be a water to air core, because you're never going to find enough room to run 2 sets of boost pipes out to air to air cores in the front of the car. But you still need to aftercool after the blower, because both these compressors will add a lot of heat, and you wil have the same temperature (more or less) as if you produced all that boost with a single stage, and no one in their right mind would try to run a petrol engine on high boost without a cooler (unless not using petrol, which we shall ignore for the moment). I'm of the opinnion that 2x water to air cores in the bay and 2x HXs out the front is probably the only sensible way to avoid wasting a lot of room trying to fit in long runs of boost pipe. But the struggle to locate everything in the limited space available would still be a pretty bad optimisation problem. If it was an OEM, they'd throw 20 engineers at it for a year and let them test out 30 ideas before deciding on the best layout. And they'd have the freedom to develop bespoke castings and the like, for manifolds, housings, connecting pipes to/from compressors and cores. A single person in a garage can either have one shot at it and live with the result, or spend 5 years trying to get it right.
    • Good to know, thank you!
    • It's a place for non car talk. There's whoretown which is general shit talking. But also other threads coving all sorts of stuff(a lot still semi car related)
×
×
  • Create New...