Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

There isnt a whole lot of info on rb30dets in my desired relms of use. Most rb30dets area drag monsters...

Hmm suppose it's the difference between a punchy quicker less laggy spool or a wait for a bit and get the the the holly f##k on it scary spool. Response vs shear power balance. Loads of rb's you see with bigger turbo's tend not to be able to get off the line or blow up boxes half shafts and diffs. I'd say with the bigger turbo you would need a mental clutch and longer ratio to get the power happening or it would just snap stuff and light up the tyres permanently. Which is also fun:-)
6 minutes ago, TiTAN said:

 


High flows have been tried on an rb30 years ago. It was a cheap build basically stock Na bottom end with the 25 head and it came on like a light switch but come 5000 it hit a wall, by 5500 it had dropped about 100kw from memory.

 

This is no gd... mine will be a forged bottem end so looking to lean on it some ?


Hmm suppose it's the difference between a punchy quicker less laggy spool or a wait for a bit and get the the the holly f##k on it scary spool. Response vs shear power balance. Loads of rb's you see with bigger turbo's tend not to be able to get off the line or blow up boxes half shafts and diffs. I'd say with the bigger turbo you would need a mental clutch and longer ratio to get the power happening or it would just snap stuff and light up the tyres permanently. Which is also fun:-)

Being a 3ltr it will have more torque anyhow so perhaps response is the way to go? Don't forget I'm only a sheet metal worker who has never blown up a Cleavo Windsor c4 top loader or 9".[emoji4]
Gtx3582r with an 50mm external gate is what i was also thinking. Either way i think external gates gonna be better


I had a pre gtx series 35r with 0.82 rear. If you tweaked the waste gate setup you could have 20psi at 3500. Traction was non existent below 100km/h, for Street use it was too laggy to be quick and too fast to be usable without potential jail time. You would start seeing positive boost (a few psi) at 2500 with a bit of load.

Guilt-toy had a similar setup and should be documented fairly well on sau.

This is my dyno sheet, 26 psi and the dip at 145 was spark breaking down, done on a 33c day.

IMG_1502280990.305269.jpg
13 minutes ago, Beyond Blue R33 said:


Being a 3ltr it will have more torque anyhow so perhaps response is the way to go? Don't forget I'm only a sheet metal worker who has never blown up a Cleavo Windsor c4 top loader or 9".emoji4.png

I hear u can get cheap pipe? Gonna need some mikd steel and aluminium to make some pipe work. Proberly not till later in the year tho

  • Like 1
9 minutes ago, TiTAN said:

 


I had a pre gtx series 35r with 0.82 rear. If you tweaked the waste gate setup you could have 20psi at 3500. Traction was non existent below 100km/h, for Street use it was too laggy to be quick and too fast to be usable without potential jail time. You would start seeing positive boost (a few psi) at 2500 with a bit of load.

Guilt-toy had a similar setup and should be documented fairly well on sau.

This is my dyno sheet, 26 psi and the dip at 145 was spark breaking down, done on a 33c day.

IMG_1502280990.305269.jpg

 

Hell yeah, that looks right up my street. I wont be using it much on the street, mabe once a week at this stage. Il proberly get hooked at drive it all tje time lol

thats a run out at an airport, i am not even an amateur film maker obviously as its hard to even read any of the gauges. had spark breaking down at 160 then it clears up and keeps going, trapped at 242km/h at the 800m mark.

  • Like 1
6 minutes ago, TiTAN said:

thats a run out at an airport, i am not even an amateur film maker obviously as its hard to even read any of the gauges. had spark breaking down at 160 then it clears up and keeps going, trapped at 242km/h at the 800m mark.

Sounds gd ?

16 minutes ago, TiTAN said:

That's mainly to give you an idea just how quickly 400kw puts on speed.

If it's going to be a track toy, you are going to need some serious brakes to deal with stopping it. Upgraded pads and rotors won't cut it.

350 all round. Alpha omega brembo upgrade. Dba discs and bendix pabs. With all my cars its always been suspension, tyres, brakes then power.


Posted some pics of the boot fit out. What do you think of it?

Looks good mate, should sound good too.

A lot of bass is lost through the back seat of our skylines due to the steel plate etc but will still be plenty of punch no doubt.

Is it all hooked up and running now?
  • Like 1



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...