Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

It was.

Linear, quick to fall back into its stride. I would 100000% prefer that than a set of -5's (let alone a set is RS's) on a stock engine. Makes me very curious to see what a 3582R would do on the same setup, being smaller.

That was an old dinosaur garrett Z, open scroll, single gate setup.

The Zs work well don't they.

[emoji2] [emoji2] [emoji2]

Don't know what it is with the 35s but they don't seem to come back on as quick in between gear changes, where dyno sheets makes them look better than what they are in my experience.

Its good to see u experienced the Z first hand, dynos tend to lie about a lot of things, but its a fun turbo that's for sure.

Edited by XGTRX

Yet to see a GTW result that is half decent.

I would assume twin scroll, billet compressor wheel and ball bearings would make some difference compared to the dirty T04z you tested?

The old T04z dynos never looked any good really. People actually use to look at that and stay with the twins.

Edited by s2d4

Yet to see a GTW result that is half decent.

Old Z with a newer style billet compressor with a bit of cleaning up comes on 300 or so earlier. Pretty much what a GTW does, yet people always claim more response, like 500 rpm, yet to see it though.

Because most GTR owners run those T04z in single scroll.

To really harness any motor vs. turbo application is to go twin scroll to reduce back pressure on each pulse as well as rely on scavenging.

The more the motor breathes, the more torque and power it will make. Simple combustion engines 101.

I would assume twin scroll, billet compressor wheel and ball bearings would make some difference compared to the dirty T04z you tested?

The old T04z dynos never looked any good really. People actually use to look at that and stay with the twins.

I got into this car expecting the worst. Got out of it with a smile on my face.

I'm not shy to express my hate for 2.6L's. They suck. But I'd rather a 2.6L open scroll, dirty old Dinosaur T04Z than a 2.8L with RS's as much as I hate to say it.

Call it what you will. I'm VERY critical of a setup.

I would assume twin scroll, billet compressor wheel and ball bearings would make some difference compared to the dirty T04z you tested?

The old T04z dynos never looked any good really. People actually use to look at that and stay with the twins.

Garrett Zs are ball bearing

I got into this car expecting the worst. Got out of it with a smile on my face.

I'm not shy to express my hate for 2.6L's. They suck. But I'd rather a 2.6L open scroll, dirty old Dinosaur T04Z than a 2.8L with RS's as much as I hate to say it.

Call it what you will. I'm VERY critical of a setup.

I wasn't having a go nor do I like RS's.

Was just saying that you would like the gtw more than the old z, dyno or no dyno considering you like the z and that generally has not so nice dyno curve.

I wasn't having a go nor do I like RS's.

Was just saying that you would like the gtw more than the old z, dyno or no dyno considering you like the z and that generally has not so nice dyno curve.

Well, the same can be said about the GT vs GTX. And the jury is still out on those as they take a shit load of boost to reap the benefits. Yet to see a gtw impress on an RB in the real world. As piggaz found out the old BB Zs aren't as bad as people make them out to be and their performance aren't really reflected on a 4th gear WOT run on a dyno sheet. As with so many perceived laggy dyno sheets, the real world says different.
  • Like 1

If I could draw a comparison.

The low end fell between a -9 and a -5, yet made 450 kW. This was the most basic jurassic park setup there is. A proper twin scroll manifold, twin gates, two scroll ass end housing would have made it better no doubt!

"Twins for response" is a little upsetting when a dinosaur open scroll Z punches hell out of -5's on an equivalent engine.

Well, the same can be said about the GT vs GTX. And the jury is still out on those as they take a shit load of boost to reap the benefits. Yet to see a gtw impress on an RB in the real world. As piggaz found out the old BB Zs aren't as bad as people make them out to be and their performance aren't really reflected on a 4th gear WOT run on a dyno sheet. As with so many perceived laggy dyno sheets, the real world says different.

Yeah, I wasn't disagreeing with you guys.

No idea what started the shit storm.

If I could draw a comparison.

The low end fell between a -9 and a -5, yet made 450 kW. This was the most basic jurassic park setup there is. A proper twin scroll manifold, twin gates, two scroll ass end housing would have made it better no doubt!

"Twins for response" is a little upsetting when a dinosaur open scroll Z punches hell out of -5's on an equivalent engine.

Pretty sure that's what I was saying.

Fairly certain they didn't used to be and can still be ordered without the ball bearing, no idea how old of a Z we are talking about though.

They were BB from about 10+ years ago, old tech with BB cartridge.

Yeah, I wasn't disagreeing with you guys.

No idea what started the shit storm.

No shit storm, just a discussion, all good. Edited by XGTRX
  • Like 1

They were BB from about 10+ years ago, old tech with BB cartridge.

No shit storm, just a discussion, all good.

Don't you have 04z setup in yours?

If so, is it modern 04 or? I'm curious now lol

As much as you say you don't we all know you love the little 2.6

I got into this car expecting the worst. Got out of it with a smile on my face.

I'm not shy to express my hate for 2.6L's. They suck. But I'd rather a 2.6L open scroll, dirty old Dinosaur T04Z than a 2.8L with RS's as much as I hate to say it.

Call it what you will. I'm VERY critical of a setup.

Don't you have 04z setup in yours?

If so, is it modern 04 or? I'm curious now lol

Dual Ball Bearing Garrett To4Z . 700-750HP flow potential.

Compressor wheel diameter is 84mm exd. / 66.7mm ind. (63trim) Compressor housing is .70 A/R has a 4" inlet and 2.5" outlet slip on connection.

T4 Turbine housing divided A/R .84 entry, all with standard 3" V-band discharge.

Turbine

-Wheel: 74.2mm w/ 76 trim

-T4 Divided Housing A/R .84

Compressor

-Wheel: 84.0mm exd./66.7mm ind w/ 63 trim

-Housing: 0.70 A/R

t04zcompress.gif

Edited by XGTRX

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 guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
    • Probably not. A workshop grade scantool is my go to for proper Consult interrogation. Any workshop grade tool should do it. Just go to a workshop.
×
×
  • Create New...