Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Car makes a bit over 330rwkw on 22psi on e85 - R34 with 86ks and healthy comp.

Has all the usual supporting mods, big exhaust, cam gears, twin turbo pipe mod, Haltech etc.

Was considering bumping boost to 25-26psi or so for a little bit more punch, but don't know enough about how to read comp graphs to tell if there's any point. My reading of this implies that more boost won't actually equate to much additional air flow? Is that correct?

post-23873-0-17995200-1465445055_thumb.jpg

Have also heard about heads being lifted at this boost, is there any truth to that and what are the symptoms? coolant in the cylinders/oil or vice versa? I can put ARP studs in if necessary. For what it's worth, car runs very cool with oil cooler and vented bonnet and guards, oil and water temps are always very stable. I haven't seen above 85 or so deg water/oil temp and 650 deg EGT with spirited driving through the hills. Intake temps are good also.

Was also contemplating switching to those 65mm K&N pods that bolt directly onto the AFMs and running an enclosure, possibly modded to allow me to retain snorkel. This is purely a rice mod for the noise and fun factor, but is there likely to be any power loss in the real world? I do have the vspec intake temp readout on the MFD.

Edited by ActionDan

boost doesn't lift heads, cylinder pressure does and 350kw seems to be that magic number as you've been informed a number of times

As for upping the boost to see more power, reading a compressor map isn't going to tell you anything. Just crank it and see what it does

Changing to pods isn't going to do anything but it's your money do as you will with it

I should've specified, not boost specifically, cylinder pressure.

No I have not been informed numerous times that 350 was the magical number for that, nor could I find it when searching. SAU search sucks copious cock.

I'm not looking at pods for power, just the fun factor when driving it (noise). That question was more related to any negatives I might encounter, if I can deal with heat management well enough. Something like, I ran K&Ns at that power and they collapsed, etc.

Has anyone spun up there -9s to 25-26?, again, if I could find that easily, I wouldn't ask.

Throwing on the dyno means dropping the front shaft, getting it there for a touch up tune, then seeing what happens. It costs me less in time and effort to at least see if anyone else has done it. I may find that they just shit the bed and pump bulk heat after 23-24psi, I don't know, I've never run these turbos and don't know what if any relevance the comp map has to my question.

Hence seeking the experience of others.

Edited by ActionDan

I think you might be misreading the maps you posted. The left map is the compressor map, the right map is the turbine map. The turbine map flattens off at the sort of pressure ratios that you're talking about (2.5 and up) but those pressure ratios you're talking about are boost, not the PR over the turbine. So totally irrelevant.

Unfortunately, to read the comp map and say whether adding some more boost will result in any benefit we have to know exactly where you fall on the map now, which is not really clear. Your PR is clear enough, it's pretty much 2.5. What that means is you must be somewhere on the map to the right of the 17lb/min line on the air flow axis, otherwise you'd be surging. But the problem is knowing exactly how much air you are using to make your power.

Horrible simple maths says 330 / 0.75 / 0.75 = 586 HP. At about 10 lb/min needed per HP and divided by 2 for 2 turbos, you are in the ballpark of 29 lb/min air flow.

On the 2.5 PR line, that is right over on the right hand side of the map. Going up in PR from there takes you off the map and up to massive shaft speeds too. Even if you are not that far over to the edge of the map, say at 26-27 lb/min, then going up to 26-27 psi will take you right up to the top edge of the map.

You have been told about the 350 causewe said it in your build thread countless times before you got your car tuned.

If I can push -7s to 24psi without any issue then your -9s will be fine as well

ARP studs are cheap

Changing studs (without removing the head OR cams) is also a cheap/easy process...

Just change studs and add in as much boost as possible, i.e. still no more power can be made :)

#e85lifey0

I think you might be misreading the maps you posted. The left map is the compressor map, the right map is the turbine map. The turbine map flattens off at the sort of pressure ratios that you're talking about (2.5 and up) but those pressure ratios you're talking about are boost, not the PR over the turbine. So totally irrelevant.

Unfortunately, to read the comp map and say whether adding some more boost will result in any benefit we have to know exactly where you fall on the map now, which is not really clear. Your PR is clear enough, it's pretty much 2.5. What that means is you must be somewhere on the map to the right of the 17lb/min line on the air flow axis, otherwise you'd be surging. But the problem is knowing exactly how much air you are using to make your power.

Horrible simple maths says 330 / 0.75 / 0.75 = 586 HP. At about 10 lb/min needed per HP and divided by 2 for 2 turbos, you are in the ballpark of 29 lb/min air flow.

On the 2.5 PR line, that is right over on the right hand side of the map. Going up in PR from there takes you off the map and up to massive shaft speeds too. Even if you are not that far over to the edge of the map, say at 26-27 lb/min, then going up to 26-27 psi will take you right up to the top edge of the map.

Really useful, thanks. So from that I can infer that it will "work" but with a notable increase in required shaft speed to maintain the pressure ratio for a given airflow requirement - if the engine is actually ingesting that many lbs of air per min. So, test it and see... What sort of behavior would I be looking for to know it's unhappy? I imagine I'll have more resistance to surge due to the twin turbo pipe mod, or do you mean surge differently?

You have been told about the 350 causewe said it in your build thread countless times before you got your car tuned.

If I can push -7s to 24psi without any issue then your -9s will be fine as well

Again, only relying on SAU search, but I can't see that mentioned, I tried searching for 350, head lift, head gasket etc. Happy to be proven wrong, but ultimately, even if I was told, I didn't remember, and asking the question in a more visible location isn't going to hurt anyway.

What did you make again on 24?

Edited by ActionDan

And the money you're planing on wasting for pods I'd be putting toward a crank trigger system. They allow you to push the timing so much closer due to not having any fluctuations in the map there fore more power :devil:

Really useful, thanks. So from that I can infer that it will "work" but with a notable increase in required shaft speed to maintain the pressure ratio for a given airflow requirement - if the engine is actually ingesting that many lbs of air per min. So, test it and see... What sort of behavior would I be looking for to know it's unhappy? I imagine I'll have more resistance to surge due to the twin turbo pipe mod, or do you mean surge differently?

Suck it and see has a strong element of truth because of the unknowns making it impossible to be too scientific.

More specifically answering your above questions though.....The compressor map pretty much shows where you can use the compressor. If you run off the right hand side, you are generally spinning it too fast and bad things will happen. You start to eat into the mechanical limitations on how strong the wheel itself is, and of course the efficiency drops as you go to the right of the island. You're already only at 65% at the right hand edge. Going further to the right does as you originally asked - it makes hot air.

Keep in mind one thing. Unless you do start to make hot air and actually go backwards, the intention of adding boost is to add air flow. Let's play an imaginary game. Place your operating point on the intersection of the 2.5 PR line and the 25 lb/min line. If you wind the boost up from 22 to 26 psi then your PR goes up to 2.7. But you don't go up vertically, because if you did so you would only be running more boost, not flowing more air. So you have to go up at some angle to the right. If you started at the operating point I described, then at PR 2.7 you might well end up very close to the right hand edge of the map. You also would have fallen off the efficiency island (>76%) and would probably be down in the 72% efficiency region. You'd definitely lose some potential power from that.

It gets worse. On top of all this compressor side stuff, the turbine has to be able to provide the extra power to drive the compressor. It probably can, there's probably well and truly enough power available, but on some turbos you might just end up choking the back end. This all depends so much on the total package or turbo and engine that it is even harder to say without some direct measurement (suck it and see on the dyno basically).

And the money you're planing on wasting for pods I'd be putting toward a crank trigger system. They allow you to push the timing so much closer due to not having any fluctuations in the map there fore more power :devil:

And how many millions of GT-R taxed dollars is that lol

Suck it and see has a strong element of truth because of the unknowns making it impossible to be too scientific.

More specifically answering your above questions though.....The compressor map pretty much shows where you can use the compressor. If you run off the right hand side, you are generally spinning it too fast and bad things will happen. You start to eat into the mechanical limitations on how strong the wheel itself is, and of course the efficiency drops as you go to the right of the island. You're already only at 65% at the right hand edge. Going further to the right does as you originally asked - it makes hot air.

Keep in mind one thing. Unless you do start to make hot air and actually go backwards, the intention of adding boost is to add air flow. Let's play an imaginary game. Place your operating point on the intersection of the 2.5 PR line and the 25 lb/min line. If you wind the boost up from 22 to 26 psi then your PR goes up to 2.7. But you don't go up vertically, because if you did so you would only be running more boost, not flowing more air. So you have to go up at some angle to the right. If you started at the operating point I described, then at PR 2.7 you might well end up very close to the right hand edge of the map. You also would have fallen off the efficiency island (>76%) and would probably be down in the 72% efficiency region. You'd definitely lose some potential power from that.

It gets worse. On top of all this compressor side stuff, the turbine has to be able to provide the extra power to drive the compressor. It probably can, there's probably well and truly enough power available, but on some turbos you might just end up choking the back end. This all depends so much on the total package or turbo and engine that it is even harder to say without some direct measurement (suck it and see on the dyno basically).

Understood, and thanks again. So realistically with the current gear I have, all I can monitor is intake temp, maybe EGT, and that's it? given I don't have a way of measuring turbo shaft speed.

Yes there was one person then he sold his car because he ran a slow trap speed but was making "380" kW on -9's

Sorry what was that in reply to?

There are a few versions around, there was for sale on here and would have been all done for under $700, the one I got was 1,000 but requires an aftermarket balancer and there the Ross one that's 2.5k plus

Yup, monitor those things, see if it will make more power.

Measuring exhaust manifold and dump pressures may be educational too, but that is going to quite a lot of effort. A better estimate of flywheel HP would provide some more confidence on where exactly on the compressor map you're sitting. My maths was using a big, rough 25% dyno factor. A few % either way can change things.

There are a few versions around, there was for sale on here and would have been all done for under $700, the one I got was 1,000 but requires an aftermarket balancer and there the Ross one that's 2.5k plus

OK Cheers.

Yup, monitor those things, see if it will make more power.

Measuring exhaust manifold and dump pressures may be educational too, but that is going to quite a lot of effort. A better estimate of flywheel HP would provide some more confidence on where exactly on the compressor map you're sitting. My maths was using a big, rough 25% dyno factor. A few % either way can change things.

Understood. and thanks for the detailed info.

Hopefully dumps should be up to task, they are the 3" HPIs into 3.5" front pipe and 3.5" all the way from there.

Has anyone else pushed -9s to this level or does everyone stop at 22 because that's where they stop making wasps.

Mate you own a 34, buy a set of head studs and get it back on the dyno. Removing the front shaft isn't that hard and cost of the extra dyno time will be worth it. It's really stuff all cost compared to what you payed for the car and what a rebuild is worth....

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...