Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, MaximuSmurf said:

 Otherwise I'll just say f**k it and grab 2 x 38mm gates and go external setup which SHOULD get around the boost holding issue.

I posted something similar in this thread and Geoff from Full race said that it wouldn't make any difference.
Said it was more to do with the rear housing design than the internal gate.

Nice numbers by the way.

  • 3 weeks later...
4 minutes ago, sneakey pete said:

Is there an ETA or any more info on the 8474?

I haven't heard anything beyond what is already in here, I'd definitely update the thread if I have information which I'd be able to share.

The information already in here is basically; shown off at SEMA 2016, someone had one on an evo earlier this year that made ~10% more power and that's about all we know?

Hadn't really paid much attention to it but a mate may be interested if they're going to be a thing before mid year.

How are you finding it on the 2.8?   Must be pretty perky at that power level [emoji3]

Comes on much much earlier than I thought, very sketchy at this power. I usually have it on 29psi setting still a handful to drive tho.
  • Like 1

comparing the dyno charts from both Umair's youtube videos, the 9180 looks to be pretty much 900rpm later than the 8374 everywhere. same engine, both 1.05A/R housings.

8374 is at: 200kw at 4450rpm | 300kw at 4650rpm | 400kw at 5050rpm | 500kw at 6800rpm

9180 is at: 200kw at 5460rpm | 300kw at 5470rpm | 400kw at 5910rpm | 500kw at 5910rpm

it appears the 9180 is being brought on a bit more gradually, then peak torque being liimited by timing (unless wheelspin?) as well

 

great to see some proper back to back figures!

8374vs9180.png

Edited by burn4005
added picture
  • Like 1
1 hour ago, burn4005 said:

comparing the dyno charts from both Umair's youtube videos, the 9180 looks to be pretty much 900rpm later than the 8374 everywhere. same engine, both 1.05A/R housings.

8374 is at: 200kw at 4450rpm | 300kw at 4650rpm | 400kw at 5050rpm | 500kw at 6800rpm

9180 is at: 200kw at 5460rpm | 300kw at 5470rpm | 400kw at 5910rpm | 500kw at 5910rpm

it appears the 9180 is being brought on a bit more gradually, then peak torque being liimited by timing (unless wheelspin?) as well

 

great to see some proper back to back figures!

8374vs9180.png

I did change from a 5 speed to a 6 speed (with factory 33 diff) between those tunes, which would have a material impact on the dyno graphs. I.e. it's not as bad/laggier as the dyno shows it to be.

1 hour ago, usmair said:

I did change from a 5 speed to a 6 speed (with factory 33 diff) between those tunes, which would have a material impact on the dyno graphs. I.e. it's not as bad/laggier as the dyno shows it to be.

If the ramp rate is the same and the rpm is set up correctly that should have no effect

I did change from a 5 speed to a 6 speed (with factory 33 diff) between those tunes, which would have a material impact on the dyno graphs. I.e. it's not as bad/laggier as the dyno shows it to be.

How are you finding the 6 speed mate?? Was it a headache to convert?

Also just out of curiosity why is it dynoed in 3rd. I know it doesn’t matter much but just curious as every tuner wants to dyno at 1:1 ratio or close to it

the 1:1 thing is a bit of a wives tale.

Final drive ratio has an inversely proportional relationship to velocity, and a proportional relationship to Torque.. so the gear ratio completely drops out of the power equation. 

Actual torque is really high in lower gears, any torque plot is just a 'normalized' plot at 1:1 mechanical advantage... really just brake torque neglecting drivetrain losses

dyno in a high gear so the dyno doesn't have to work as hard to retard the engine (especially if you want a slow ramp on a powerful car), but also at a speed that is considered safe.

300km/h is a lot of rotating momentum.

Edited by burn4005
  • Like 2
3 hours ago, Buraz said:


How are you finding the 6 speed mate?? Was it a headache to convert?

Also just out of curiosity why is it dynoed in 3rd. I know it doesn’t matter much but just curious as every tuner wants to dyno at 1:1 ratio or close to it

pretty straight forward to convert although apparently when converting into a 33, you have to remove a part or not connect a part (or something...... my mechanic mentioned it to me once) so on idle/at traffic lights the box just rattles lol. bit annoying but you get used to it.

other than that its awesome for street use. Not so awesome for the strip or roll racing as I'm changing into 5th just before the line.

Also a bit worried if i break something then it would be a very expensive exercise to repair.

Also an FYI - if all goes to plan I'll be heading out to WSID on 11th April to see what this extra power does for ET and MPH. Stay tuned.

  • Like 1

Wouldn’t you be starting in second for roll racing anyway?

cause I was using 1st to 4th in the 5spd and now with the 6spd I’m guessing I’ll be using 2nd to 5th, so itll be the same number of gear changes 

11 minutes ago, r32-25t said:

Wouldn’t you be starting in second for roll racing anyway?

cause I was using 1st to 4th in the 5spd and now with the 6spd I’m guessing I’ll be using 2nd to 5th, so itll be the same number of gear changes 

Might try starting in 1st to get the 9180 to come quicker.  See how 50km reacts in 1st lol

37 minutes ago, usmair said:

Might try starting in 1st to get the 9180 to come quicker.  See how 50km reacts in 1st lol

With the 5spd I was at 6500-7,000 at 50kmh in first so was starting at 40 to make it useful, so with the 6spd I imagine it being even higher lol 

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

    • Hi, SteveL Thank you very much for your reply, you seem to be the only person on the net who has come up with a definitive answer for which I am grateful. The "Leak" was more by way of wet bubbles when the pedal was depressed hard by a buddy while trying to gey a decent pedal when bleeding the system having fitted the rebuilt BM50 back in the car, which now makes perfect sense. A bit of a shame having just rebuilt my BM50, I did not touch the proportioning valve side of things, the BM50 was leaking from the primary piston seal and fluid was running down the the Brake booster hence the need to rebuild, I had never noticed any fluid leaking from that hole previously it only started when I refitted it to the car. The brake lines in the photo are "Kunifer" which is a Copper/Nickel alloy brake pipe, but are only the ones I use to bench bleed Master cylinders, they are perfectly legal to use on vehicles here in the UK, however the lines on the car are PVF coated steel. Thanks again for clearing this up for me, a purchase of a new BMC appears to be on the cards, I have been looking at various options in case my BM50 was not repairable and have looked at the HFM BM57 which I understand is manufactured in Australia.  
    • Well the install is officially done. Filled with fluid and bled it today, but didn't get a chance to take it on a test drive. I'll throw some final pics of the lines and whatnot but you can definitely install a DMAX rack in an R33 with pretty minor mods. I think the only other thing I had to do that isn't documented here is grind a bit of the larger banjo fitting to get it to clear since the banjos are grouped much tighter on the DMAX rack. Also the dust boots from a R33 do not fit either fyi, so if you end up doing this install for whatever reason you'll need to grab those too. One caveat with buying the S15 dust boots however is that the clamps are too small to fit on the R33 inner tie rod since they're much thicker so keep the old clamps around. The boots also twist a bit when adjusting toe but it's not a big deal. No issues or leaks so far, steering feels good and it looks like there's a bit more lock now than I had before. Getting an alignment on Saturday so I'll see how it feels then but seems like it'll be good to go       
    • I don't get in here much anymore but I can help you with this.   The hole is a vent (air relief) for the brake proportioning valve, which is built into the master cylinder.    The bad news is that if brake fluid is leaking from that hole then it's getting past the proportioning valve seals.   The really bad news is that no spare parts are available for the proportioning valve either from Nissan or after market.     It's a bit of a PITA getting the proportioning valve out of the master cylinder body anyway but, fortunately, leaks from that area are rare in my experience. BTW, if those are copper (as such) brake lines you should get rid of them.    Bundy (steel) tube is a far better choice (and legal  in Australia - if that's where you are).
×
×
  • Create New...