Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

G42 definitely has the exhaust flow to back it up - but a significant amount more lag too.  Probably the way to go if you are looking for big power, but if you are looking for big power and response doing something a bit different a Xona Rotor 105-69S have the potential to be pretty epic when they get more available.

Its such a fine line. At the end of the day, everyones idea of laggy is different.

9280 would bolt straight up to my current setup as I've got a 9180..... that's why I'm looking down that route for this new engine. 

I haven't been on the forum much in a long time - but look what turned up in the post today...  courtesy Geoff Raicer (thanks again mate).   Just came by to see what the latest results were..

I'll be doing a direct one to one comparison of this vs my current 8374 when the time comes.

image.png.4cea276dadffcce09a7e8748e3879427.png

 

  • Like 6
18 hours ago, burn4005 said:

People really like round numbers don't they.. My car did 495kw at absolute max turbo speed and everyone always asks why I didn't go one psi more to break the half ton.  If you need a round number in your life set the Dyno to metric and aim for 700kw instead of 1000hp.  People forget that tuners pull a degree or two of global out when they unstrap the car anyway.

#penismeasuringcontest

18 hours ago, Lithium said:

 If you get an EFR9280 on a strong RB28, and tune it until you hit around 117,000rpm shaft speed then who gives a crap what the dyno says - that is going to be a FAST car.   Pick a bunch of parts which work well together and build, tune until it's sent and go forth and enjoy... that is the way to get a happiest result. 

totally agree.  A illustration of this is seen working with world class top-level professional drivers.  Guys who drive real racecars for a living, sit them in a turbo 4 or 6 cyl vehicle with a big EFR at full song, and everytime its the same shock-and-awe reaction of "that thing is so fast, i have to change my driving style to adapt".  These are the best in the game, and its not easy for them to drive to the limit.  especially considering how laggy these little RB engines really are - even with all the tricks. 

12 hours ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

HP, kW, Shaft speed are great numbers, but those numbers are completely useless if you can't back it up with solid time slips OR eye popping lap times.

But my dyno chart number is bigger than yours !! ... said every forum jockey ever. (especially on the BMW forums)

8 hours ago, Lithium said:

 if you are looking for big power and response doing something a bit different a Xona Rotor 105-69S have the potential to be pretty epic when they get more available.

i love the guys at Tial,.  however xona rotor = undivided singlescroll only.  For some applications this may work well but Im pretty stuck on divided housings for I4's and I6's that turn (dragstrips singlescroll is fine).  What further irks my inner engineer is there are no turbine or compressor maps nor speed sensor option to confidently know where you are operating... but thats never affected precision so it must be me.  the market doesnt seem to care

7 hours ago, Deano 1 said:

At the end of the day, everyones idea of laggy is different.

9280 would bolt straight up to my current setup as I've got a 9180..... that's why I'm looking down that route for this new engine. 

Very true.  my idea of laggy has changed considerably over the last few years as i get more experience with better spool.  Regardless if you can do a supercore swap on your setup, that would be convenient.  all the hoses/fittings remain the same and you might be able to get away without removing the turbine housing from the vehicle

3 hours ago, R32 TT said:

I haven't been on the forum much in a long time - but look what turned up in the post today...  courtesy Geoff Raicer (thanks again mate).   Just came by to see what the latest results were..

I'll be doing a direct one to one comparison of this vs my current 8374 when the time comes.

image.png.4cea276dadffcce09a7e8748e3879427.png

?

 

Edited by Full-Race Geoff
  • Like 1
11 hours ago, Deano 1 said:

Its such a fine line. At the end of the day, everyones idea of laggy is different.

9280 would bolt straight up to my current setup as I've got a 9180..... that's why I'm looking down that route for this new engine. 

Ahh yep, gotcha.  Sounds like the 9280 is a couple hundred rpm or so laggier but the compressor map definitely paints a picture of a lot more flow.  I think the 9180 compressor left a bit to be desired, so in that sense it may be a good upgrade depending on how much more power you want, and how much more lag you can live with.

A shame results seem to take so long to filter through - most people who have run them so far have not shared anything, and the things shared so far fall well short of what the flow claims would suggest aside from the EFR8474 dyno result from a couple of years ago.  Hopefully this changes eventually!

8 hours ago, R32 TT said:

I haven't been on the forum much in a long time - but look what turned up in the post today...  courtesy Geoff Raicer (thanks again mate).   Just came by to see what the latest results were..

I'll be doing a direct one to one comparison of this vs my current 8374 when the time comes.

image.png.4cea276dadffcce09a7e8748e3879427.png

 

Yusss!

On 7/2/2019 at 4:15 AM, Full-Race Geoff said:

8474 0.92 a/r just won pike's peak with a Honda K20

62101444_2552144351482953_20056412691259
 

https://newatlas.com/2019-pikes-peak-results-robin-shute/60378/

With a Life Racing based ECU and correct set up that engine would have run properly LOL........

Regardless goes to show what a superior power train config can manage, we run a 2zz 1.8lt engine on EFR at same level of peak power but with far broader power range, similar vehicular constraints, and I can confirm it makes lesser packages look 'compromised' when you look at the performance potential.

Edited by RICE RACING

I just want milk that tastes like real milk.

 

In other news, i'm getting boost spikes with the new tune unfortunately, seems to be more on rapid changes in revs, eg in second or if i lift off and the get back on it in 3rd/4th. This is using the 4 port with 14psi springs in an IWG 75. Will have to head back to the tuner I suppose.

that being said I do have the 1.05 rear housing chilling out in the shed still that i got with the replacement core...

9 hours ago, sneakey pete said:

I just want milk that tastes like real milk.

 

In other news, i'm getting boost spikes with the new tune unfortunately, seems to be more on rapid changes in revs, eg in second or if i lift off and the get back on it in 3rd/4th. This is using the 4 port with 14psi springs in an IWG 75. Will have to head back to the tuner I suppose.

that being said I do have the 1.05 rear housing chilling out in the shed still that i got with the replacement core...

Sneaky Pete, can I ask why you would run a 14psi spring with a 4port? my understanding the ability of the 4port allows you to run minimal spring (say 7psi) which in turn lowers your lowest boost pressure but the 4port gives ability to run boost to the top of the gate if u have a twin port iwg 75 that has that ability. This could help with the gate catching the spike. Maybe that your just too small on the rear but dropping the spring pressure imo would be my first thing to try. 

  • Like 1

Personal attacks, negative posts about businesses (including childish name calling) and off topic posts (this is a turbo, not ECU thread) removed. It's not that hard to keep a discussion civil.

Further such posts will lead to warnings and bannings

  • Like 2

Is your ecu doing the boost control? You could try backing off the proportional gain a bit as the proportional error seems to be too high. Alternatively you may need a bit more derivative to back it off if you think the prop gain is correct (output gain matches process gain)

  • Like 1
On 06/07/2019 at 1:48 PM, sneakey pete said:

i'm getting boost spikes with the new tune unfortunately, seems to be more on rapid changes in revs, eg in second or if i lift off and the get back on it in 3rd/4th. This is using the 4 port with 14psi springs in an IWG 75. Will have to head back to the tuner I suppose.

that being said I do have the 1.05 rear housing chilling out in the shed still that i got with the replacement core...

 

On 06/07/2019 at 11:38 PM, welshy_32ZILA said:

Sneaky Pete, can I ask why you would run a 14psi spring with a 4port? my understanding the ability of the 4port allows you to run minimal spring (say 7psi) which in turn lowers your lowest boost pressure but the 4port gives ability to run boost to the top of the gate if u have a twin port iwg 75 that has that ability. This could help with the gate catching the spike. Maybe that your just too small on the rear but dropping the spring pressure imo would be my first thing to try. 

Hard to say without having had a look or go at it all and not knowing which ECU you are running etc, but it seems like there are a couple of things there which definitely are setting up to make it a bit of a challenge to make boost stable.... I'm not a huge fan of the internal wastegate EFRs personally, the 1.05a/r housing with external wastegate seems to be the way to go in most cases but as Welshy says, the 4-port actuator with a 1bar spring in it is definitely likely to make things trickier.   

You basically end up with much smaller duty cycle differences needed to have a solid impact on wastegate behaviour, and annoyingly a lot of ECUs with closed loop boost control don't factor in the dead time for the wastegate solenoid which means that closed loop corrections are counting the dead time as part of the effective pulse width... not usually an issue when you have a fairly wide duty cycle range for not a huge boost target range, but a bit more of an issue when the amount of the pulse needed to open the solenoid in itself could have a reasonable impact on boost if applied as part of the effective pulse width, if that makes sense?  It's likely to make closed loop control have fits unless the ECU is able to provide the closed loop logic with just the effective pulse width to work with.

We haven't actually tried it out yet, but one of the cars I work with that need a wide boost range we've plumbed up two 3-port solenoids and will use a PWM output on the Link ECU to regulate pressure to one side of the wastegate just using a table to effectively bump up the spring pressure based off boost target a bit, so we can use a .4 or .6 bar spring and be able to run sufficient boost to justify the setup with acceptable control.  

  • Like 1

I would run a much softer spring. you are clamping the lower effective control range of the boost control output as its just more preload for the boost control pressure to overcome for no reason.

 

I am using a 5psi spring in a progate 50 and it holds 28psi no problems, in saying that it has an excellent diaphram to valve area ratio (~2:1) so even a 1psi spring would work.

 

I also recommend the 12watt mac solenoid instead of the 5.4. its deadtime is significantly shorter giving you a broader effective control range.

  • Thanks 1

@burn4005 noticed you don't have a build thread, however I recall you run a 76mm Pro Series cooler?

If so, are you able to give me some data on your IATs with a bit of load? I'm in the middle of tossing up between a 76mm or a 100mm cooler as I want the IAT as low as possible as I plan to mainly run 98RON with the occasional dilution of 98RON with ethanol.

I did a bit of logging and with my dim sum bok choy 76mm Hybrid cooler it's peaking at 59 degrees on a 15 degree day in 3rd with only a baby amount of boost (1.4bar).

nah I've got a 100mm greddy unit.

dont really have much useful data as I havent got any track data for full boost as I'm getting the chassis happy first. and at 10psi from the last test day there is very little heat being added to the air, making around 300awkw.

 

but a 7 second dyno pull at 28psi went from 26 to 34 degrees C. but thats more heat sinking than cooler efficiency, Dyno fan not an accurate test.

 

 

On 7/3/2019 at 10:00 PM, R32 TT said:

I haven't been on the forum much in a long time - but look what turned up in the post today...  courtesy Geoff Raicer (thanks again mate).   Just came by to see what the latest results were..

I'll be doing a direct one to one comparison of this vs my current 8374 when the time comes.

image.png.4cea276dadffcce09a7e8748e3879427.png

 

You've kept this quiet...

Game on mole :D 

  • Like 1
3 hours ago, SimonR32 said:

You've kept this quiet...

Game on mole :D 

I wanted to 'surprise you'..   and now because I couldn't keep my mouth shut..  I've gone and ruined everything.

.......................You know about the Samsonas though yeah?

PS..   I can't believe you called me a mole...  

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

    • The other problem was one of those "oh shit we are going to die moments". Basically the high spec Q50s have a full electric steering rack, and the povo ones had a regular hydraulic rack with an electric pump.  So couple of laps into session 5 as I came into turn 2 (big run off now, happily), the dash turned into a christmas tree and the steering became super heavy and I went well off. I assumed it was a tyre failure so limped to the pits, but everything was OK. But....the master warning light was still on so I checked the DTCs and saw – C13E6 “Heat Protection”. Yes, that bloody steering rack computer sitting where the oil cooler should be has its own sensors and error logic, and decided I was using the steering wheel too much. I really appreciated the helpful information in the manual (my bold) POSSIBLE CAUSE • Continuing the overloading steering (Sports driving in the circuit etc,) “DATA MONITOR” >> “C/M TEMPERATURE”. The rise of steering force motor internal temperature caused the protection function to operate. This is not a system malfunction. INSPECTION END So, basically the electric motor in the steering rack got to 150c, and it decided to shut down without warning for my safety. Didn't feel safe. Short term I'll see if I can duct some air to that motor (the engine bay is sealed pretty tight). Long term, depending on how often this happens, I'll look into swapping the povo spec electric/hydraulic rack in. While the rack should be fine the power supply to the pump will be a pain and might be best to deal with it when I add a PDM.
    • And finally, 2 problems I really need to sort.  Firstly as Matt said the auto trans is not happy as it gets hot - I couldn't log the temps but the gauge showed 90o. On the first day I took it out back in Feb, because the coolant was getting hot I never got to any auto trans issues; but on this day by late session 3 and then really clearly in 4 and 5 as it got hotter it just would not shift up. You can hear the issue really clearly at 12:55 and 16:20 on the vid. So the good news is, literally this week Ecutek finally released tuning for the jatco 7 speed. I'll have a chat to Racebox and see what they can do electrically to keep it cooler and to get the gears, if anything. That will likely take some R&D and can only really happen on track as it never gets even warm with road use. I've also picked up some eye wateringly expensive Redline D6 ATF to try, it had the highest viscosity I could find at 100o so we will see if that helps (just waiting for some oil pan gaskets so I can change it properly). If neither of those work I need to remove the coolant/trans interwarmer and the radiator cooler and go to an external cooler....somewhere.....(goodbye washer reservoir?), and if that fails give up on this mad idea and wait for Nissan to release the manual 400R
    • So, what else.... Power. I don't know what it is making because I haven't done a post tune dyno run yet; I will when I get a chance. It was 240rwkw dead stock. Conclusion from the day....it does not need a single kw more until I sort some other stuff. It comes on so hard that I could hear the twin N1 turbos on the R32 crying, and I just can't use what it has around a tight track with the current setup. Brakes. They are perfect. Hit them hard all day and they never felt like having an issue; you can see in the video we were making ground on much lighter cars on better tyres under brakes. They are standard (red sport) calipers, standard size discs in DBA5000 2 piece, Winmax pads and Motul RBF600 fluid, all from Matty at Racebrakes Sydney. Keeping in mind the car is more powerful than my R32 and weighs 1780, he clearly knows his shit. Suspension. This is one of the first areas I need to change. It has electronically controlled dampers from factory, but everything is just way too soft for track work even on the hardest setting (it is nice when hustling on country roads though). In particular it rolls into oversteer mid corner and pitches too much under hard braking so it becomes unstable eg in the turn 1 kink I need to brake early, turn through the kink then brake again so I don't pirouette like an AE86. I need to get some decent shocks with matched springs and sway bars ASAP, even if it is just a v1 setup until I work out a proper race/rally setup later. Tyres. I am running Yoko A052 in 235/45/18 all round, because that was what I could get in approximately the right height on wheels I had in the shed (Rays/Nismo 18x8 off the old Leaf actually!). As track tyres they are pretty poor; I note GTSBoy recently posted a porker comparo video including them where they were about the same as AD09.....that is nothing like a top line track tyre. I'll start getting that sorted but realistically I should get proper sized wheels first (likely 9.5 +38 front and 11 +55 at the rear, so a custom order, and I can't rotate them like the R32), then work out what the best tyre option is. BTW on that, Targa Tas had gone to road tyres instead of semi slicks now so that is a whole other world of choices to sort. Diff. This is the other thing that urgently needs to be addressed. It left massive 1s out of the fish hook all day, even when I was trying not too (you can also hear it reving on the video, and see the RPM rising too fast compared to speed in the data). It has an open diff that Infiniti optimistically called a B-LSD for "Brake Limited Slip Diff". It does good straight line standing start 11s but it is woeful on the track. Nismo seem to make a 2 way for it.
    • Also, I logged some data from the ECU for each session (mostly oil pressures and various temps, but also speed, revs etc, can't believe I forgot accelerator position). The Ecutek data loads nicely to datazap, I got good data from sessions 2, 3 and 4: https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-2?log=0&data=7 https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-3?log=0&data=6 https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-4?log=0&data=6 Each session is cut into 3 files but loaded together, you can change between them in the top left. As the test sessions are mostly about the car, not me, I basically start by checking the oil pressure (good, or at least consistent all day). These have an electrically controlled oil pump which targets 25psi(!) at low load and 50 at high. I'm running a much thicker oil than recommended by nissan (they said 0w20, I'm running 10w40) so its a little higher. The main thing is that it doesn't drop too far, eg in the long left hand fish hook, or under brakes so I know I'm not getting oil surge. Good start. Then Oil and Coolant temp, plus intercooler and intake temps, like this: Keeping in mind ambient was about 5o at session 2, I'd say the oil temp is good. The coolant temp as OK but a big worry for hot days (it was getting to 110 back in Feb when it was 35o) so I need to keep addressing that. The water to air intercooler is working totally backwards where we get 5o air in the intake, squish/warm it in the turbos (unknown temp) then run it through the intercoolers which are say 65o max in this case, then the result is 20o air into the engine......the day was too atypical to draw a conclusion on that I think, in the united states of freedom they do a lot of upsizing the intercooler and heat exchanger cores to get those temps down but they were OK this time. The other interesting (but not concerning) part for me was the turbo speed vs boost graph: I circled an example from the main straight. With the tune boost peaks at around 18psi but it deliberately drops to about 14psi at redline because the turbos are tiny - they choke at high revs and just create more heat than power if you run them hard all the way. But you can also see the turbo speed at the same time; it raises from about 180,000rpm to 210,000rpm which the boost falls....imagine the turbine speed if they held 18psi to redline. The wastegates are electrically controlled so there is a heap of logic about boost target, actual boost, delta etc etc but it all seems to work well
    • hahah when youtube subscribers are faster than my updates here. Yes some vid from the day is up, here:  Note that as with all track day videos it is boring watching after the bloopers at the start.  The off was a genuine surprise to me, I've literally done a thousand laps around the place and I've never had instability there; basically it rolled into oversteer, slipped, gripped and spat me out. On the way off I mowed down one of the instructor's cones and it sat there all day looking at me with accusing cone eyes as I drove past. 1:13:20 was my fastest lap, and it was in the second session, 3rd lap.  It (or me!) got slower throughout the day as it got hotter.      
×
×
  • Create New...