Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

On 07/04/2021 at 9:18 AM, RB335 said:

8474 didn't deliver anything special in my application, 2.8L high comp RB26 2.8l.  WIth a 1.05 rear, compared to the 9180 it behaved very similar.  It was quite more eager to come onto power faster on full throttle in 1st and 2nd gear, but it felt so restricted as soon as you got it moving.  The 9180 didn't feel like it was choking the engine as much, overall felt much more healthy and a better match  

The 9274 was the next turbo I was going to try, but it looked like it would just be an extension of the drawbacks I had with the 8474.  74mm wheel simply too restrictive to swallow all the flow the larger compressor can give.  Wasn't impressed with the 9280 from very limited testing I done

Why are you chucking money at all these different turbos when your setup isn't optimised?

On 4/1/2021 at 1:19 PM, Robo said:

I went from a 7163 to 8374 to 8474 to 9174 and I am glad I did, it's an incredible turbo with amazing spool.

My car is not a Skyline sorry, it's an EVO X with sleeved and built 2.16cc engine (plazmaman IC, direct port meth injection, S2 cams, sequential 6 speed etc)

8474 was twinscroll  IWG and only 0.8 A/R rear

9174 was twinscroll EWG with 1.45 A/R rear

The 8474 came onto boost way too hard and made it undrivable (like between 3.5k to 4.5k was vertical on the dyno).

The 9174 we all thought being so much bigger rear housing would be lag city but surprisingly it was about the same as the 8474 (we only changed the turbo and nothing else). I see 1.5bar (22psi) by 4,300rpm. I am not done yet, I'm increasing the downpipe and going to S3 cams (Time attack car).

Rob

^ So many people just don't get this, it's a well known fact that too small a turbo while nice for a dyno sheet saying "look kuntz here is superior spool low down power" it is totally shit for applying power after apex to corner exit.

On 4/1/2021 at 1:19 PM, Robo said:

 

 

 

1 hour ago, RICE RACING said:

^ So many people just don't get this, it's a well known fact that too small a turbo while nice for a dyno sheet saying "look kuntz here is superior spool low down power" it is totally shit for applying power after apex to corner exit.

thats a very non-DBW way of thinking of things. a responsive turbo gives you more control authority.

  • Like 1
45 minutes ago, burn4005 said:

thats a very non-DBW way of thinking of things. a responsive turbo gives you more control authority.

That's how the European cars do it, it's not a pedal for the throttle, it's a pedal to request for torque.

On 4/9/2021 at 2:51 PM, burn4005 said:

thats a very non-DBW way of thinking of things. a responsive turbo gives you more control authority.

The DBW does nothing but mask the problem, it is still totally pointless restricting the engine when you actually need the power, the DBW cant magically 'add' power. And this is why its important to use the right turbo, way too many people get hung up on the modern bullshit as a panacea for bad fundamental choices, a loss is a loss, too small a turbo gives power where its useless and not enough where its needed, simple.

11 hours ago, RICE RACING said:

The DBW does nothing but mask the problem, it is still totally pointless restricting the engine when you actually need the power, the DBW cant magically 'add' power. And this is why its important to use the right turbo, way too many people get hung up on the modern bullshit as a panacea for bad fundamental choices, a loss is a loss, too small a turbo gives power where its useless and not enough where its needed, simple.

Thats a pretty "broad statement " turbo size pends on many things. Too big of a turbo is exactly the same as too small of a turbo it depends where you drive the car as to where you need the grunt.

 

2 hours ago, Mick_o said:

Thats a pretty "broad statement " turbo size pends on many things. Too big of a turbo is exactly the same as too small of a turbo it depends where you drive the car as to where you need the grunt.

 

No it is not exactly the same, you are taking me out of context, I realize its a forum and everyone thinks their opinion is worthwhile but its actually useless cause if you take note I replied to the OP who brought it up and he shared his real world track experience and I have same experience personally and through end users.

Too small a turbo is a massive mistake on a track car end of story.

It is similar to adding traction control, this does not solve issue of lack of grip, the TC cant make more grip it can only let you use closer to the limit of what your car has. Too small a turbo cant be made to have more power than it can deliver, so the DBW comment was just a pointless bit of dibble put up to make someone feel good about themselves NOT to understand the point of the OP's post....... just another reason why forums are forums in the main part.

Except a smaller turbo often has more area under the curve. Realistically if you're serious you would evaluate the RPM ranges you use most commonly and do some math to determine where you'd get the most gains.

DBW and TC can make for better lap times for better auto-management of torque so the driver can have an easier time getting the thing out of a corner. A bigger, laggier turbo making less power in this scenario (if its noticeably less than the amount that TC and DBW combined with the smaller turbo can provide) would be slower.

But yeah if you're at this point you probably have telemetry you can lean on on to see what RPM's you're actually in, when you're in them, and how much average power you're making when you want it.

I won't say bigger is better but generally if you're under 5000rpm you may be in the wrong gear.

  • Like 1

100% agree with above.

And from practical experience I am 1.5-2secs slower on a Rally Sprint over a 150sec lap when using a 8474 vs 8374.

There are times in 2nd gear I am below 4000rpm and that’s where the smaller turbo picks up time even though I have less power and top end speed.

  • Like 1
On 11/04/2021 at 1:52 PM, Kinkstaah said:

Except a smaller turbo often has more area under the curve. Realistically if you're serious you would evaluate the RPM ranges you use most commonly and do some math to determine where you'd get the most gains.

DBW and TC can make for better lap times for better auto-management of torque so the driver can have an easier time getting the thing out of a corner. A bigger, laggier turbo making less power in this scenario (if its noticeably less than the amount that TC and DBW combined with the smaller turbo can provide) would be slower.

But yeah if you're at this point you probably have telemetry you can lean on on to see what RPM's you're actually in, when you're in them, and how much average power you're making when you want it.

I won't say bigger is better but generally if you're under 5000rpm you may be in the wrong gear.

it gets more complicated than that as you also adjust what gear you are in based on the power available in rev band....  for example in my old RX8 i was always in lowest gear i could find so i was revving the thing out as much as i could as all the power is up top, now im using a few gears higher as all my torque is in the middle of the rev range. I guess theres a point that you will also adjust your driving based on the powerband...

  • Like 1
On 4/11/2021 at 11:00 AM, RICE RACING said:

No it is not exactly the same, you are taking me out of context, I realize its a forum and everyone thinks their opinion is worthwhile but its actually useless cause if you take note I replied to the OP who brought it up and he shared his real world track experience and I have same experience personally and through end users.

Too small a turbo is a massive mistake on a track car end of story.

It is similar to adding traction control, this does not solve issue of lack of grip, the TC cant make more grip it can only let you use closer to the limit of what your car has. Too small a turbo cant be made to have more power than it can deliver, so the DBW comment was just a pointless bit of dibble put up to make someone feel good about themselves NOT to understand the point of the OP's post....... just another reason why forums are forums in the main part.

ok I'll bite.

traction control gives you CONTROL to allow you closer to the limit. if it is done correctly, you will be faster.

DBW doesnt give you more power. it gives you CONTROL of available power. if it is done correctly, you will be faster. "big turbo good" isnt the answer. the post was about the 8474 coming on too hard. DBW can linearise the power developed. and compared to an 9280, sure the peak power isn't as high, but the spread of controllable power is wider. a larger turbo just gives you a smaller band you have torque demand authority. if your gearing dictates a second gear hairpin or third gear chicane complex down to 4000rpm, i garantee the smaller turbo with DBW torque demand will get you around it MUCH faster than a larger turbo with a cable throttle.

if we are talking about turbos of this size you dont need more peak power at the apex, you need more control  of midrange torque and having a large turbo so it doesn't come on as hard is a bandaid solution. sure, at QR "big turbo good". but at lakeside/morgan park its not useful.

  • Like 1

I've been doing traction control before most of you could walk lol. You missed the point actually you dont get any of it I think as you are not an engine person nor someone who drives properly on track or road? just guessing there cause I cant really work out other than you wanting to type to read back your own posts what is the point.

You have two experienced people telling you why a wrong (smaller) turbo is inferior yet you keep on about doing it the ghetto way and not addressing any points.

I get it if you want to go slower and stress the engine more, other than that don't really get what you are on about honestly.

  • Like 1
1 hour ago, burn4005 said:

I need a 700kw turbo and a cable throttle to drive my no aero no slicks car on a twisty track because more peak power is faster. got it.

You're still not getting it m8. You need to stop running that shitty e85, toss the emtron in the bin and upgrade to a syvecs and rice racing water injection kit tuned by the rice master himself. 

Then and only then will u truly understand what quick is m8.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 3

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

    • Next on the to-do list was an oil and filter change. Nothing exciting to add here except the oil filter is in a really stupid place (facing the engine mount/subframe/steering rack). GReddy do a relocation kit which puts it towards the gearbox, I would have preferred towards the front but there's obviously a lot more stuff there. Something I'll have to look at for the next service perhaps. First time using Valvoline oil, although I can't see it being any different to most other brands Nice... The oil filter location... At least the subframe wont rust any time soon I picked up a genuine fuel filter, this is part of the fuel pump assembly inside the fuel tank. Access can be found underneath the rear seat, you'll see this triangular cover Remove the 3x plastic 10mm nuts and lift the cover up, pushing the rubber grommet through The yellow fuel line clips push out in opposite directions, remove these completely. The two moulded fuel lines can now pull upwards to disconnect, along with the wire electrical plug. There's 8x 8mm bolts that secure the black retaining ring. The fuel pump assembly is now ready to lift out. Be mindful of the fuel hose on the side, the hose clamp on mine was catching the hose preventing it from lifting up The fuel pump/filter has an upper and lower section held on by 4 pressure clips. These did take a little bit of force, it sounded like the plastic tabs were going to break but they didn't (don't worry!) The lower section helps mount the fuel pump, there's a circular rubber gasket/grommet/seal thing on the bottom where the sock is. Undo the hose clip on the short fuel hose on the side to disconnect it from the 3 way distribution pipe to be able to lift the upper half away. Don't forget to unplug the fuel pump too! There's a few rubber O rings that will need transferring to the new filter housing, I show these in the video at the bottom of this write up. Reassembly is the reverse Here's a photo of the new filter installed, you'll be able to see where the tabs are more clearing against the yellow OEM plastic Once the assembly is re-installed, I turned the engine over a few times to help build up fuel pressure. I did panic when the car stopped turning over but I could hear the fuel pump making a noise. It eventually started and has been fine since. Found my 'lucky' coin underneath the rear seat too The Youtube video can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLJ65pmQt44&t=6s
    • It was picked up on the MOT/Inspection that the offside front wheel bearing had excessive play along with the ball joint. It made sense to do both sides so I sourced a pair of spare IS200 hubs to do the swap. Unfortunately I don't have any photos of the strip down but here's a quick run down. On the back of the hub is a large circular dust cover, using a flat head screw driver and a mallet I prised it off. Underneath will reveal a 32mm hub nut (impact gun recommended). With the hub nut removed the ABS ring can be removed (I ended up using a magnetic pick up tool to help). Next up is to remove the stub axle, this was a little trickier due to limited tools. I tried a 3 leg puller but the gap between the hub and stub axle wasn't enough for the legs to get in and under. Next option was a lump hammer and someone pulling the stub axle at the same time. After a few heavy hits it released. The lower bearing race had seized itself onto the stub axle, which was fine because I was replacing them anyway. With the upper bearing race removed and the grease cleaned off they looked like this The left one looked pristine inside but gave us the most trouble. The right one had some surface rust but came apart in a single hit, figure that out?! I got a local garage to press the new wheel bearings in, reassemble was the opposite and didn't take long at all. Removing the hub itself was simple. Starting with removing the brake caliper, 2x 14mm bolts for the caliper slider and 2x 19mm? for the carrier > hub bolts. I used a cable tie to secure the caliper to the upper arm so it was out of the way, there's a 10mm bolt securing the ABS sensor on. With the brake disc removed from the hub next are the three castle nuts for the upper and lower ball joints and track rod end. Two of these had their own R clip and one split pin. A few hits with the hammer and they're released (I left the castle nuts on by a couple of turns), the track rod ends gave me the most grief and I may have nipped the boots (oops). Fitting is the reversal and is very quick and easy to do. The lower ball joints are held onto the hub by 2x 17mm bolts. The castle nut did increase in socket size to 22mm from memory (this may vary from supplier) The two front tyres weren't in great condition, so I had those replaced with some budget tyres for the time being. I'll be replacing the wheels and tyres in the future, this was to get me on the road without the worry of the police hassling me.
    • Yep, the closest base tune available was for the GTT, I went with that and made all the logical changes I could find to convert it to Naturally Aspirated. It will rev fine in Neutral to redline but it will be cutting nearly 50% fuel the whole way.  If I let it tune the fuel map to start with that much less fuel it wont run right and has a hard time applying corrections.  These 50% cuts are with a fuel map already about half of what the GTT tune had.  I was having a whole lot of bogging when applying any throttle but seem to have fixed that for no load situations with very aggressive transient throttle settings. I made the corrections to my injectors with data I found for them online, FBCJC100 flowing 306cc.  I'll have to look to see if I can find the Cam section. I have the Bosch 4.9 from Haltech. My manifold pressure when watching it live is always in -5.9 psi/inHg
    • Hi My Tokico BM50 Brake master cylinder has a leak from the hole between the two outlets (M10x1) for brake pipes, I have attached a photo. Can anyone tell me what that hole is and what has failed to allow brake fluid to escape from it, I have looked on line and asked questions on UK forums but can not find the answer, if anyone can enlighten me I would be most grateful.
    • It will be a software setting. I don't believe many on here ever used AEM. And they're now a discontinued product,that's really hard to find any easy answers on. If it were Link or Haltech, someone would be able to just send you a ECU file though.
×
×
  • Create New...