Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

skyline r344 gtt 500hp

Hi Guys,

I am finally getting to tune my skyline and have a lot of work to do by researching etc

I want to gain around 500 hp form my skyline which is R34 GTT. I have done a compression testing and all cylinders where the same

I have seen posts people saying the head gasket need to be changed but also other posts saying it is fine for up to 600

what do you think ?

My budget is around 5-6k in pounds so 10k in AU dollor

I am going overkill by buying top of the range products even if not needed in case I decide to go above 500

my question is what psi would I be pushing at 500hp ? 20 or more?


so far here is what I think i should buy

1. Fuel pump also not sure of the model and liter capacity. I need to research it
2. a Turbo
3. Possible a high mount manifold
4. clutch
5. gtr brembo caliper
6. link ecu with lunch control
7. 1000 cc injectors
8. boost controller
9.remap
10. get the timing spot on before doing any remaps.
11.intercooler
do I need to change anything else on fuel system ?

 

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/466920-skyline-r344-gtt-500hp/
Share on other sites

You're missing stuff like 

Twin gates, twin scroll manifold, twin scroll turbo, ARP head studs, decent coil packs, and a hectic dose pipe. Then followed by a decent LSD, coilovers, hicas eliminator kit, traction rods, subframe bushes, etc.

No point having oodles of power that you can put down then getting toasted by a Golf GTI. 

The path to single turbo happiness on RB engines is for the turbine housing to be twin scroll (for best response) and therefore you need to match the manifold to it (ie, it needs to be split pulse) and if all of that is split pulse/twin scroll then to finish it off and do it right you need twin external wastegates.

500 engine HP is only about 280-300 rwkW, which is a walk in the park for a Neo 25DET.  Head studs as Johnny said.  No high mount manifold unless you feel the need to show it off.  The stock manifold will shit it in.  But if you do go the full split manifold and twin gates then high or low mount to whatever suits your taste/needs.

Otherwise your list is fine, + the rest of Johnny's list.

Thanks

 

280 at rear seems quite low

 

i think we looking at 330ish at rw which is around 389at flywheel

 

what will be your boost at that power?

would you change ur gasket?

 

seen manifolds costing 2k in aus dollor, isn't that high for a manifold?

38 minutes ago, stranger12 said:

Thanks

280 at rear seems quite low

i think we looking at 330ish at rw which is around 389at flywheel

what will be your boost at that power?

would you change ur gasket?

seen manifolds costing 2k in aus dollor, isn't that high for a manifold?

 

Conversion from HP to kw x 0.75  -> 500 HP is 375kW at the engine.  Conventional "conversion" from flywheel kW (or HP, it doesn't matter) to rwkW on Australian Dyno Dynamics dynos is to multiply by 0.75 again -> 280 rwkW.  That 25% "loss" can be a little more than really happens, so call it a range from 280 to 300 rwkW.

How much boost depends on how big the turbo you're looking at using is.  A larger turbo not working as hard (and with a bigger back end) will use less boost.....but of course be less responsive.  Assuming you're looking to "optimise" at the power level you're talking about, then you're looking at turbos that need about 20 psi to make that sort of power.

I wouldn't change the head gasket on a Neo at 300rwkW.  Would contemplate head studs, but plenty have run for a loooong time at that power level with the originals.

A good exhaust manifold should cost at least $1500.  There's nothing unusual about spending $2k for something that is well made with a good track record of not falling apart.  But again, at the power level you're talking about, it is doable on the factory manifold.  Save the coin and spend it elsewhere.

$10k is not going to get you what you need for a big power engine (starting with forged fully balanced components) so just concentrate your mind on the essentials for a 350KW  result as advised above. Save some money for tyres,suspension, brakes, clutch...LSD

Well what i said above was only engine

i have already spent 2.5k on 275 falken and 19 inch alloys

 

love it

 

i may forge it later hence why i am getting a 1000 cc injectors which I understand it is good for up to 1k hp

re turbo with big turbos and less boost, will you have a significant lag and sudden kick?

 

 

There's a wealth of information in the RB25 dyno section here about what people have achieved with various combinations.

It's all well and good wanting a hp number, but you've got to be clear what the performance needs are, application the car is being used for etc.  eg. you "should" comfortably achieve 300-350rwkW with either a GTX3076 or a GTX3576, or a TDO6SL-25G or a TDO6H-25G. 

Bigger turbine setup in both cases would probably shift the best torque range upwards by between 500-1000rpm.  Not good for 100 percent street, maybe not a problem for 100 percent track if the engine really doesn't have to perform under 4000rpm.

Then the split pulse, and fuel spec (E85 has become very popular here in Aus) are other variables to consider as mentioned.

If you're new to SAU, take the time to trawl the forum - it's a well worn path and the same questions have been kicked around for a long time.

Make sure you get a good dose pipe, also GTX turbos don't dose well due to their 11 blade compressor wheel design.

6+6 and 7+7 blade designs will dose very well. Using an alloy pipe over a stainless steel pipe will increase dose.

Anyhow,  running wider tyres doesn't always mean more grip. You're essentially reducing the contact patch pressure. 

  • Like 3
  • 2 months later...

Just starting to read these again and order parts



Got distracted with work so starting fresh again

Re reading through posts and sau forum , i think gt30 is the turbo i need

Can you get any turbo in single or twin scroll?

Is that good option with a 80% street use?

I want around 400 hp rear wheel or 500 flywheel

If budget permits, twin scroll, twin gates, divided rear housing and a EFR7670.

Or if you're a bit poor (like most Skyline owners) a GTX3576 would be a good pick.

Or if you're broke as fek (like me) get a HyperGear SS2 or G3SAT and weld a gate off the manifold.

All above options will give you that magical 500hp to brag (when on e85 or running water/meth)

I am not very familiar with e85 , did look at it while ago but can't remember what it was and seems like too much hassle for daily driving

 

I did some reasearch on twin scroll and it seems to be best of both top end and bottom end and making turbo lag go away.

is the impact significant enough to justify the cost?

I guess the other question is do all turbos have single and twin scroll ?

I am doing some research on price ..

 

I am tempted to get a f10 m5 and put this tuning to bed for a while as want to take my time building it . I will be doing all of the work myself.

in the uk 6boost is well known and doesn't seem very cheap at 1.2k £ for the twin scroll

 

http://www.6boost.eu/6boost-rb26-nissan-skyline-r32-r33-r34-gtr-t4-twin-scroll-manifold-1641.html

Edited by stranger12

If you can afford an F10 M5 buy one and sell your Skyline to someone who can build it up themselves. If you pay people to do all the mods you are contemplating it will cost you an arm and a leg and it will never be as good as the M5. If you try to do it yourself it looks like it will be a costly learning exercise with an uncertain outcome.

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

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...