Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

(Not my car) Boost curve will depend on what kind of boost control you have. For more results trawl though the RB25 turbo upgrade section at the top of this page. A number of people post with non-upgraded turbos...post-20742-1143423396.jpg

I was picking on your weird English.  Marvelling <> wondering.

But to answer the question....What are you trying to do?  If you are just asking about putting an OP6 housing onto an R33 turbo, and doing nothing else, then don't waste your time.  There's no point doing ANYTHING to stock turbos.

If you're talking about using an OP6 housing to build a highflow from.....then given that the only two parts that are kept when highflowing an RB's turbo are the comp and turbine housings, then what you're really asking is "what is the performance difference between an R33 and an R34 highflow?".  In which case there are a million bits of information available on here that already answer that question.  You should look at the Hypergear thread and his website to see what the difference is.

I think the most practical way to look at these OP6 Turbos is that the factory used them as part of a system to make better overall performance than the R33 RB25DET spec engine did . They made a completely new cylinder head and valve train , altered cam specs and changed the inlet manifold as well . Bore stroke and static compression ratio are the same . The bigger turbine housing they already had from the four cam single BB turbo VG30DET .

You should look up the standard power outputs for R33 and R34 spec RB25DETs and note the torque peaks but more importantly where they occur in the rev ranges . Don't quote me but I think with the R33 version the torque peak was up near 5000 revs where the R34 version was more like in the low 3000s . To me it looks like Nissan wanted more lowish and part throttle torque in the R34 engine and achieved that without a low turbo boost threshold or onset if you like . Things like higher air speeds through a slightly smaller runner diameter inlet manifold possibly with a smaller volume plenum chamber . Cams with a bit more lift and a bit less duration which would increase the cylinders trapping efficiencies .

When you can make more low end torque you can afford to raise the boost threshold with things like larger turbine housings - which have advantages higher up . You wouldn't achieve the same thing on an otherwise standard R33 spec RB25DET by only substituting the OP6 turbine housing or complete turbo . I imagine you would start to open a dip in the torque curve by having boost start later .

Nissan would have been looking for cleaner exhaust emissions for a late 90s car and I also think the R34 GTt may have been slightly heavier than the R33GTS25T .

Given a choice you would always start with an R34 engine but rebuilding an R33 with the R34 spec rods pistons and head should give the best of both . Staying with the R33 inlet means all the plumbing and most electricals can stay the same . From memory just need to rejig the CAS wiring and change cam solenoid plugs .

This is really only economically viable if your engine needs a rebuild or you can't quite justify an RB30 conversion .

A .  

  

  • Like 1

Happy New Year!

Thanks for the input.

Background is that I have a new hybrid turbo with the 21U housing.

It's a prototype and for me to test.

 

Since I have an unused OP6 turbo I was 'marvelling' if there were any merits in changing the 21U for the OP6.

 

Picture one is Hybrid vs OP6

Picture two is OEM vs Hybrid

 

 

R33R34.jpg

HYBRID.jpg

17 hours ago, discopotato03 said:

I think the most practical way to look at these OP6 Turbos is that the factory used them as part of a system to make better overall performance than the R33 RB25DET spec engine did . They made a completely new cylinder head and valve train , altered cam specs and changed the inlet manifold as well . Bore stroke and static compression ratio are the same . The bigger turbine housing they already had from the four cam single BB turbo VG30DET .

You should look up the standard power outputs for R33 and R34 spec RB25DETs and note the torque peaks but more importantly where they occur in the rev ranges . Don't quote me but I think with the R33 version the torque peak was up near 5000 revs where the R34 version was more like in the low 3000s . To me it looks like Nissan wanted more lowish and part throttle torque in the R34 engine and achieved that without a low turbo boost threshold or onset if you like . Things like higher air speeds through a slightly smaller runner diameter inlet manifold possibly with a smaller volume plenum chamber . Cams with a bit more lift and a bit less duration which would increase the cylinders trapping efficiencies .

When you can make more low end torque you can afford to raise the boost threshold with things like larger turbine housings - which have advantages higher up . You wouldn't achieve the same thing on an otherwise standard R33 spec RB25DET by only substituting the OP6 turbine housing or complete turbo . I imagine you would start to open a dip in the torque curve by having boost start later .

Nissan would have been looking for cleaner exhaust emissions for a late 90s car and I also think the R34 GTt may have been slightly heavier than the R33GTS25T .

Given a choice you would always start with an R34 engine but rebuilding an R33 with the R34 spec rods pistons and head should give the best of both . Staying with the R33 inlet means all the plumbing and most electricals can stay the same . From memory just need to rejig the CAS wiring and change cam solenoid plugs .

This is really only economically viable if your engine needs a rebuild or you can't quite justify an RB30 conversion .

A .  

  

 

Hello,

I found the first dyno run I ever had with my (back then) standard GTST. Only mod was an installed boost controller to the standard turbo.

HP figure is at the engine. Torque max is at 3700rpm

So from what you're writing I understand that the OP6 exhibits more lag but this is offset by the different design of the head/runner/cams?

The current hybrid I have installed maxes out at 260RKW, I'm not sure but I suspect this is also due to the restrictive 21U housing?

(that's basically why I am looking at the OP6)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

300_HP_vs_BOOST.jpg

300_HP_vs_TORQUE.jpg

48 minutes ago, KiwiRS4T said:

If you want a bolt on hybrid turbo Hypergear makes a number of great turbos. Have a read through his thread.

Yep, that's still an option ...thing is that I'm in the UK and postage/import duty would make things expensive.

17 minutes ago, Torques said:

Yep, that's still an option ...thing is that I'm in the UK and postage/import duty would make things expensive.

At prices half that of some Garrett turbos freight and duties will mean they are still competitively priced and a lot of RB focused research has gone into them...

marvelling | Definition, meaning & more | Collins Dictionary

This time when he unbuttoned her dress he did it slowly, marvelling at the velvety finish of her skin. 

 

Personally I've never looked at a turbo that way...

  • Like 1

OP6 is made for a Neo engine, and it has higher CPR, and more VCT cam angle.  Fitting that housing to a normal R33's high flow will result in an average of 500RPM worth of lag and increase HP by roughly 15kws. 

12 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

PLUS....if that "hybrid" turbo is some sort of highflow, then the 21U housing should have been machined out to suit the larger turbine and there is no way you can fit the OP6 onto it without also machining it out.

PLUS, there is no such word as marvelling.

Yes, the housing would get machined to accommodate the larger wheel :)

marveling -> http://www.dictionary.com/browse/marveling 

:)

1 hour ago, hypergear said:

OP6 is made for a Neo engine, and it has higher CPR, and more VCT cam angle.  Fitting that housing to a normal R33's high flow will result in an average of 500RPM worth of lag and increase HP by roughly 15kws. 

 

Thanks Stao,

500rpm is a figure I can understand, not sure it's worth 15KW

From your experience what is the power limit for the 21U housing due to back pressure?

12 hours ago, KiwiRS4T said:

At prices half that of some Garrett turbos freight and duties will mean they are still competitively priced and a lot of RB focused research has gone into them...

 

You don't have to convince me mate :)

I've been following Hypergear's developments for long.

 

40 minutes ago, Torques said:

Do you actually use it in that sense in the UK?  Because that's seriously f**ked if you do.  Marvelling (double L, because we can at least agree on the correct English spelling if we're not dealing with retarded Americans) implies that the thing you are looking at is a marvel, something weird, strange or otherwise non-comprehensible.  Like looking at a circus freak.  When you are trying to work out how to do something or how something works......that's wondering.  At least in the English usage that we use.  Is marvelling something that is used in your part of the UK?  Just your subculture?  The whole place?  Note that I'm not unfamiliar with the UK, I've spent a bit of time there.  Never heard it used in that way.

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

    • Who did you have do the installation? I actually know someone who is VERY familiar with the AVS gear. The main point of contact though would be your installer.   Where are you based in NZ?
    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
×
×
  • Create New...