Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

GTR transfer casing questions

So, I have the weirdest question ever asked...

Does anyone know enough about the GTR transfer casing, to know, whether it could handle over 300HP, using only the front wheel setup ... and can the rear drive be disabled somehow?

I ask, because i'm looking for something to use for a mid/rear engine setup (custom chassis) and would prefer not to use a wrx or volkswagen/audi driveline...

 

any answers? or thoughts?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/469758-gtr-transfer-casing-questions/
Share on other sites

Ummmmmmm........I fail to see how you could use the GTR gearbox and transfer for a mid-rear setup.  Especially if you want to use the front output.

 

Ignoring, for the moment, the questions of strength, the engine-gearbox-transfer arrangement for the GTR stuff is purely inline.  So if you were wanting to drive something's rear wheels with the front output of a GTR gearbox, then the gearbox would have to be mounted a long way behind the rear axle line.  The driveshaft would have to come out of the transfer case the same as it does in the GTR, forwards to the diff, in the same way that the diff lives in the sump of the RB26.

You are aware the GTR transfer case only has the one, forward facing output, aren't you?

Even if you planned to just use the transfer case, without the GTR gearbox, it doesn't really change anything.  The TX case still needs to hang off the back of a gearbox, still only has the same output shaft.

Addressing the question of strength......actually, there's no point in addressing the strength question.  The answer is yes, or no, depending on a number of things that don't really make sense considering because the idea is fundamentally broken anyway.

Now i remember what these forums are like....

 

Let me clear it up...   RB25, + GTR or GTS4 gearbox, GTR or GTS4 sump and transfer casing. Power transmitted through the transfer casing instead of the rear output. And yes, I'm aware that the gearbox goes behind the engine...  and then has a shaft forward again to the transfer case. 

So, not a fundamentally broken idea..   hell, if factory five can do exactly the same thing with a wrx driveline (Yes I know its less complex...   but that's what fabrication is all about) in their 818 kit car, i don't see why it couldn't be done similarly with a GTR/GTS4 driveline...   my only question was on strength..  not on what you think of my idea...

Of course you remember what these forums are like.  With 12 posts and an Integra to your name.

So you want to use a really long engine in the middle of the car, more or less centred on the rear axle line, and a really long gearbox and transfer case at the rear of the car, then send the drive all the way forward to the sump region of the really long engine, where the rear axle line needs to be?  Right?  You do realise that the rear end of this drive line is going to be >1.2m behind the axle line, yeah?

How is this going to be smarter than any of the various Audi/Porsche gearboxes that people already use that are 10x more compact and can handle >300HP?

I used to come here all the time, under a different name..

I've owned 31's, I've owned a 32, I've owned a 33...  And yes, now I own an Integra...  Have you decided I'm stupid simply because I drive a Honda...

Yes, it would be a lot of weight (and length) behind the rear axle.. Hence my asking the question, so I know whether its worth trying to fabricate a better solution based on that gearbox...

And yes, everyone does audi/porsche solutions...  they've been done to death...

 

Thanks so much for your help... 

1 hour ago, Haz33 said:

Let me clear it up...   RB25, + GTR or GTS4 gearbox, GTR or GTS4 sump and transfer casing. Power transmitted through the transfer casing instead of the rear output. And yes, I'm aware that the gearbox goes behind the engine...  and then has a shaft forward again to the transfer case. .

You mean a shaft going forward from the transfer case to the front diff. No I don't think the drive from the gear box to the transfer case would hold up. The front shaft also is tiny compared to the rear drive shaft and the front diff too is a smaller unit than the rear.

Hey, Thanks man, that's kinda what i was looking for....

The whole idea looked a bit awkward, but i thought if it could hold the power it might have been worth tooling around with a bit.

Looks like its back to the drawing board...  Trying to find a decent transaxle without paying for porsche is a pain in the ass...

 

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

    • 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...