Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

And didn't you lift a head or blow your motor?

Squeezing all that pressure into a tiny T3 flange, then releasing all that pressure after the restriction is counter intuitive. That's why as soon as people go to high mounts they pick up power but it's not so much the high mount it's more so the exhaust gasses be bleed off before the collector.

Boost control is subjective, and your 6tits probably doesn't have twin gates off it or the merge between both scrolls to the gate was poor.

If you ever have an exhaust pressure sensor or gauge on the collector you'll understand.

1 minute ago, Griffin said:

Is there any difference having wastegate on manifold at / before collector over the turbine housing?

Yep, you'll reduce exhaust back pressure, make more power, less things glowing on the hot side.

I did that only mod and with the same timing map, same boost, same turbo (except it was a BB centre this time round, same comp/turbine wheel) and made extra 20kW off the bat. 

4 hours ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

And didn't you lift a head or blow your motor?

Squeezing all that pressure into a tiny T3 flange, then releasing all that pressure after the restriction is counter intuitive. That's why as soon as people go to high mounts they pick up power but it's not so much the high mount it's more so the exhaust gasses be bleed off before the collector.

Boost control is subjective, and your 6tits probably doesn't have twin gates off it or the merge between both scrolls to the gate was poor.

If you ever have an exhaust pressure sensor or gauge on the collector you'll understand.

Wouldn't the actual restriction be the actual turbine housing itself?
By my understanding of pressure, the pressure inside the manifold would not be altered depending on where the gate was, as long as it's between the head and the turbine wheel.

I had 1 gate in both setups, and a 45mm gate off the housing vs a 50mm gate off the 6boost. You can tell just by looking at it which gate is in the better spot for flow.

I agree with you, going external gate does free up power, once you start to really get the most out of any specific turbo. IWG's of any kinds (Even on EFR's!) seem to just not cut it once you really, really want to get the most out of a rear housing.


In this example though, the engine is likely to let go before the turbo or gate really even gets involved as a point of discussion

Here's a thought experiment.

Let's say that the exhaust gas needs to be split 50/50 between the gate and the turbine.  If the ext gate is on the turbine housing, then you are shoving double the amount of gas into the housing than if the gate was on the manifold somewhere.  Either way, we want the same 50% to make it all the way to the nozzle, but in the region between the flange and the housing mounted gate, the gas velocity must be double.  Pressure losses go up with the square of velocity.  So whatever frictional losses occur, they are doubled.  The exhaust gas is losing energy before it has even made it to the turbine.  It must therefore not be as good as if it was vented before the housing.

The difference might not be large, but it will be there.

The one big advantage of putting the gate on the housing is that it is easier to put it in a spot where the gas is definitely flowing towards the gate (because all the gas is flowing that way anyway) which makes it a little harder to f**k it up the way that people do when they put ext gate offtakes onto manifolds at bizarre angles.

  • Like 1

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...