Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yeah good on them for being the guinea cops at that kind of expense, that is a LOT of unproven turbo to jump into using on a 2.8litre turn-corners-car.  Will be very interesting to see how they perform in the real world, they do definitely seem to be not shy of pumping some air!

  • Like 1
On 6/7/2018 at 7:36 AM, mr_rbman said:

Looks like the Integrated Motorsport Time Attack R34 GTR is going to twin Garrett new series turbos from a single EFR (9180 from memory) shall be interesting to see the differences, obviously custom everything, manifolds etc....

Nice cannot wait!

Will be fitting a 550.72wg to a very basic config SR20VET later this year. 

Low comp, P11/VET cam combo, franken DET/VE intake, hypex ex side. Will try access above 8000 RPM on Piss98. Hope to move close to 50lbm.

Yes, Lithium, I am still alive. I also have an R33 GTR. 

Posting for sake of what they look like in the flesh. This was the first one delivered to a customer in Aus (me). It is a highly finished product compared to last gen, I have handled all manner of GTX and EFR in the last 2 years and can say these are the prettiest. I hope it's pretty good rather than pretty average. 

Stay tuned. 

IMG_20180109_181956.jpg

IMG_20180109_182158.jpg

IMG_20180109_182143.jpg

IMG_20180109_182134.jpg

IMG_20180109_182016.jpg

IMG_20180109_182004.jpg

This may be the integrated motorsport set up mentioned earlier... look like an amazing setup regardless, sporting a bunch of local Platinum fruit [emoji1362]?

 

 https://www.facebook.com/545029935656927/posts/989437111216205/

 

 

IMG_2236.thumb.jpg.f5c4e669217ad06f6924996ecbb6a1dd.jpgIMG_2237.thumb.jpg.d85a67280c57bc2f5a8edbd1922ac82e.jpg

 

  • 2 weeks later...

Cut and paste post from Facebook:

Probably one of the easiest to compare, this shows boost, torque and power for a G25-660 (solid lines) vs a Gen2 GTX3076R on an EVO.

Very solid power from the frame, but not what you'd necessarily be expecting spool wise from a "2867 sized turbo"

IMG_4795.jpg

Cut and paste from Facebook:

Same car, comparing with the GTX3582R it had on it earlier. THIS case shows a substantial spool improvement, but obviously needs more boost to make the same power - while it did match the GT30 psi for psi.

No question it flows very much like a GTX30 series turbo, but would have been nice if the boost threshold was much like the GT28 sized turbos like the naming would have you hope

IMG_4796.jpg

  • 1 month later...
On 8/14/2018 at 9:01 AM, Snara said:

Anyone have experience with Garrett GTW3684R ? 

That's actually a GTW range turbo, a little off topic in here - but I've seen VERY little for the GTW range, most you can find is the GTW38s.  

  • Like 1
1 minute ago, sneakey pete said:

Apparently the twin G turbo engine made 1050 hp on the dyno with a little worse down low than the 9180 it replaced, 
probably not a bad result given the extra few hundred hp it picked up

Yep, pretty much as expected really - initially I thought they were saying they expected better spool than the EFR9180 which seemed like a tall ask... but it sounds like as you say, it's a reasonable amount laggier but makes >100hp more (not sure about a few hundred).  In the scheme of things - they are more turbo, they're laggier, and they make more power.

One of the more impressive things about the comparison for me was that apparently the twin G25s give nothing away to the Precision 6870 they tried, but makes more power and the 6870 fell on its face after 8000rpm - while the G25s hold on past 9000rpm. 

So yeah, as expected the G25s aren't really cooking until will into the 5000rpm range but if you've built it to rev like hell and they are holding up high then it sounds to match what they were looking for to a T.  

 

 

 

Not a long term proposition (for engine life), currently doing a durability run on 9180 (~1000bhp) with 3.4. Aiming for 20 hours, which is a topic not discussed or understood by most be it by deception or ignorance?.

The higher rpm required for twins along with associated exponential drop in engine life running it this way means we pretty much shit canned the idea ;)

7 minutes ago, RICE RACING said:

Not a long term proposition (for engine life), currently doing a durability run on 9180 (~1000bhp) with 3.4. Aiming for 20 hours, which is a topic not discussed or understood by most be it by deception or ignorance?.

I am sure they know this, and I am sure a good percentage of the people discussing this realise that - I doubt it is either deception or ignorance so much as just like top level drag racing, time attack is pretty much getting the most you can out of a setup while still HOPEFULLY having it hold together long enough to get a result.  Its clearly not going to be an endurance engine... though those reasons are why I assumed when they said "more drivability/wider power delivery" that they were hoping it'd be more responsive earlier - not at the drag racing end of the rpm range.

It kind of backs up a lot of initial discussions of these turbos, considering wheel size wise they are comparable with GTX2867Rs or SMALLER than Trust T517Zs - they are not spool monsters by any stretch of the imagination, the G-series don't seem like a threat to EFRs in their realm however for this car the logic in why they went for them seems sound... so long as they can hardness the power delivery and keep the engine together long enough to achieve the results they are aiming for.

 

The RB34/EFR9180 combo sounds like fun!  What kind of rev range will that operate in?  In Evo world from memory the "more reliable" setups tended to be shorter stroke/longer rod combos (so nearer stock displacement as opposed to 20% more than stock) resulting in slightly less displacement - the bit of extra rpm needed to make a given power level usable was considered to often be a better reliability trade off from the effects come from the lower rod/stroke ratios the strokers resulted in.

Edited by Lithium

These guys (Integrated / PMC) are building a car to be damn quick, not reliable longevity...

They have even gone to the extent of now running alloy rods purely to save weight etc...

They want to win WTAC oz, end of story...

 

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

    • The fab work can be as simple as a couple of silicon hoses and clamps to the factory piping. 
    • Just sounds like either way you need to do some fab work to get everything to fit, so why limit yourself at that point? If the GCG high flow option is zero effort in and out swap though I'd probably do that. It's almost certainly lowest risk, lowest cost, etc. The HKS GTIII-RS option that Kapr mentioned is laughably expensive for what it is, they charge the exact same for two turbos on the RB26 so their margins are off the charts on that thing.
    • Intake manifold is not a part of the issue. The turbo bolts to the exhaust manifold. That is easy. But close your eyes and picture the physical situation. That is a T3 flange on the manifold and a T3 flange on the turbo. As long as any new turbo has a T3 flange on the exhaust housing, that exhaust housing will bolt to the exhaust manifold. This places the exhaust housing in the same place as the stock one. But now move your mental attention a little further forward. The location of the compressor housing is set by the length of the turbo's core. The stock turbo had a long core. Let's say that it is..... 100mm long. So that would place the compressor housing 100mm forward of the exhaust housing. But a highflow, might well have a centre core that is shorter. Let's say that it is only 70mm long. Now the compressor housing will be 30mm further back in the engine bay than the stock one. This DOES move the turbo's compressor outlet backwards. It also moves the compressor's inlet backwards. You will very likely have to do some work to both the inlet and outlet piping to make everything connect again. I am not say this to make it out to be a bigger deal than it is. I am just pointing out that "bolt on" is sometimes not quite bolt on. The highflow from GCG that Murray linked above (https://gcg.com.au/turbo-charger-upgrade-skyline-gtst-2iu-xtrgts-s1.html ) uses a core that is the same length as the stock core, and so does not require this extra work. It will look very much like the stock turbo. No-one uses GTR turbos of any flavour (stock, or aftermarket) in a single turbo application on RB20/25. It's not a thing. Yes, people have been putting on GT3076, GTX3076 (and bigger and smaller versions of those) and G30s (of various sizes) onto RB20/25 since forever. But these are not "bolt on". Everything except the 4 bolts to the exhaust manifold change with these. And genuine Garretts are expensive. Non-gen, like Pulsar, etc, are cheaper, variously as good or nearly as good. But still not bolt on. No-one in the right mind would pay for an HKS turbo. Not in this modern day and age. Well, yes, the GCG highflow. You could ask HG what he can do to make the compressor housing sit in the original location. There are surely others doing highflows around the world. And some of the eBay/Temu ones (as reported by Dose) work and don't die. Bit of a lottery though. I would send your turbo to GCG (here in Oz) to be highflowed if you want a trivial no-extra-work option. But seriously, the work required to change inlet and outlet piping is not that hard. That's a boost control problem, not a turbo problem.
    • Thank you all for the replys 🙂 I know that intake would be different but that is one pipe at it is not that hard to get(custom one). I meant mainly bolt to the stock manifold and the turbo elbow. I looked and many sites/forums but they are just "old" with some old HKS turbos from GT-R i guess? What about some Garrets?  Or any other turbo? Is there even a turbo which i can just bolt on? 😄 And yeah i know about that new HKS but that is like 2000k USD without taxes/shipping in here   Iam getting a touch up tune but my "problem" is that on the "not" hot day iam getting peaks around 0,9 bar...and when it was around 15 Celsious i saw peak around 1 bar which is just too much for stock turbo. And of course turbo is old and i like to get some new one for a piece of mind 🙂 
    • I'm working on the assumption that our friend Jasmine here is a Russian (or, possibly Ukrainian) spammer/spambot, based purely on the number of such that I have been having to neuter in the last few weeks. IP address for the OP above was in WA. But that could have been via VPN. Posting at quarter to 4 in the morning is a good sign of being from somewhere in Europe. The last Jasmine that I kicked in the cooch was IP addressed in Ukraine. Even that could have been via VPN, and the bitchbot could have been from Russia, Serbia, China or anywhere. Regardless, was a spambot, so I killed it with fire. The fact that our new friend Jasmine here did not respond in any way to my tart query strongly suggests to me that this OP was just the establishment phase of a user able to be activated for spamming in a week, or 3 or 10.
×
×
  • Create New...