How difficult is 1000hp with stock appearence RB26

[GTRAAH]

WIth the GEN 2 GTX2867R  Twin setup (below link) rated at 1000hp Is it difficult to get this kind of HP?  And around 550KW - 600KW+

 

https://www.turbokits.com/Nissan/Skyline_R32,_R33,_R34/Turbo_Upgrades/ATP_Garrett_GTX2867R_Gen_II_Drop-In_Turbo_Upgrade_-_RB26DETT_(1000HP)/10764/

 

Will be on a Flex Setup RB29 WIth PLenty headwork.

[r32-25t]

Safe to say Impossible 

[Lithium]

6 hours ago, GTRAAH said:

WIth the GEN 2 GTX2867R  Twin setup (below link) rated at 1000hp Is it difficult to get this kind of HP?  And around 550KW - 600KW+

Is this a trick question?

I am not aware of ANY stock appearing low mount setups making a legit ~600kw @ wheels "all boost".  I'd imagine that if it was easy then by now it would be way more common to see setups like that, or there'd be a few hero cars making even close to that.   

Realistically people seem to hit a wall WELL before that power level, not matter what size turbos they squeeze into the stock location.

Here's probably one of the most "full effort" low mount twins setups I am aware of, twin GT-RS with all the fruit etc - not sure what the low mount twins 1/4 mile record is now, but this held it for a while: https://dsportmag.com/the-cars/this-aussie-rh9-r32-gt-r-does-more-with-less/

The GT-RSs only fall slightly short of the GTX2867Rs in flow, mid/low 40lb/min versus mid/high 40lb/min and the same turbine wheel and housings.... so should be pretty indicative of efforts people have needed to go to make in the area of 500kw.

Edited February 21, 2020 by Lithium

[GTRAAH]

lol OK 1000hp seems to far dont even know why they advertise it as such  .But Over 500Kw has to be possible, neway Im not just talking about slapping the turbos in , it will be a complete MEGA-overall setup PLenty Head/block work, Spool Rb29 strkr... Flex setup  Im just wondering if anyone has actually seen it with a different mega-Overall setup than the RH9,  Im guessing many people just hear Single are best and thats what they end up with 

Maybe ill give it a go and post results 

Say I wanted to Go single,  does anyone know where i can get it certified road legal (NSW) and whats the costs? Only thing i dont like is the appearence its easier to tell its Heavily power modded just by lifting up the bonnet. Do people just do it anyway and just hope it doesnt get looked at?

 

Edited February 22, 2020 by GTRAAH

[GTRAAH]

CLOSE THREAD - DONT WORRY I GOT MY ANSWER ELSEWHERE

THNX

[GTSBoy]

 

7 hours ago, GTRAAH said:

I GOT MY ANSWER ELSEWHERE

Which is...... 1000HP twins don't look low mount and stock.

[sneakey pete]

13 hours ago, GTRAAH said:

  Im guessing many people just hear Single are best and thats what they end up with 

 

 

Many people hear single is best, think its a lot of parroted tripe, start buying high power twins stuff, but do their own research and then go single... 

 

I'm honestly interested in what info you found? Skeptical, yes, but interested.

[GTRAAH]

33 minutes ago, sneakey pete said:

 

Many people hear single is best, think its a lot of parroted tripe, start buying high power twins stuff, but do their own research and then go single... 

 

I'm honestly interested in what info you found? Skeptical, yes, but interested.

 

Its going to be different but interesting , I'll post up when i'm more definite and ill post results either way.

Edited February 23, 2020 by GTRAAH

[GTSBoy]

It's actually very simple. Start with something that Hypergear says about one of his larger single turbos for RBs. It can be installed as internal or external wastegate. if internal, it can be low mounted off the stock manifold. It will make ~100kW more when high mounted with external gate than low internal. It's all about the pipework, the crowding, the compromises and the big wastegate. Anything you try to jam into the spot where the factory twins live is going to be compromised by the the tight confines.

[Lithium]

5 hours ago, GTRAAH said:

 

Its going to be different but interesting , I'll post up when i'm more definite and ill post results either way.

Good luck, very interested to see how it goes and if it ends up much different to the other quite smart folks who have invested a lot of time and money in trying to make stock location twins work well at higher power levels - I have seen and been involved with enough projects to know that just because no one has "cracked the code" doesn't mean that someone won't come up with a way around it, and it'd be pretty cool to see some cunning solution which works well so please to update on the approach and the results.  No matter what the outcome I can't see how it wouldn't teach someone something

[Kinkstaah]

No smart folks want 1000hp in any form of street car, because the reliability of such a setup, even on the best built engine will be comedy at best.

[Lithium]

1 hour ago, Kinkstaah said:

No smart folks want 1000hp in any form of street car, because the reliability of such a setup, even on the best built engine will be comedy at best.

I don't agree, and that's not just because there is a clear difference between being smart and being wise 

The beauty of modern ECUs, turbos, cams etc etc is that you can build an engine capable of producing 1000hp by nudging the boost up to the level required to make that power - but having that there as an option as opposed to the default mode.   For sake of argument, a 1000ish-hp capable single EFR9280 setup on an RB30 would be much much more usable on the road even if running at 600hp than your classic popular 600hp low mount twin setup on an RB26 - and there isn't much use for 1000hp in most situations.   

If I was building a fun GTR street toy I'd realistically build it like that, a responsive 1000hp capable setup that I rarely ran at such a power level because realistically - even 600hp is nuts on the road, but use 1000hp for the old drag day/chops at roll racing type stuff.   Naturally you'll still have a shorter than normal life, and there will be more likelhood of niggles etc... but there are plenty of people crazy enough that it would be worth it.

 

[Dose Pipe Sutututu]

2 hours ago, Kinkstaah said:

No smart folks want 1000hp in any form of street car, because the reliability of such a setup, even on the best built engine will be comedy at best.

Put it this way a F1 motor back in the 80s would last at best a few sessions, now take that same motor and run it off a modern ECU with all the proper strategies in place and it would last probably a whole season (provided the dinosaur turbos don't explode and the motor doesn't re-ingest the fragments).

[PLYNX]

1 hour ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

Put it this way a F1 motor back in the 80s would last at best a few sessions, now take that same motor and run it off a modern ECU with all the proper strategies in place and it would last probably a whole season (provided the dinosaur turbos don't explode and the motor doesn't re-ingest the fragments).

Ah memories !

I remember talking to the Honda F1 engineers about their 80s Honda F1 engines back in the day !

Well over 1000hp out of less than 1.5 litres . . . . .

Sigh . . . take me back to simpler days . . . . and unlimited budgets . . .

[GTSBoy]

2 hours ago, PLYNX said:

Sigh . . . take me back to simpler days . . . . and unlimited budgets . . .

And lethal fuel mixes.

[djr81]

1 hour ago, GTSBoy said:

And lethal fuel mixes.

Dont be silly.  Toluene is good for you.

[sneakey pete]

5 hours ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

Put it this way a F1 motor back in the 80s would last at best a few sessions, now take that same motor and run it off a modern ECU with all the proper strategies in place and it would last probably a whole season (provided the dinosaur turbos don't explode and the motor doesn't re-ingest the fragments).

Genuine question, but what sort of advancements have we made since then that would actually do that?

[PLYNX]

1 hour ago, GTSBoy said:

And lethal fuel mixes.

Been there, done that !

A bit of tetra ethyl lead, av gas with a flick of nitro methane swizzled around with a drop of pure methanol with put hairs on your chest.

[Lithium]

1 minute ago, sneakey pete said:

Genuine question, but what sort of advancements have we made since then that would actually do that?

Actually curious about this myself, I don't profess to know heaps about F1 but I do understand they had a fair bit of R&D and weren't running the worst engine management - all things considered they made small high revving engines survive quite epic power levels fairly well considering

[djr81]

The qualifying motors only had to last a lap and the race motors a couple hundred miles.  At the end of the previous turbo era they had regulated the boost to be no more than 4 bar, then 2.5 bar with fuel limits.  They ended up only good for 500kW or so out of 1.5 litres.

The unlimited stuff of 1986 or so had phone numbers for horsepower.  If you want to see how Ford (Cosworth) got it wrong there are some good books on the subject.  Mostly having Duckworth etc crying about fuel and everything else including compression ratios, turbo sizes etc etc.