Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, PLYNX said:

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.

And what did you put in your car?

  • Like 1

Lol.

Guys, 1000hp engines may last a season on track. 50 laps is 150km. A year of track days at once a month (more than most) is 1800km.

Sorry but if your 1000hp engine lasts 1800 hard km.. it's still an unreliable piece of crap. And I think someone getting 12 full track days out of a 1000 hp setup, with 50 hot laps per session is beyond what it would reasonably last.

If you're measuring your engine life in hours, then.. yeah.

  • Like 1
On 21/02/2020 at 6:11 AM, 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+

Far as turbos go, with a .64 rear and .60 front that is very possible, you can even up size them to GTX3071R. I found factory exhaust setup is very restrictive, so if you can run two short 3 inches pipes hanging out side of the car along with all other supporting mods you should be able to get there.  

13 hours ago, Kinkstaah said:

Lol.

Guys, 1000hp engines may last a season on track. 50 laps is 150km. A year of track days at once a month (more than most) is 1800km.

Sorry but if your 1000hp engine lasts 1800 hard km.. it's still an unreliable piece of crap. And I think someone getting 12 full track days out of a 1000 hp setup, with 50 hot laps per session is beyond what it would reasonably last.

If you're measuring your engine life in hours, then.. yeah.

There are a lot of things I could say to this glorious demo of building a strawman argument, but the most obvious would be - what exactly are you doing in this thread if the sheer mention of 1000hp clearly triggers your fear response?

I don't think it's a straw man argument at all..

The OP clearly posted it with a view to keep it stock looking as they intend to use it as a road car, so "Stock looking" is "Stock looking, Mr Policeman observing my road car"

As many have said, there are 0 instances of this actually being done.
As many have also said, 1000hp RB26's at all, have a limited lifespan on a racetrack, measured in hours in terms of reliability, and they don't look stock.

So to answer the original question, how difficult is it to have a 1000hp, reliable, stock looking setup on the street? I'd say extremely.

You and I both know that a 1000hp setup, cruising around town is only using 50kw or something like that at 100km, cruising around. So it could last 400,000km in such a scenario.

But that isn't what people really care about when they talk about reliability. They care about how many seconds or hours of full throttle time. While 1000hp in 2020 is different to 1000hp in 1995, I still would say it's limited to drags or highway pulls and even then have limited reliability.

WTAC GTR's don't have 1000hp. They certainly don't have 1000hp, and 300,000km of daily driving, and do a track day once a month for multiple years. If you asked the owners to do that, they would definitely insinuate that something would break before then.

Motive DVD ran there stock RB 26 to what 800hp for years of thrashing.  I know not full race pace everyday.

Now will find out how there new engine lasts at 1000hp with all the fruit (still stock crank tho).

Obviously not "stock" looking.

I got told when my engine was built that 10 years (100,000km) has been seen on these engines with normal/drag and some circuit mixed in.  Seems reasonable for 600+hp.

Edited by Stixbnr32

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

    • Yep super expensive, awesome. It would be a cool passion project if I had the money.
    • Getting the setup right, is likely to cost multiples of the purchase price of the vehicle.
    • So it's a ginormous undertaking that will be a massive headache but will be sorta cool if pulled off right. And also expensive. I'm sure it'll be as expensive as buying the car itself. I don't think you could just do this build without upgrading other things to take the extra power. Probably lots of custom stuff as well. All this assuming the person has mechanical knowledge. I'm stupid enough to try it but smart enough to realize there's gonna be mistakes even with an experienced mechanic. I'm a young bloke on minimum wage that gets dopamine from air being moved around and got his knowledge from a Donut video on how engines work.]   Thanks for the response though super informative!
    • Yes, it is entirely possible to twincharge a Skyline. It is not....without problems though. There was a guy did it to an SOHC RB30 (and I think maybe it became or already was a 25/30) in a VL Commode. It was a monster. The idea is that you can run both compressors at relatively low pressure ratios, yet still end up with a quite large total pressure ratio because they multiply, not add, boost levels. So, if the blower is spun to give a 1.4:1 PR (ie, it would make ~40 kPa of boost on its own) and the turbo is set up to give a 1.4:1 PR also, then you don't get 40+40 = 80 kPa of boost, you get 1.4*1.4, which is pretty close to 100 kPa of boost. It's free real estate! This only gets better as the PRs increase. If both are set up to yield about 1.7 PR, which is only about 70 kPa or 10ish psi of boost each, you actually end up with about 1.9 bar of boost! So, inevitably it was a bit of a monster. The blower is set up as the 2nd compressor, closest to the motor, because it is a positive displacement unit, so to get the benefit of putting it in series with another compressor, it has to go second. If you put it first, it has to be bigger, because it will be breathing air at atmospheric pressure. The turbo's compressor ends up needing to be a lot larger than you'd expect, and optimised to be efficient at large mass flows and low PRs. The turbo's exhaust side needs to be quite relaxed, because it's not trying to provide the power to produce all the boost, and it has to handle ALL the exhaust flow. I think you need a much bigger wastegate than you might expect. Certainly bigger than for an engine just making the same power level turbo only. The blower effectively multiplies the base engine size. So if you put a 1.7 PR blower on a 2.5L Skyline, it's like turboing a 4.2L engine. Easy to make massive power. Plus, because the engine is blown, the blower makes boost before the turbo can even think about making boost, so it's like having that 4.2L engine all the way from idle. Fattens the torque delivery up massively. But, there are downsides. The first is trying to work out how to size the turbo according to the above. The second is that you pretty much have to give up on aircon. There's not enough space to mount everything you need. You might be able to go elec power steering pump, hidden away somewhere. but it would still be a struggle to get both the AC and the blower on the same side of the engine. Then, you have to ponder whether you want to truly intercool the thing. Ideally you would put a cooler between the turbo and the blower, so as to drop the heat out of it and gain even more benefit from the blower's positive displacement nature. But that would really need to be a water to air core, because you're never going to find enough room to run 2 sets of boost pipes out to air to air cores in the front of the car. But you still need to aftercool after the blower, because both these compressors will add a lot of heat, and you wil have the same temperature (more or less) as if you produced all that boost with a single stage, and no one in their right mind would try to run a petrol engine on high boost without a cooler (unless not using petrol, which we shall ignore for the moment). I'm of the opinnion that 2x water to air cores in the bay and 2x HXs out the front is probably the only sensible way to avoid wasting a lot of room trying to fit in long runs of boost pipe. But the struggle to locate everything in the limited space available would still be a pretty bad optimisation problem. If it was an OEM, they'd throw 20 engineers at it for a year and let them test out 30 ideas before deciding on the best layout. And they'd have the freedom to develop bespoke castings and the like, for manifolds, housings, connecting pipes to/from compressors and cores. A single person in a garage can either have one shot at it and live with the result, or spend 5 years trying to get it right.
    • Good to know, thank you!
×
×
  • Create New...