Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

On 19/3/2022 at 9:53 AM, r32-25t said:

When does it hope to have boost, 4th gear? Lol

Well they get big pro mods on boost, the car is being set up for drag racing, not street duties 

On 20/03/2022 at 9:32 PM, Old man 32 GTR said:

Well they get big pro mods on boost, the car is being set up for drag racing, not street duties 

Yeah with methanol and big auto stalls to get 1000psi of boost and all that - this is crazy 2000whp+ stuff - I like👍

On 18/03/2022 at 6:19 PM, Old man 32 GTR said:

Yep, two of my turbos! Lol

Out of curiosity, what is the 6875 like ?

Just took my 32 for a drive and still think the 6466 is fckn mental, but have always wondered what a 6870 upwards turbo would be like realistically outside of drag use.

On 20/3/2022 at 11:02 PM, Old man 32 GTR said:

Well they get big pro mods on boost, the car is being set up for drag racing, not street duties 

I had a feeling it would be a drag car with a big converter and a lot of gas to get it into the converter 

On 18/03/2022 at 12:26 AM, Old man 32 GTR said:

As stated in title, when you’re hell bent on twins, but love singles, this is going in my mates car. Should make some serious numbers. 
 

725C7177-0985-4485-86EA-F01BEEDD4A80.jpeg

Haha that's actually pretty damn cool, I have to admit I was always a huge fan of the old Japanese drag cars running 3240s etc - they had an epic sound to them and looked choice under the bonnet and I'm sure this will look and sound unique, albeit I don't think twins are actually functionally that great a prospect on RBs and while I hope it works... especially with this turbo combo there's a good chance it may prove to be quite a headache trying to make it work as well as the 102+mm singles you're effectively trying to compete with here.

VERY keen to see how it goes, though!  Any more details on the engine spec?

  • Like 1
On 21/3/2022 at 8:13 AM, Lithium said:

Haha that's actually pretty damn cool, I have to admit I was always a huge fan of the old Japanese drag cars running 3240s etc - they had an epic sound to them and looked choice under the bonnet and I'm sure this will look and sound unique, albeit I don't think twins are actually functionally that great a prospect on RBs and while I hope it works... especially with this turbo combo there's a good chance it may prove to be quite a headache trying to make it work as well as the 102+mm singles you're effectively trying to compete with here.

VERY keen to see how it goes, though!  Any more details on the engine spec?

CRD built 3.2, wide journal drag spec bottom end with CRD race port head combo, not sure of the exact specifics, will be running auto and NOS. 
I like that it’s something different, sure he could have run a pro mod like all the others (in that league) but you don’t learn if you don’t try. 
Car looks mint and is coming together really well. 

On 21/3/2022 at 12:33 AM, BK said:

Out of curiosity, what is the 6875 like ?

Just took my 32 for a drive and still think the 6466 is fckn mental, but have always wondered what a 6870 upwards turbo would be like realistically outside of drag use.

I don’t know, car is still in pieces, will update my build thread soon as I will be pushing forward and try to get it back on its wheels in the next couple of months. 
the 68/70 on the 3L was awesome, but I honestly couldn’t really feel the difference between it and a 2.6 with a 64/66 (a mates car). But at roll racing I had an edge on him in acceleration. And that was when I was lifting the head and running 28psi vs the 64/66 running 32psi. 
The new 68/75 I bought will be going on my new 2.7 motor so will no doubt be vastly different. I’ll let you know when it’s finally together. 

  • Like 1
  • 1 month later...

Kind of related to the topic. There is a twin trust T67 kit up for sale for 6k includes turbos, manifold, waste gate, down pipes, oil/water lines, twin entry trust drag intercooler and pipes from turbos to intercooler. They have been rebuilt and are in good nick. I am really keen to get rid of my 7685 kit and get that. I remember hearing and seeing that kit on Kier Wilson’s R32 when he ran 8s. These things look amazing and sound insane. They would spool ok to on a 3.2 with a sequential on e85. Looking specs, they flow up to 750hp each. 

9EB4A272-F9E6-4485-BD0D-3F8B75A6B66F.png

A8E585E3-E2B1-43E1-86D7-89BD669D5468.png

25492306-66E3-41D8-BDE9-921FF5709AEF.png

Edited by khezz

What are you hoping to achieve by going to a setup from 1912?

what’s wrong with your setup at the moment? What are you trying to achieve by changing everything?

Seems like a pretty backwards move with turbos with overgrown heavy wheels, journal nugget bearings and just general shitness.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
On 30/04/2022 at 4:36 PM, Piggaz said:

What are you hoping to achieve by going to a setup from 1912?

what’s wrong with your setup at the moment? What are you trying to achieve by changing everything?

Seems like a pretty backwards move with turbos with overgrown heavy wheels, journal nugget bearings and just general shitness.

Remember this car has never been run with the combo mentioned.

This is funny - Looking at moving to a Trust twin high mount setup from a 7685 that has never been installed 😄

At least try the Precision first. Not happy ? Maybe move down to the Gen2 7275 / 7675 or something than this Trust twin idea.

Always wanted to stay twin. It was the early 2000s GTRs that got me hooked. Kiers r32, GTR700, HKS R33, all the big twin monsters.  Call it a tribute if you will. Plus these twins have been rebuilt with billet wheels and new cartridges. So I’m not really moving back that far. Every high powered gtr is exactly the same these days. Yes, because it works. But there is nothing wrong with being a little unique. It would be much cheaper and less painful to do it now while everything is still in pieces and my parts are brand new. 

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...