Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

On 21/04/2022 at 12:07 PM, r32-25t said:

It was more aimed at the post above yours where they recommended to pull the engine to change turbos 

Apologies, my bad.

English is my 3rd language so there are times I mistranslate into Bing Bong 😂

  • Haha 2
On 21/04/2022 at 5:32 PM, joshuaho96 said:

I like my gloves, but I'm a desk jockey that gets sore all over after rotating my tires and bleeding brakes.

Same here. Always need to wear those Ansell gloves after not working on cars for a decade + soft skin

I have 2 pairs of standard R32/R33 turbos if you want hehe (good condition)

  • Like 1

Spectrum Motorsports (Sold through Up Garage?) , appear to do twin turbos based on modern Garrett wheels.  May be worth looking into but unsure of anyone in Australia who has ran them

https://www.spectrummotorsportssolutions.com/collections/gt-r/products/r32-r33-r34-rb26-smr600

On 22/4/2022 at 9:37 PM, RB335 said:

Spectrum Motorsports (Sold through Up Garage?) , appear to do twin turbos based on modern Garrett wheels.  May be worth looking into but unsure of anyone in Australia who has ran them

https://www.spectrummotorsportssolutions.com/collections/gt-r/products/r32-r33-r34-rb26-smr600


good thread to read for twin guys wanted to put ‘billet’ wheels into compact GTR junker housings.

  • Like 1
On 4/22/2022 at 3:43 AM, niZmO_Man said:

Same here. Always need to wear those Ansell gloves after not working on cars for a decade + soft skin

I have 2 pairs of standard R32/R33 turbos if you want hehe (good condition)

I still debate what to do there honestly, the original turbos were covered in either a ton of blowby from the decades or seeping a little from the seals and I couldn't ship them with the car anyways. As far as I can tell nobody really rebuilds turbos with the factory ceramic turbine either. I'm also not sure that anyone cares about having the factory ceramic turbos, even for weird obsessives like me. Then again you have the Contempo Concepts of the world trying to source series 1 R32 steering wheels because the later revisions have slightly wider spokes which is unacceptable to them.

On 4/22/2022 at 7:03 PM, Piggaz said:


good thread to read for twin guys wanted to put ‘billet’ wheels into compact GTR junker housings.

I'm pretty sure you're right but it's kind of interesting to see the kinds of results that this tuner got with the magical beans.

244705525_ScreenShot2022-04-22at11_28_48PM.thumb.png.f5690590eaa9b9134362266577c1f4d4.png

They also report differences between the HKS 2530 turbos and the Garrett -5s which is interesting:

1613610769_ScreenShot2022-04-22at11_36_52PM.thumb.png.08a15f57998d8a530aa93da2be85177a.png

How real any of this is an open question but they sure sold me on the HKS magic bean journal bearing nuggets. Well, that and a lot of staring at Kansai Service/Midori Seibi dyno charts to get a sense for how they compared to the other relatively low power bolt-on turbos.

The factory ceramic turbos are garbage. They spool slightly better than anything else available but fall over as soon as they reach peak 15psi of boost in the mid range compared to anything else in the real world. Reality = garbage mid to top end output meaning car is actually slower and more underwhelming as you don't drive a GTR in the 2 - 4000rpm range expecting it to be the most awesome thing ever developed.

Also Garrett -5 is not original HKS 2530 direct equivalent - close but not the same. HKS 2530 will always make more power than a -5 with better overall power curve which I thought everyone knew by now. These billet wheels into existing housings are also stupid as it ends up being way to much compressor flow for the turbine side to handle as Paul pointed out equalling nugget response.

I suggest to stop trying to reinvent the wheel and find this RB26 spool nirvana ideology that doesn't exist. If you must twin turbo I'd sell your heap of shit journal bearing MHI based HKS GTIII-SS turbos and just run ball bearing -7 / -9 Garretts like the rest of the world running half decent low mount twins, or find a set of old HKS 2530s for that extra top end.

You'll be happier for it guaranteed 👍

(Until you try a single that is 😄)

  • Like 1
On 23/04/2022 at 9:58 PM, BK said:

If you must twin turbo I'd sell your heap of shit journal bearing MHI based HKS GT-III GT-SS turbos

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

They do remind me of Kando/Kinugawa turbos but that's maybe due to my biased opinion and the fact that I despise twin turbo upgrades on a RB26s.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ The Kinugawa bolt-on turbos for RB26 are far larger than the -7s, it also lacks the HKS logo for extra JDM tyte points for cars and coffee. The goal isn't really to go for big power. The GTIII-SS obviously is down on response from bearing drag but it's a smaller turbo than the GT-SS. It's pretty much the smallest turbo readily available for the RB26 other than the factory ceramics. It's not going to impress anyone with numbers but if that was the goal I'd buy a Lucid Air.

On 24/04/2022 at 5:53 PM, Piggaz said:

GT - RS’s would have to be number 1, surely.

I guess it depends how you look at it. The GTIII-SS for choking the turbo with a turbine and exhaust housing too small or just lag city with the GT-RS being way too big to be useful on the compressor side.

GTIII-SS wins for being pointless but yeah, RS probably as 💩

On 24/4/2022 at 6:23 PM, Piggaz said:

GT - RS’s would have to be number 1, surely.

Dunno. GTRS are laggy but at least make some power, these are laggy and don’t make power. Sounds like a double loss 

  • Haha 1
On 24/04/2022 at 9:24 PM, r32-25t said:

Dunno. GTRS are laggy but at least make some power, these are laggy and don’t make power. Sounds like a double loss 

That's about right. Image how bad the GTIII-RS would be ?

  • Haha 2
On 24/4/2022 at 10:18 PM, BK said:

That's about right. Image how bad the GTIII-RS would be ?

We keep talking about these Japanese companies being stuck in the 90s but I guess now they’re moving towards the 80s 

  • Haha 1
On 4/24/2022 at 4:08 AM, BK said:

I guess it depends how you look at it. The GTIII-SS for choking the turbo with a turbine and exhaust housing too small or just lag city with the GT-RS being way too big to be useful on the compressor side.

GTIII-SS wins for being pointless but yeah, RS probably as 💩

Is the GTIII-SS actually mismatched between compressor and turbine? I've never been able to find any information on it. Only thing I know is the exhaust housing a/r is 0.54. 

A few twin turbo advocates here turned single turbo activists.

That's saying something. One guy *cough* Pig.. *cough* gaz famously said "I wouldn't change a thing" on his twin GT-RS RB26 with Tomei brap cams.

Well not sure whatever happened to that setup.

On 25/4/2022 at 10:10 AM, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

A few twin turbo advocates here turned single turbo activists.

That's saying something. One guy *cough* Pig.. *cough* gaz famously said "I wouldn't change a thing" on his twin GT-RS RB26 with Tomei brap cams.

Well not sure whatever happened to that setup.

If I dig deep enough I could find that post too… but that was circa 2009 man. 🤣

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...