Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey i was ondering if anyone would be able to share some information on the gtr plenums and the greddy plenums in terms of flow characteristics and efficiency etc. I got the gtr plenum which we are adapting to my RB25 head. In long term chasing a max of 450hp at the wheels, im not really concerned about the gtr plenums efficiency as there ar many gtrs that make nice numbers still using original plenums so im assuming there good. Any advantages going greddy over gtr?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/51507-gtr-plenum-v-greddy-plenum/
Share on other sites

well im going to have to stick with what i have for the moment, i cant see there being any dramas with the GTR plenum. Single 85mm throttle body is probably the choice too. Im not expecting to make any big power till i can upgrade from a high flow to a bigger turbo. I havent done much research on gt30's etc, im more hooked on TD06-25Gs or T04R but will see thats a fair way down the track as i spent all i could on the motor and motor accessories getting it strong.

Hi sweetr33, just in case you haven't seen or done the numbers for yourself, here is the comparison between a single 100 mm throttle body and the standard GTR multiple (6) throttle butterflies. Also following are some comments I wrote a while ago on this subject.

Butterfly = 44/2*44/2*22/7 = 1,521 sqmm

Spindle = 44 * 4 (from memory) = 176 sqmm

= 1,345 sq mm each X 6 = 8,070 sq mm

Compared to the big single.....

100/2*100/2*22/7 = 7,857 sq mm

Spindle = 100 X 6 = 600 sqmm

= 7,257 sqmm

So, the standard 6 throttle bodies are 11% larger than one 100 mm single throttle body.

But is this the right way to do the comparison? Since each cylinder fires individually (one at a time) then isn't each cylinder getting sole use of the 100 mm throttle body some of the time? Not all of the time because of valve timing overlap between cylinders and the volume of air contained in the plenum. So you would have to know the valve timing and the plenum volume and the engine rpm to work out each individual cylinders share of the 100 mm.

My opinion (for what it's worth) is that the main reason the Japs go to a single throttle body is so they can use MAP sensor driven ECU's. Multiple throttle bodies and MAP sensors don't go together very well, especially when you have big cams and lots of boost. Over some LARGE horsepower number, there is probably an airflow advantage, but I have no idea how LARGE it is.

What I can say for certain is there is far better throttle response for the GTR multiple throttle butterflies. Personally I have yet to see any power advantage from a 100 mm single throttle body and we are well over 625 bhp in our circuit race cars. I should also point out that the Brisbane Street machines R32 GTR runs 9's on radials with the standard GTR multiple throttle bodies.

Hope that helps :cheers:

I'm still running the stock plenum with multiple throttle bodies on my car and we made 617rwkw on my GTR at AutoSalon back in April.

The only reason I would use a single is for ease of tune.

The multiple throttle body is so much better for street response.

ok, the multiple v single tb thing. I am going to stick with the single, although i was referring to a 85mm single tb and the info was given at 100mm tb would the response be better from the smaller throttle body? I was reading on these forums that munro's street gtr is using a single 85mm tb insted of multiples???

Did you also work out what harm 6 10mm shafts do to airflow and the area they take up in your smallish intake runner or seen and heard them on a flow bench, The scream they make is amazing.Never seen any car respond faster than Pauls 100mm single on a Greddy manifold.Try before you knock it SK you WILL be amazed,then you can coment with athority.

Did you also work out what harm 6 10mm shafts do to airflow and the area they take up in your smallish intake runner or seen and heard  them on a flow bench, The scream they make is amazing.Never seen any car respond faster than Pauls 100mm single on a Greddy manifold.Try before you knock it SK you WILL be amazed,then you can coment with athority.

Steve, I have "tried it" both with a standard RB25 throttle body and a Foulcan throttle body. I could fee lthe slowness instantly on the road, and on the track it was disasterous. With the dog box we have ~50 milliseconds for a downshift and you MUST match the engine rpm with the gearbox rpm. Otherwise you end up with twisted splines on the input shaft from the triple plate clutch and missing teeth on the gears, particularly 2nd.

It is quite simple to understand why this is the case. With the multiple throttles there is very little air between the butterflies and the inlet valves. So when you close the throttle the airflow to the engine stops instantly, therefore so does its power production. Compare that to a single throttle body with a plenum in between the butterfly and the valves. The usual rule of thumb is at least double the engine capacity in the plenum, so on a 3.1 litre that's 6.2 litres. Plus that 6.2 litres is under boost just before you close the throttle, so at 1.5 bar it really has 9.3 litres of air in it. In addition, after you close the throttle, the plenum goes under vacuum, around 0.25 bar is not unusual, that's another 1.6 litres.

So when you close and reopen the throttle 7.8 litres of air flow dulls the response. On a 3.1 litre engine that's almost 5 revolutions of the crankshaft, at 7,500 rpm that's 666 milliseconds. That's more than 10 times slower than the gearbox will handle. To translate that into distance, at Bathurst it would mean we would be lapped twice during the race distance

Another way to look at it, Nissan designed the GTR to win races on the circuit, if they thought a single TB was better then they would have used it. Let's face it, a single TB is simpler to make, therefore cheaper, easier to tune and maintain. But Nissan went for multiple TB's, why? Because for their stated aim it was superior.

Let me close off with;

I have seen articles on Jap GTRS that run low nines still using the original 6 throttle bodies & a std plenum!!!

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

    • Look, realistically, those are some fairly chunky connectors and wires so it is a reasonably fair bet that that loom was involved in the redirection of the fuel pump and/or ECU/ignition power for the immobiliser. It's also fair to be that the new immobiliser is essentially the same thing as the old one, and so it probably needs the same stuff done to make it do what it has to do. Given that you are talking about a car that no-one else here is familiar with (I mean your exact car) and an alarm that I've never heard of before and so probably not many others are familiar with, and that some wire monkey has been messing with it out of our sight, it seems reasonable that the wire monkey should be fixing this.
    • Wheel alignment immediately. Not "when I get around to it". And further to what Duncan said - you cannot just put camber arms on and shorten them. You will introduce bump steer far in excess of what the car had with stock arms. You need adjustable tension arms and they need to be shortened also. The simplest approach is to shorten them the same % as the stock ones. This will not be correct or optimal, but it will be better than any other guess. The correct way to set the lengths of both arms is to use a properly built/set up bump steer gauge and trial and error the adjustments until you hit the camber you need and want and have minimum bump steer in the range of motion that the wheel is expected to travel. And what Duncan said about toe is also very true. And you cannot change the camber arm without also affecting toe. So when you have adjustable arms on the back of a Skyline, the car either needs to go to a talented wheel aligner (not your local tyre shop dropout), or you need to be able to do this stuff yourself at home. Guess which approach I have taken? I have built my own gear for camber, toe and bump steer measurement and I do all this on the flattest bit of concrete I have, with some shims under the tyres on one side to level the car.
    • Thought I would get some advice from others on this situation.    Relevant info: R33 GTS25t Link G4x ECU Walbro 255LPH w/ OEM FP Relay (No relay mod) Scenario: I accidentally messed up my old AVS S5 (rev.1) at the start of the year and the cars been immobilised. Also the siren BBU has completely failed; so I decided to upgrade it.  I got a newer AVS S5 (rev.2?) installed on Friday. The guy removed the old one and its immobilisers. Tried to start it; the car cranks but doesnt start.  The new one was installed and all the alarm functions seem to be working as they should; still wouldn't start Went to bed; got up on Friday morning and decided to have a look into the no start problem. Found the car completely dead.  Charged the battery; plugged it back in and found the brake lights were stuck on.  Unplugging the brake pedal switch the lights turn off. Plug it back in and theyre stuck on again. I tested the switch (continuity test and resistance); all looks good (0-1kohm).  On talking to AVS; found its because of the rubber stopper on the brake pedal; sure enough the middle of it is missing so have ordered a new one. One of those wear items; which was confusing what was going on However when I try unplugging the STOP Light fuses (under the dash and under the hood) the brake light still stays on. Should those fuses not cut the brake light circuit?  I then checked the ECU; FP Speed Error.  Testing the pump again; I can hear the relay clicking every time I switch it to ON. I unplugged the pump and put the multimeter across the plug. No continuity; im seeing 0.6V (ECU signal?) and when it switches the relay I think its like 20mA or 200mA). Not seeing 12.4V / 7-9A. As far as I know; the Fuel Pump was wired through one of the immobiliser relays on the old alarm.  He pulled some thick gauged harness out with the old alarm wiring; which looks to me like it was to bridge connections into the immobilisers? Before it got immobilised it was running just fine.  Im at a loss to why the FP is getting no voltage; I thought maybe the FP was faulty (even though I havent even done 50km on the new pump) but no voltage at the harness plug.  Questions: Could it be he didnt reconnect the fuel pump when testing it after the old alarm removal (before installing the new alarm)?  Is this a case of bridging to the brake lights instead of the fuel pump circuit? It's a bit beyond me as I dont do a lot with electrical; so have tried my best to diagnose what I think seems to make sense.  Seeking advice if theres for sure an issue with the alarm install to get him back here; or if I do infact, need an auto electrician to diagnose it. 
    • Then, shorten them by 1cm, drop the car back down and have a visual look (or even better, use a spirit level across the wheel to see if you have less camber than before. You still want something like 1.5 for road use. Alternatively, if you have adjustable rear ride height (I assume you do if you have extreme camber wear), raise the suspension back to standard height until you can get it all aligned properly. Finally, keep in mind that wear on the inside of the tyre can be for incorrect toe, not just camber
    • I know I have to get a wheel alignment but until then I just need to bring the rear tyres in a bit they're wearing to the belt on the inside and brand new on the outside edge. I did shorten the arms a bit but got it wrong now after a few klms the Slip and VDC lights come on. I'd just like to get it to a point where I can drive for another week or two before getting an alignment. I've had to pay a lot of other stuff recently so doing it myself is my only option 
×
×
  • Create New...