Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

Sorry if this has been posted before.. i've tried multiple searches but cant find anything..

Just wanted to know whats stock boost for an r32 gtst?

I currently have a slightly modded r32 gtst and would like to know what stock boost is, and also how much the turbo could handle, on a cold night, without turbine failure.. i.e. safely.

Mods include - 3" exhaust (need to check up whether its a turbo back or cat back), pod filter and EBC.

Its currently running .8 bar boost which is about.. 11 - 12 PSI..

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/72253-stock-boost-on-an-r32-gtst-type-m/
Share on other sites

Dont run anymore boost unless your going to fit a frount mount. The standard side mount cooler suffers from heat soak and also 11 - 12 PSI is pretty much the limit for a stock turbo i would say say 13 - 14PSI max using the stock turbo and a front mount. Im sure some of the lads here can offer a more detailed answer and more advice.

Hey guys,

Sorry if this has been posted before.. i've tried multiple searches but cant find anything..

Just wanted to know whats stock boost for an r32 gtst?

I currently have a slightly modded r32 gtst and would like to know what stock boost is, and also how much the turbo could handle, on a cold night, without turbine failure.. i.e. safely.

Mods include - 3" exhaust (need to check up whether its a turbo back or cat back), pod filter and EBC.

Its currently running .8 bar boost which is about.. 11 - 12 PSI..

don't lie... you didn't do a search

stock boost for r32 gtsts is 10psi, like everyone above said you should see it spike abit more with aftermarket parts eg, exhaust, airfilter etc etc

mines currently running 13~14 with stock cooler, looking to upgrade to bigger one soon.

I see this topic and its funny to read everyone's posts about stock boost. My stock boost gauge reads about 6 psi and my after market reads around 8psi, yet when i boot it on the guage at the mechanics it shows around 10psi. Most people will say its 10psi although as stated its not good to run it too high for long periods of time with the stock cooler and turbo but then again there are guys out there running in excess of 12-14psi with stock turbo. Just my 2cents

don't lie... you didn't do a search

Uhh.. i actually did.. but didnt find anything that applied to me directly.. other people had front mounts etc..

So what about on a cold night? Wouldnt that be like having a front mount already since the air surrounding me is already cold?

Uhh.. i actually did.. but didnt find anything that applied to me directly.. other people had front mounts etc..

So what about on a cold night? Wouldnt that be like having a front mount already since the air surrounding me is already cold?

To a degree yes but then the biggest problem you have with the difference in ambient temp is the way that you have your car tuned for normal day to day driving. One of my mates has a stock R32 that runs like a dream on a colder night and his older brother who's car is slightly moded runs worst on a cold night. When it comes to stock boost and stock turbo i would stay at 10 mayb 12 psi but not for long periods of time and not for daily driving.

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...