Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

These aren't the biggest turbo in terms of HP. I think they are rated at 320ps.

The advantage is they are ball bearing which means the RB25 will spool this very early.

With supporting mods you could probably pump out around 220rwkw. Though if you're going to the trouble of replacing the turbo you'll be asking yourself why you didn't pay the extra $500 and get something a little bigger.

Expect to pay upwards of $1200 ~ for a good condition example. Check to make sure if it comes with oil / water lines as this will set you back $100 or so plus intake modifications.

You don't need two threads to ask the same question.

If it's a turbo question then it's pretty obviously going to go in the Forced Induction section.

Also there is a shitload of info on here about this turbo and how it goes on an RB25. It's an old turbo.

A 2535 would be better suited to an RB25 but don't underestimate what a street weapon a 2530 RB25 will be. The first question that should be asked when upgrading turbo is what do you want to do with the car?

A 2540 is not often recommended.

Check out http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/sh...ead.php?t=55845

and do some more reading.

Oh, and have fun. ;)

Like everyone has stated, ask yourself what you're after in your car. If you're after big horsepower, don't go this turbo. I have a 2535 on mine and in my opinion, it's heaven on a stick. An RB25 with a 25XX turbo is going to give you a very quick response, with good power but don't expect to see the rwkw mark exceed much more than 250rwkw with a 25 series turbo. A 2530 would be lucky to even get there with 220rwkw about it's theoretical max. I currently make 220rwkw on just 12psi with my 2535, which is rated just a bit higher than the 2530.

For $1200, you can't go wrong if all you are chasing is around 200-220rwkw and a very responsive street car. As others have said, don't underestimate this turbo as it will certainly give your car a kick in the arse that will have you smiling every time ;) Best of luck mate.

With supporting mods the 450hp GCG rebuild wud go close, maybe 250-260rwkw is more likely though. Mind you its still damn responsive which is awsome, when you go past 250rwkw you tend to get abit more lag and that isnt the best on a street car.

Gotta say 16psi at 3,000rpm is pretty damn cool!! And if ur makin near on 300rwhp, well most would be pretty happy with that too.

if your chasing say 270rwkws what turbo is suitable. Ive read all the related threads posted by other members but got lost in the information. For examples sake, would a GCG turbo be capable?

seach button, and half the stickie threads in this section will answer that question for yous

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...