Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Okay so back on topic.

Hows the car at low revs know?  Making any less power?

Do you have a graph from like 2000 rpm upwards?

Can you retain the existing dump pipe?

Dying to find one.

BASS OUT

Hi Bass...The car is as it was with the original GCG Hiflow, spools up early. Definately have not lost any power down low.. But when boost builds up it is brutal and hits you in the back much much harder...I'm not exagurating, the car is a bit of an animal.. I have a CES split dump, but it fits up as a standard dump to the VG30 Exhaust as Stock as a Rock. No modification necessary. Brett from GCG told me when he rebuilt the turbo with the VG30 turbine housing on it that it would make 30kw@tw more....I emailed him after I got the car re-dynoed at C&V and attatched the dyno chart, and yesterday he emailed me back and said " It looks like we were right on the money eh good result"

I could honestly recommend anyone with a RB25 engine contemplating a GCG Hyflow turbo upgrade to add the VG30 turbine housing at the first build.

Ian

  • Replies 316
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

They haven't got any.

It probably worth trying the "For Sale" section in a Nissan ZX forum as well?

I've tried and tried to download the pictures on here of the VF30 Turbine housing, I've even zipped it but it keeps saying that the file is too large. I took the originals on a 6 megapixel camera on the highest quality. Anybody know how i can resize?

Ian

So where is the break even point on one of these compared to an off the shelf turbo producing the same power/response?

Edit- basically since GCG advertise around $2K for the rebuild, plus the cost of the housing, plus the work to modify the housing, would it not be more economical to just buy off the shelf?

I guess the following would be about right.

Turbo = free

High Flow = $1950 (max)

exhaust housing or busted turbo = $150

I assume the exhaust housing machining could be done when th turbo is high flowed so no additional price.

Total, $2100

I think

Yeah, I agree with bass, for around the $2000 you get a turbo that puts you easily over the 250kw realistically and closer to 280. Is a bolt in situation, no modifications required for the fitting which is a big plus..And retains the stock look for any enquiring eyes. I know I was disappointed with my stock Hiflow struggling to get 240kw with the usual mods. I know for sure i was disappointed in my HKS cams, I thought they were a waste of money. But I think now with the VG30 Turbine housing the cams might be getting breathing space. One last thought is that I feel i'm comming to the end of my quest for more power. SK's theory of 280kw max is good for me.

Ian

So reasonably comparable for new, and a bit more than used. Sounds good, comes with warranty so a decent option for those interested.

Ian, I think you are right, but find 220rwkw was too much on stockish suspension so the lod R33 needs plenty to tie the thing down. 280 would be tyre murder :)

So reasonably comparable for new, and a bit more than used. Sounds good, comes with warranty so a decent option for those interested.

Ian, I think you are right, but find 220rwkw was too much on stockish suspension so the lod R33 needs plenty to tie the thing down. 280 would be tyre murder :)

Hi Geoff, I've spent more money on suspension than the engine...LOL...Whiteline everything they make for R33 and Bilstein, Strut Braces Front and Rear, Adjustable Caster Rods, Adjustable Upper Rear Camber Rods. And Brakes have been hugely upgraded....Ohh and one of your magnificent Hicas Lock Bars.

Ian

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

    • 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.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...