Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 316
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I have just heard that the std VL turbo exhaust housing is almost identical to the VG30. T3 flange .63 a/r. I was told there was a slight differance, can't remember what, but would not effect the operation and mounting of the turbo. The flange on the dump pipe is different though, thus a custom dump whould be required.

Can someone in the know confirm/reject this theory, please?

Can the std VL housing be used, instead of the VG30?

Al, somebody said that to me too, but because the exhaust flange is different, it would make it a pain in the butt to get custom parts made up.

I can't confirm 100% though.

I have a guy who thinks he may have a couple for us though. VG30DET that is.

Great, I still would prefer the VG30det turbo exhaust housing.

But if i am unable to get one, i still have my 3.5" front pipe from my previous exhaust so all i need to do is get a dump pipe made up at my local exhaust shop, no big deal really :rofl:.

I picked mine up last night.. whahahah. :D

I managed to pick up a second handy one that apparently works (it feels and looks in good nick) for $300.

Thanks for not cutting my lunch Bass Junky. lol :(

I'm starting to doubt it is in fact a .81 or there abouts.

I've got a what was meant to be a .82 ARB GT35R machined housing. The GT35R housing is quite a bit bigger.

I'll have to find out how to measure the a/r and well... Measure it! ;)

Area to radius ratio is difficult to measure without sectioning (cutting up) the casting . These Hitachi housings never had the ARR size cast into them like Garrett's housings do . My impression looking at all three is RB20 type = miniscule

, RB25 type = small , VG30 type = huge . They really do have a lot of volute area inside them but remember they were designed to not choke a three litre V6 .

Cubes do you intent to run the complete VG30 turbo or some kind of bitza thing .

Cheers A .

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

what bolt on turbo can I get for 2k that makes 280rwkw ? and where can I get one ?

Bass Junky,

Are you sure they don't have any? I was in there only a few days ago and they had quite a few.

Your not confusing Option1 Garage with D1 Garage?

Discopotato,

I plan on initially running the as is VG30DET turbo, I'm keen to see how well it goes.

I know the RB20DET turbo makes 175rwkw on 9psi from 4400-4950rpm. Lets see how the vg30 differs. :)

I figure it should make 210rwkw on the dyno that I run on (rb25's make 190-200rwkw with rb25det turbo's and approx 11psi).

Should be interestering too see.

To be honest the exhaust a/r doesn't look much bigger than the rb20det turbo i'm running.

When I was up at D1 Garage I noticed there are 2 different types of rb20det turbo's, mine and a smaller looking one.

It has what looks like a smaller exhaust housing and a different designed compressor inlet, mine steps up to the compressor wheel where as the other smaller one has a smaller inlet steps down then steps back up to the compressor wheel.

This hi-flow sounds like the perfect upgrade here, and correct me if I am wrong in saying this but cant you get a Garrett GT3071r that has a T3 flange and a Option for a nissan .63 ar internally gated zuast housing capable of making 280 rwkw easy for about 1900-2100 dollars????

If I had to make a choice between a engineered turbo and a re-engineered turbo I know what I would go for...

Yes I know that its a RTA risk & you still have to run water & oil lines so add $250 and a heat shield.

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

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

    • 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.
    • When I said "wiring diagram", I meant the car's wiring diagram. You need to understand how and when 12V appears on certain wires/terminals, when 0V is allowed to appear on certain wires/terminals (which is the difference between supply side switching, and earth side switching), for the way that the car is supposed to work without the immobiliser. Then you start looking for those voltages in the appropriate places at the appropriate times (ie, relay terminals, ECU terminals, fuel pump terminals, at different ignition switch positions, and at times such as "immediately after switching to ON" and "say, 5-10s after switching to ON". You will find that you are not getting what you need when and where you need it, and because you understand what you need and when, from working through the wiring diagram, you can then likely work out why you're not getting it. And that will lead you to the mess that has been made of the associated wires around the immobiliser. But seriously, there is no way that we will be able to find or lead you to the fault from here. You will have to do it at the car, because it will be something f**ked up, and there are a near infinite number of ways for it to be f**ked up. The wiring diagram will give you wire colours and pin numbers and so you can do continuity testing and voltage/time probing and start to work out what is right and what is wrong. I can only close my eyes and imagine a rat's nest of wiring under the dash. You can actually see and touch it.
×
×
  • Create New...