Jump to content
SAU Community

who here as taken there boost restrictor out of the GTR?  

29 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

Umm, fragile 12-15years old ceramic wheeled turbos a good enough reason? ;)

yeah, i did...then i spent a few grand on a new set of turbos... :(

restrictor is good i thought coz it allows to run .7bar as a minimum instead of .9-1bar minimum...

post-12416-1127011475.jpg

Edited by oRiCLe
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/88092-boost-restrictor/#findComment-1591013
Share on other sites

The problem is, its impossible to say (with any accuracy) if the ceramic wheels will definately let go or definately be fine once the boost restrictor is removed.

My 0.02c is don't remove it unless you are happy to run the risk of blowing one or both of your turbos. If they blow, your looking at about 2000-3000 in parts (for new items) plus installation. Of course if they blow and take out your engine, your up for double that.

That's a rather expensive risk to take in my books.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/88092-boost-restrictor/#findComment-1592773
Share on other sites

when you say it like that its probably not worth it hey

i was thinking is it woth the effort of taking out the restrictor as to how much more power you will get lol.

1st gtr i took it out.. and it went fine and still gets around fine these days

2nd gtr - it was out when i got it.... the motor has now died however the issues arnt directly related

3rd gtr - its in and staying in as long as i have it

i guess i just mean, taking it out will give notable gains, i wasnt really concerned of the risks when i did it because i didnt add up the costs etc.. also in a HPI mag i saw a write up on how to get more power from a gtr, they did it to there gtr and the results sucked me in

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/88092-boost-restrictor/#findComment-1592804
Share on other sites

can u put it back in if u remove it????

lol :lol:

i just had a huge argument with a couple of people about this sort of thing..

see thread> why was my GTR running so much boost. mainly the last page!! :P

ps. for temporary solution disconnecting the hose the the boost solenoid will result in running stock boost (if no boost controller is installed)

now i have started it here! :lol: sorry guys

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/88092-boost-restrictor/#findComment-1602632
Share on other sites

my turbos have run over 40,000ks, a few track days at 1-1.1bar boost making 260rwkw. I'm back down to 0.7bar now for unrelated reasons, and its so slow!

But it is luck of the draw, some turbos may die at 1bar, some may last forever.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/88092-boost-restrictor/#findComment-1602783
Share on other sites

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 know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...