Lithium

I do mean real life I live in Wellington, what I meant is if I see it again I'll know that the car is actually a bit of a weapon... I am pretty sure I've seen it and wondered in the past

Nice! I am trying for the life of me to remember where I've seen this car, but I am certain I've seen it around. Next time I see it I'll link it to this thread haha

Haha yeah, a mate has a 2015 8V with a Revo Stage 2 kit on it and it is more than peppy. Tbh I'd be happy with something like that, even a closer to stock version than that just to try and keep the lights on the dash to a minimum

I am very jealous. Can't justify RS3 money but if I could, I would. And yeah, not for a race car - but an S3 would make for a nice everyday car.

I'm scared of Euros, but love them too. I am trying not to get too tempted to get an S3 as my next car for these kinds of reasons.

Yeah, definitely Sinco and I'd say the same design - just for an RB25 NVCS head instead, and different coating. Works really well. In all honestly without having hard data etc I won't stamp my foot down with any strong opinion on the merge location, with gas flow where possible I like the idea of not stacking up too many "events" which can cause turbulence at one point as that can increase drag and slow down flow - both a bend and also a merge are sources of turbulence, so I guess at that bend there could be quite a bit happening compared to if the gases just have to take a bend then have a merge after the fact but really I have no idea if or what the significance of that is... or if there are other things which could compromise spreading it out like how the sedan has it. For what it's worth, the sedan is running a .4bar spring and experiences slight boost creep after a decent pull on wastegate boost - reaching maybe 8-9psi at full rpm if given enough time to, but it can hold 10psi dead flat. The setup certainly flows well, though.

... annnnd I'm done :o Turbo, manifold and block are probably similar enough to this to get some ideas:

Can vouch for the Sincos, we've been using them for ages and have had really good results with them

Cheers, thought so - was partly thinking about oil feed/drain location and type. Yeah there was discussion about the 63 and 64.5, but for the significant increase in compressor size there isn't really a huge improvement in compressor flow relative to the initial step up in flow (>10%) going to the 61mm SX-E and we're really keen to try and have our cake and eat it to in terms of sacrificing response for extra flow up high. It's also handy that a local supplier has a 68/76mm S361SXE (their 63 and 64.5 have 73/80mm turbines) which will cost us less than ordering from overseas and paying freight and tax haha. Will post a comparison after it's done, it'd be very nice to stretch the power out more - even with it going flat at 5500rpm it is a very hearty power delivery/fast road car.

Yep, that's basically it. Some ECUs that support it are a little rugged about it and effectively just make the two 3-ports act like a single 4-port - basically using one 3port to apply pressure to one side, and block pressure from the other on an inverted scale. Others are more elaborate and allow you to set rules for how each side is driven, the Link has multiple PWM tables so you can set an open loop rule for how one of the MACs is driven and then make the other side deal with the finer control. I tune mostly lower spec race cars but still things like this aren't really that complicated, when people will spend $1000 more to get a slightly more responsive turbo, or do massive head porting etc (btw I'm not bagging that, just saying it's worth the effort to consider this kind of thing) to get incremental gains when you can actually spend another $100 for a MAC valve and do a bit of wiring and button pushing to have a substantially bigger improvement in usability of a car - little wanky tricks like this can make much more difference to how a car performs in real life than the things people put in bragging lists Devils in the details.

Another solution I've come up with for another car I tune which granted, we've not tested yet - and I don't know how flexible the Halaltech is with settings and available outputs, but we're running 2 MAC valves and running one of them against a fixed PWM look up table to "bring up the base pressure", then use conventional boost control to drive the second one as an effort to retain 3-port style table granularity but give a 4-port style boost range.

While you're here... I recently tuned a car with an S300SX 8376 with .91a/r hotside on an RB30DET and it performed very nicely - the spool is epic, though it it was out of it's depth quite quickly... not really having the compressor flow to happily supply a nice 20psi of boost to redline. We are looking at getting a 61.4mm S300SX-E 8376 supercore to drop into the same turbine housing with the intention of stretching the power out a bit more while giving away little or nothing if possible - question is, we are hoping that it is a straight drop in replacement. Is there anything we may not have thought of or be aware of which may need changing to integrate the S300SXE core to the existing setup? Cheers

So good to see it all together Those mexico clips are on 11psi, "mostly" pump gas too - looking forward to seeing how it goes with another 5-10psi in it haha

I know of two RB32s running 1.45a/r EFR9280s being tuned in the coming weeks, fingers crossed there should be some interesting results showing up

Cheers - yeah, a 1bar spring with a 4port solenoid is going to make life very tricky for you as you say..... Partly because small changes in duty will result in large changes in boost. The other issue is if you are using closed loop boost control a lot of the more middle-of-the-road ECUs don't factor in dead times, which isn't a biggy with open loop but if the closed loop logic starts including the "dead time" portion of the pulse to the BCS then the attempt to correct error will always have an invalid component to it - when 1-2% duty is going to have a meaningful effect on boost you will have issues when maybe for sale of argument 10% of the duty is taken up by just getting past the dead time. Not sure if the Haltech has the same issue but the Link does and I have to consider that and make compromises when tuning the closed loop logic, and closed loop seems pretty much a necessity with 4-ports. With this setup there is an ever slight oscillation in the control but it is definitely not something you can tell when you drive, it just irks my OCD

It was more or less by design, I had limited dyno time and was just collecting as much data as possible in each run to make sure I could configure the boost control thoroughly etc - I didn't bother trying to make the boost curve completely flat so this was the highest power single run we got. The BCS duty needed to start going for the sky to hold much more than 17psi at high rpm and you could audibly hear the turbo working hard so I didn't bother trying to push it harder at high rpm as heartily delivered 600whp was coincidentally a bit of an unofficial target (and we expected it to choke around 18psi at full rpm) and it hit that so definitively, there were no surprises so we just decided to leave it there and tidy up the other bits and pieces. This run was on 66% ethanol and again it can technically has a little more flow but we got everything we needed and the car is very rapid as it sits. Out of interest, the boost control setup works really well - has a 4-port solenoid on it with a 0.4bar spring and runs about 5-6psi in first, about 11psi in second and then gets to more serious boost levels in the higher gears. It can hold WOT in any gear in decent conditions and just sits on the limit of traction at worst, which makes it surprisingly un-lethal to drive fast considering it's an R32 GTSt. As the boost plot probably paints the picture of, the thing builds boost easy as hell so you don't even have to think about trying to get it on steam when driving so between that and boost per gear it's a pretty fool proof kind of package. Definitely when that "600whp" number only tells a bit of the story when it is delivered so broadly. Btw with the boost control fully dialled in the ramp to full boost is also quite a bit more aggressive than this plot shows if you set a 18psi target, and the power peaks at around 7000rpm.

I had been trying to remember where I put this rant, thought I might dredge it up seeing as it's been talked about in here and I should probably quantify things a bit. I basically worked a lot of this out after tuning my first car using the Bosch 2200cc injectors and struggling with some drivability and getting the charge temperature correction right. Normally I find this kind of thing goes quite smoothly and decided to sanity check the setup and my process, so sat down and carefully checked over the logs, did some maths and worked out that the variation I was seeing was impossible based off ideal gas law, then dug deeper and discovered a bunch of the info I shared in the above rant. The car I was tuning when I found this now has a set of XSpurt 1550cc injectors and immediately tuning the car became a different experience, and the car drives and behaves quite differently. It's alarming how differently in behaves- in some ways. After talking to other tuners, and based off my own experience I would NEVER use a CNG injector on a car using a liquid fuel. The car using these injectors uses a Borg Warner Airwerks turbo, btw - so here's a result from the poor cousin of the EFR: RB30E block with S2 R33 RB25DET head CP 8.5:1 pistons MRP rods, arp2000 bolts ARP main studs Oil pump drive adapter RB25DET oil pump Tomei 256x 8.5 poncams (NVCS) Lightly ported r33 s2 head Genuine greddy intake manifold VH45 throttle body 6x XSpurt 1550cc injectors with flex fuel sensor 150mm intercooler Sinco twin scroll exhaust manifold 66mm precision waste gate Borg Warner S300SX 8375 w/ twin scroll .91 housing 4inch exhaust from turbo to back Vipec i88 ECU NZ Wiring cam trigger kit

This made 570kw on a pretty conservative tune (read: a fair bit more in it if it needed) with 30psi seen before 30psi in a sweep

Ohhhhh... yes.... right, makes sense - cheers (Y) Obviously agree, but I feel this really needs to be underlined. I'd sooner not use the car with the cylinder pressures that high than continue using the stock trigger setup - ESPECIALLY with an identified trigger error issue.

Sweet as, yeah if I had no ECU and it was between Link and Haltech I would definitely go Link - just an unusual option to swap between them so was curious Oh PPG, very nice... that should be a hell of a fun setup, I look forward to hearing how it goes at the drags. Be also interested to hear how reading the signal from the speed sensor goes, being able to wire and config the sensor isn't what I anticipate as a potential issue - it's the fact that the DI frequency is too low to accurately count the blades, even though the Borg speed sensor divides by 8. Or has it been wired to an analog input? That could be interesting... If you aren't going to do the PRP kit I would suggest the NZWiring thing at the very least is a good way to go, takes like half an hour to setup and install from memory - and will be a significant improvement.

Yeah, I have to admit having a brief heart palpitation when I read that it was stock CAS up to this point. It's either been giving away power, or spiking from MBT to over-advanced. Given it's kept it's head on etc, it's probably giving away power.

Oh yeah, for sure... for the OP that definitely makes sense - but given the original question was asked 4 years ago so I was talking more generally

These days I would expect most ECUs do at least as good a job, have the ability to set other rules to decide how to manage boost control, and various inputs can be used if "on the fly" adjustments are needed - so really I'd not bother with any of them, or upgrade engine management and profit from having generally much better all kinds of stuff as a result.

Good read, albeit clearly telling a story of ups and downs for yourself. The new tuner/setup sounds like it was worth the investment - though as much as I am more of a Link fan than a Haltech one, the upgrade is a bit of a sideways step... is there a specific reason for going the Link? One of the places the Haltech does have an edge over the Links is that they support a higher sampling rate from digital inputs, so running a turbine speed sensor on a Link is a bit of a PITA. You'll need to do some wiring or use a digital->analog signal converter to make sense of the signal from the TSS. A mate has a built RB26/EFR9180 combo going on the dyno in the next day or so before being sent over to Oz for WTAC, they aren't going to go "full send" as its a drift car being built at the last minute - but I'll share some results if appropriate.

Can definitely vouch, the car in the post I quoted above from August uses one of these kits - among plenty of others I know of or have tuned myself. A crank trigger is obviously the penultimate but these have proven more than sufficient and the ease of installation and being a fraction of the price are pretty hard to overlook