mazgtr

LOL!!! Why not buy the Garret, then use the money you saved to buy several "HKS" stickers to put all over your car...

360RWKW at only 12.5PSI seem a little high compared to the other 2530 equipped GTR's ive seen. Either the boost is higher than 12.5PSI or the dyno reads a little high. Ive seen several GTR's with the same mods and turbos register figures as high as 360RWKW but all of them needed closer to 20PSI. Also if it made 360RWKW at 12.5PSI then at 16PSI it would be closer to 380RWKW-390RWKW and 120MPH doesnt support that. Not in any way detracting from your results, just like Roy said, that dyno figure does seem a fair bit higher than most.. But a mid 11sec pass is a fecking great result, well done.. Cheers....

I had a similar issue the other day with my car alarm. My siren stopped working, regardless of where the key in the back was turned. So i bought a new Black Widow battery back up siren. Installed it and wired it up, turned the key in the back and it just went off constantley. I spent several hours and almost lost my hearing trying to figure out what i did wrong, before giving up. An alarm guy came and fixed it for me, apparently the siren had shorted out, and was now faulty. i:e even when fed 12volts it would still go off. So he had to install another new siren. Cheers

lol!! Yeah it gets kinda hard im guessing to bullshit a cop that your twin HKS 3040's are stock!!LOL!!

Just curious, what do R32 GTR Vspec 1 and Vspec 2 stock wheels look like, and what are their dimensions? Cheers...

This is an old Autospeed article, hope it helps... Cheers Matt... The Japanese manufacturers Blitz, Field and HKS produce torque split controllers for the GT-R. I managed to source a Japanese magazine review of one of the controllers and get the article translated. The translation showed that the device plugged into the centrally-mounted G-sensor and that it certainly altered the handling characteristics! I figured that it must change the output of the G-sensor, perhaps increasing it so that the four wheel drive ECU thought that the car was cornering harder than it really was. Wouldn't this direct more torque to the front wheels? Armed with a multimeter and an assistant, I measured the output of the G-sensor in all sorts of driving conditions. I soon found that there isn't just one G-sensor - there are three! Two measure longitudinal acceleration (ie acceleration and braking) and the other measures lateral acceleration (ie cornering). All three sensors have a 0-5 volt output signal. When there is no acceleration, the sensors all have about 2.5 volts output. The harder the car is accelerating, the higher the voltage output from the longitudinal G-sensors. When decelerating, the sensor voltage drops to below 2.5. With the lateral G-sensor, the voltage decreases below 2.5 on right turns and increases above 2.5 volts on left turns. My electronics skills are near to zero so I called on some experts to design an amplifier. This device would boost the output swings of the lateral accelerometer, while at the same time leaving the 2.5 volts 'stationary' output untouched. The amplifier was designed and fitted to the lateral sensor output, but sadly there was absolutely no difference in the car's behaviour. The standard dash-mounted torque split gauge also behaved as standard. Another amplifier design was developed (this time designed and built by my Father), and it was duly fitted. Weeks of experimentation followed. The amp was working - when it was connected to the longitudinal sensors I could boost straight-line acceleration torque going to the front wheels, but with only limited benefits when cornering. But when it was connected to the lateral accelerometer, little changed. Did the lateral accelerometer even work? I wondered. Stunning The first breakthrough came when I took the unlikely step of rotating the G-sensor package through 90°. This meant that the lateral G-sensor became the longitudinal, and the longitudinal became the lateral. Sounds terrible, doesn't it! This was done because I realised that the longitudinal sensors had a very powerful influence on the torque split - something that the lateral sensor didn't appear to have. Turning the G-sensor package through 90° made a stunning difference to the handling. Instead of being a car where every slow corner exit required a gentle foot and/or opposite lock, now full throttle could be used with near-impunity. For the first time it simply felt like a proper four wheel drive car....... But there proved to be some negatives. Firstly, in tight corners taken with a high entrance speed, the car could now understeer excessively. Also, the confused torque split computer allowed some wheelspin high in the rev range in first gear. Still, the handling was so much better than standard that I stuck with this mod for some time. Then it rained. The predictability and stability that the car had in the dry was immediately gone. Not that it was as bad as I'd found it in standard form, but it just didn't feel quite right and straightline wheelspin was even more pronounced. By this stage two more important things had happened: I'd had a chat to a bloke who had been involved in the Bathurst race GT-R's, and my tame electronic guru (thanks Dad!) had developed the third version of the G-sensor adjustable amplifier. This was being used to slightly reduce the output of what (with the G-sensor rotated) was now the lateral sensor. The ex-Bathurst race team man said something that immediately caught my attention. "The computer reduces the front torque split the harder you corner. So if you remove the influence of the lateral G-sensor, the car will go into four wheel drive earlier". Gulp! I'd always figured that the computer would increase the front torque split as you cornered harder. That's why I'd initially tried to amplify the signal - I should have been trying to reduce it all along! "One way to do this is to feed a constant 2.5 volt signal to the computer input for the lateral G-sensor" he continued. "Course, it understeers like a pig then" he added. Even Better I raced out to the car and effectively returned it to standard, but for feeding a constant 2.5 volt input lateral signal to the computer. He was right - with this mod the car did understeer excessively. But that was in the dry. In wet conditions this modification made the car just ballistic - unbelievably good, with so much traction and cornering prowess that it was uncanny. The difference was so immense that in the wet conditions I found myself ABS'ing up to roundabouts, so good was the car's grip in every other situation. Okay - if holding the lateral G-sensor input fixed at 2.5 volts gave too much front wheel drive in the dry but was perfect in the wet, why not use the amplifier to vary the lateral G-sensor signal from 1:1 (ie signal unchanged from the standard voltage swings) right through to 0:1 (ie signal fixed at 2.5 volts input)? In other words, be able to change the influence of the lateral G-sensor all the way from factory standard to none! That way I'd be able to dial up any cornering torque split from huge oversteer right through to heaps of FWD for wet conditions. And that's just what the final configuration is like. A knob on the dash allows variable selection across the whole range. The knob is calibrated from 0-10, with 0 being standard and 10 being for full wet weather. Generally I'm around '7' in dry conditions, with '6' being used in really tight low speed corners when I want the tail to come out a bit to turn the car in. When the road gets wet '8' or '9' is selected, and when it's streaming with water I'm a '10' man! Set up in this way the handling is absolutely fantastic. It's hard to believe, but the electronic mods have made more difference to the handling of the GT-R than any other suspension modifications I have ever made to a car. And that includes the changing on previous cars of wheels, tyres, sway bars, springs, dampers, bushes - the lot. The difference simply cannot be overstated. And I might add that now the cat's out of the bag, a number of GT-R owners who had previously told me how wonderfully their cars handled have modified their torque split control system... Now with the car handling as well as it does I reckon I could do with a bit more power..... stay tuned! Tech Summary: Skyline GT-R R32 Torque Controller Modifications Some R32 GT-R Skylines have pronounced power oversteer. The degree of oversteer varies from car to car. If the driver has driven only rear wheel drive cars previously they are less likely to recognise a problem. The oversteer is at its greatest in wet conditions. Modification to the electronic torque split control system can make a massive difference to the degree of power oversteer or understeer. There are several ways in which the system can be modified. Quite different results can be achieved by the different modifications. Simplest is to rotate the G-sensor module through 90°. The G-sensor is the gold coloured box located under the centre console, in the very middle of the car. Rotate it by 90° and fix it in its new position. Advantages: results in a far higher degree of front wheel drive torque split in cornering conditions; is the easiest of all modifications. Disadvantages: results in some wheelspin in straight-line acceleration at high revs; power understeer can occur; in wet conditions the car is still a little unpredictable. Summary: Gives an easier car to drive but isn't the ultimate mod. With the G-sensor orientated as factory, disable the output of the lateral (cornering) G-sensor. This G-sensor input actually reduces the front wheel torque split as cornering loads increase. Cutting the wire results in a fault condition and the disabling of the four wheel drive and ABS systems. Instead, 2.5 volts needs to be constantly fed to this ECU input. This can be achieved by using a voltage divider (pot) as shown here. The pot should be carefully adjusted until 2.5 volts output occurs when it is connected up. Advantages: very large amount of front torque split in cornering; simple mod; superb in wet conditions; excellent straight-line traction. Disadvantages: excessive power understeer in dry conditions. Summary: great "wet weather over-ride" if switched in and out appropriately. With the G-sensor orientated as factory, use an amplifier circuit that allows variation of the magnitude of output swing of the lateral G-sensor. This involves feeding the output of the lateral G-sensor into the amp and then the output of the amp into the ECU input. A dash-mounted potentiometer allows adjustment of the gain. As shown, the circuit allows a gain of 1 times (ie factory output signal retained) right through to 0 times (ie output stays at 2.5 volts irrespective of input voltage swings). Advantages: best of all worlds - with knob adjustment, excellent dry road handling, excellent wet weather handling, excellent straight-line traction. Disadvantages: requires extensive knowledge of electronics to build and calibrate amp. Figure 2 shows a suggested amp circuit. Note that the designer of this amplifier has stated "This circuit cannot be employed as the basis of replication with randomly chosen LF411 ICs because the voltages shown are optimum for the particular op amps used." Also note that the designer is not interested in producing any more amplifiers. Summary: just superb! G-sensor Pin-Outs With G-sensor in Standard Orientation Note: initial colour code refers to wiring on the sensor side of plugs; after semi-colon refers to colour code on the ECU side of plugs. Large Plug Yellow; blue/green longitudinal sensor output (2.5 volts at rest) Blue; blue/yellow lateral sensor output (2.5 volts at rest) Red; white/blue regulated supply (8 volts) Black; orange/blue earth Brown; black braided earth Small Plug White; red longitudinal sensor output (2.5 volts at rest) Red; white regulated supply (8 volts) Black; black earth Brown; black braided earth All three G-sensors have a 2.5 volt output at rest. Under acceleration conditions, the voltage swings at least as high as 4 volts or at least as low as 1 volt (depending on the direction of acceleration). http://us1.webpublications.com.au/static/i...0/0060_10mg.jpg http://us1.webpublications.com.au/static/i...0/0060_09mg.jpg

Sweet, so my current 265 tyres on my 9.5inch rims are just about perfect, according to Falken.. Thanks guys....

It sounds a bit like an air leak. Have you checked all of the intake hoses for any loose connections or splits. Sometimes they can be hard to spot as they only come apart under engine load. Check that you BOV isnt leaking any air also. Another option might even be a rooted CAT in the exhaust. Unfortunatley once you exhaust all the simpler options, its time for a trip to your mechanic... Good luck

I have 18x9.5 or 18x10 inch rims (im not sure of there exact width, i measured it with a tape, and it depends wether i measure to the lip or the entire rim) I currentley have 265/35 tyres. What is the max width i could go on a 9.5inch rim and a 10inch rim? Cheers.

Ive lost track of whats still for sale!!! How much for the 2 x hks 2530's??? And did the manifolds allready sell?

Wow. It seems that the 2530's are able to generate great times by being able to record great 60foot times. This must be where their added response over 2540's and the like make it quicker over the strip, even if MPH trap speeds are similar. On your 10.38 run i noticed your 60foot was 1.51sec!!! Thats insane!!! I think my 2540's would drop off boost/revs too much between gearchanges to enable a 10sec pass. Ill drop by CRD this week and chat to Jim, they built my car for the previous owner a couple of years ago. Cheers. ps good luck Stacey in joining the 10sec club...

Might have to put a TO4Z or 2530 combo on the to-do list...

So if the HKS 2530's are considered the best low-mount setup, and the T04Z the best large single, when it comes to power/response. Whats considered the best high-mount twin setup? With all these people fitting T04Z's, what am i looking at price wise to upgrade to this setup? I allready have the supporting mods, engine/fuel/ic/ecu. Haveing HKS dumps and front pipes, would i need to change my exhaust aswell?

Nope. I like most am amazed at DirtGarages results, clearly they have spent the time/research/testing required to achieve a power figure i didnt think possible from turbo's as small as 2530's. Their results are not in question. R31Nismoid is right when he stated that the boost levels, fuel,tune, mods and results shown in the article arent clear and thus is not a 100% be all and end all comparison. But its good enough to at least gauge what the different turbo's look like. Its still gold for owners looking to upgrade. DirtGarage, that dyno graph at 24PSI and pump fuel is more impressive to me than the 442KW C16 run. 391AWKW on CRD's dyno is massive figure. What time/MPH did the car run at this level? Starts to make me think that my eventual goal of a 10sec pass might still be possible on my HKS 2540's. That TO4Z graph is also very impressive. Instant 10sec GTR, and from what i know the turbo is very responsive for a large single. Cheers.

I agree. The turbo comparison in the article is a basic guide to the results produced by the different turbo combinations on said GTR. The boost level used and the fuel they were run on is 99% sure to be street friendly. Quite simply NO street useable turbo setup/tune, wether new or old is going to come anywhere near to the results achieved by TWO-06L in terms of power and response. But thats not a fair comparison. Most GTR owners are not going to spend the time/money/research/labour/testing required to enable turbo's as small as 2530's to achieve similar results, and even then its not a practical street setup IMO, requireing obscene boost levels for the street, and leaning on the engine to the extent that "street useable/reliable" is hardly a fair description, and the fact your always only one bad batch of pump fuel or one really hot day away from disaster. Dirt Garages dyno sheet is simply going to wipe the floor with anything else you can post up to compare with. But i think their results with this combination is the exception rather than the rule. As far as i know only 1 other GTR in Oz has run a 10sec pass on low mount turbo's, and it needed C16 to enable the 2.0Bar running through its 2540's to achieve it, after being expertly setup by CRD. So it would seem that the new HKS GT-Rs are now the best option for those wanting maximum power from a low-mount setup thats street friendly. Although their response is laggier than 2530's, their topend power advantage while running on pump fuel and reliable boost levels gives them the edge IMO if power and quick drag strip times/higher MPH results are your desired goal. 2530's are great turbo's, no doubt. With near stock boost response, while adding 60-70KW at the wheels running street useable boost levels is very impressive. This gives you a GTR that can power around a race track, tear up the street and run 11sec passes at the strip. A great "allround" setup. But, if a repeatable/reliable 350+AWKW is your goal, 10sec passes or 130MPH trap speeds in a streetable setup is what your after, then the 2530's are not a viable street option, as the boost levels required to achieve this rule out the use of pump fuel, the very thing that makes a car "streetable". How the new HKS GT-Rs would go at 2.0Bar and C16 is yet to be seen, but is not really relevent to 99% of owners. The vast majority of owners want a safe/reliable/repeatable setup that runs on pump fuel and is is at home on the street. Transporting your GTR on a flatbed to the workshop everytime you want a retune to enable 2.0Bar to be used grows tiresome. Not forgetting the fact that as soon as Avgas/C16 is used the car is not longer legally able to be driven on the road, and thus is no longer a "street GTR" anyway. Takeing this into account the new HKS GT-Rs offer the best "bang for your buck" from a low mount setup for a genuine street GTR. Cheers, Interesting opinions. Lets keep it friendly though boys..

The R32 N1's are getting quite dated now. I think the turbo's start to fall off their efficiency range once you get to around 1.3Bar-1.5Bar, this is when they will simply start to produce more heat than power. On a GTR with all of the matching add on mods, id expect they would max out at around 260AWKW-280AWKW. But the boost level required for this amount of power is a bit to high for regular street use IMO, id say a lazy 240AWKW-250AWKW at 1.1Bar-1.2Bar should be your target.

Are the 2530's still available? Or have they been dis-continued like the 2510's and 2540's? I really must go for a ride in a GTR with 2530's, it seems everywhere i turn someone is praiseing them as the "best" turbo choice for the ultimate "allround" GTR. When my 2540's give up the ghost ill have to look at them, or whatever replaces them. The new GT-SS's share the same exhaust wheel as the 2530's, but a slightly smaller compressor i beleive. So faster spool up with a little less topend. I know CRD got 330AWKW from a pair so they're still very good up high. The one thing that bothers me about the 2530's though is the very high boost levels required to achieve these kind of figures. I'd guess you would need 20PSI to get 330AWKW and 22PSI-24PSI to break 350AWKW. Thats a lot of boost for pump fuel while still retaining reliability. I wouldnt do a track day in my GTR at 20PSI and pump fuel, prolonged hard driving and warm weather would also not help. Talking to Jim at CRD and haveing him setup up both of my cars, 18PSI is about as high as you should go on pump fuel, to still enable you to give your car a hard time out on the road and the odd track day and still have a high degree of reliability. The drag strip is a much shorter period of abuse, so higher boost is usually tolerated here. 2530's at 18PSI would struggle to top 320AWKW IMO. Still enough for the street, responsive enough for the track and powerfull enough to run 11s at the strip. Sounds like a very well rounded choice. But if you want more than 320AWKW-330AWKW i think they start to lose their appeal as a genuine street option, as prolonged use at 20+PSI isnt going to be a very reliable option on regular pump fuel. Thats why a turbo's performance at around 18PSI is important to me, as this is about the level a genuine street GTR is going to live at. The 2540's fitted to my GTR by the previous owner are not a great street option. At 18PSI they make 330AWKW, but are laggy. The 2540'S strength is its ability to make big power in the 1.7-1.9BAR range, at this level 400AWKW is within reach and 10sec passes, but its hardly any use to me on the street and 99% of the time. It just seems to me that most of the turbo options for the GTR are'nt overly practical, requireing dangerously high amounts of boost and funny fuel in order to run the turbo's in the meat of their efficinecy. Perhaps some owners have more funds or access to cheaper labour or parts than others, so can risk their engines longevity by leaning on it harder than others. Im on the other side of the fence, even one engine rebuild or turbo meltdown is almost certainly going to cost me the car, as many have stated in the past, just because you can afford to buy it doesnt mean you can afford to own it. While running 10sec passes and makeing 440+AWKW on 2530's is achievable, its hardly practical for 99% of owners. A T88-34H will give you 400AWKW at 18PSI and the potential to run 10s, but be laggy on the treet and track. But to me, the cars that are most impressive are able to make their power or run their times as genuine "street' cars, in full street trim. Pump fuel, treaded tyres, no nitrous, exhaust with cat. These to me are the most impressive. Once this line blurrs then the car becomes a "drag" car and not a street car. To me a GTR running a 10sec pass with a big single on pump fuel is more impressive than a "drag" GTR running 9sec passes. It would seem useing small responsive turbo's like 2530's to achieve a 10sec pass has really bridged the gap between track and strip turbo options, even if most owners will never lean on this setup anywhere near hard enough to get similar results. Bored ramble over...

The boost level used with each setup is also important. According to HPI magazine TW0-06L 442RWKW pull was at 35PSI and C16, hardly a fair comparison if the GTR's are at 20PSI and pump fuel..

In terms of ATTESSA, theres not a great deal that you can check. Copious amounts of rear wheel spin, with no real power going to the front can be a a sign of worn clutch packs in the transfer carrier. Power "surging" between the front and rear under acceleration, or hard cornering. Other than that all you can do is test drive it, and talk to the owner...

True, ive seen a car with "420RWKW" only clock 119MPH. And another GTR with 390RWKW clock 136MPH. Both on stock transmission. Clearly one car is makeing a lot more power than the other...

HKS 2530'S AND HKS 2540'S are both Ball-Bearing Turbo's. Period.

As it was stated before, a % power loss is not accurate. A 700BHP GTR isnt going to lose any more power through its drivetrain than a 400BHP GTR, providing they have the same transmission/gearbox/clutch/flywheel/fluid. Its much more logical that its a fixed amount. Someone suggested about 50-60KW of power loss from engine to rear wheel figure. And about 3-4% difference from this to an AWKW figure...

Mate 700AWHP and responsive track GTR are at complete odds with each other. Like a few boys have said, for a quick track car, masses of topend power doesnt make it quicker around a track. Mid range torque and responsiveness makes it quick. A really quick track GTR usually selects turbo's for the midrange, 700AWHP is enough to run a low 10sec quartermile, possibley a high 9sec pass with suspension and transmission work. Not many 9sec GTRs are quick around a track or on the street mate. For the best street GTR, with a bit of track work id suggest the HKS GT-SS twins. 300-330 AWKW. But if your building up a bigger engined GTR, theres no point going with turbo's this small. 2530's would also IMO be to small for your application. 2540's can produce up to 400AWKW, and GTR Jason on this forum has clocked some amazing track times around some Sydney circuits with them. But their getting a bit old now, and have since been replaced by the GTRS's. Looking at that dyno graph id say these turbo's would be great for your application. You could get 600-700 AWHP outta them, and they're more responsive than a T04Z. GTR's are the biggest/powerfull low mount turbo's you can fit. After them, your looking at a large single like the T04Z or a small high mount kit, like the Trust TD05 twin setup. TD06's would be to laggy for track work IMO. Personally i think you need to rethink your power goal and your intended use for your GTR. Becasue at the moment i think they're at loggerheads. You'll find that a 550-600 GTR with GT-SS's will more than likely be quicker around a track than a laggy 750BHP monster.

Im buggered if i could figure out the handi-cap system they used. They didnt explain how it exactly worked. I was sitting there with a mate, bragging about how it recorded the fastest 400m time and the quickest lap time. Next thing i know the presenter states that the GTR comes last after they apply a handi-cap WTF!!!!! Seems like there's still a bit of hostility and sour grapes amonst the Ford and Holden boys when it comes to Godzilla...

Wow makes the HKS GTR's look pretty good.... Decent response, and just under 400kw at the wheels. Might have to trade in my HKS 2540's...