hypergear

Its been a good six month in to building and evaluating turbochargers for SR20det motors and I'm coming back to do further work on Rb engines. Except this time it is for Rb26DETT. I have purchased a fully stock 98 model GTR33 with 55,000KM from a 65 years old man as my new test rig. As for this evaluation I would prefer some thing some thing easy bolt on that produces reasonably good power and response, I will also look into possibilities of a single turbo that might fit factory twin exhaust manifolds. Since the car is fully standard with a cat back exhaust only, I will be posting information on the parts that I might be getting for the modifications that I do, and effects of it in terms of power, response and drive ability. Hopefully my GTR venture will be smooth and successful. Stock standard engine bay: Some interesting found. Its funny how the GTR has a twin entry air box, with one end capped off: From the past few days of driving. Also been call a skyline, the drive ability is totally different to the GTST. It just doesn't feels to be the same car, and definitely fast for OEM spec. I will be installing an Adaptronic Eselect ECU with larger aftermarket front pipes before initial dyno tune for some base results. I have spent a reasonable amount of time reading up few member's GTR build ups. But please share experiences and post useful advises if you are experienced in modifying GTRs. Thank you.

Yes most of the the stuff are quite custom. The housing were made in castings, its then been machined to suit a range of wheels, back plates and bearing housings.The cold side doesn't affect performance as much as the hot side would. That G3 is using an an generic .70 casting, performance in between this, .50 and .60 T4 as well as T2x .60 are very similar with this particular wheel. And Just bought a virgin 98 model GTR of a old guy. I will be doing a bit of RB26 turbo developments in the next few month. It is currently full stock, and very slow. I think my KIA is quicker at this stage And any one is interested to buy my KIA and S14? I need some garage space. Thanks

This VLT had a the .60 based GT3076 machined in .63 stock housing with a spacer. The turbo exploded of course, and his rear housing was cracked all over. I ended up building a jig for his rear housing + dump pipe and made every thing new in the exact same position. Be interested to see what it makes after, will update once result sent in. Trent just tuned a XR6 FG with our ATR45 turbo. Car made 400rwkws+ on 20psi E85, and 384rwkws on P98 fuel. Internally gated bolton.

Posting some updates: Been dummying some direct bolt for Holden VL Turbos. This particular one is made based on our ATR43G3 turbocharger. Factory 2.5 inches cast dump is not replaced with a full 3 inches dump including a much larger 38mm internal gate. Expected to support 260~280rwkws on a RB30ET with supporting mods on P98 fuel. Bigger profiled turbochargers can also be be built based on the same turbine housing configuration. That includes our ATR43SS2 (500HP), SS3(530HP), SS4(550HP) and G4(600HP) models.

Your factory exhaust manifold will provide the best possible response, How ever it does not have the discharge capacity required for alot of power. So if you are looking to use stock exhaust manifold running at a peek of 20psi, I guess the most you will see with the SS1 would be 230rwkws and 245rwkws with the SS15. Note many Jap companies interpret HP based on DIN (European) configuration which reads slightly higher then Australian dynos. Our TD06 is capable of making 500HP engine. How ever this type of turbos does not perform well internally gated. VNT turbochargers start off with a tiny .35 rear and expands to a maximum of .82 as RPM increases. There for it is always in the most efficient state at given RPM. This type of turbos are only designed to work on externally gated setups.

First of all the RB20det has similar RPM to Boost ratio as a None VTC SR20det motor. T2x patterned turbochargers will do much better job then many of the T3x patterned turbochargers. Our ATR43SS1x series are very specifically made for this application. Those are made in T3x print with .64 T2x FNT flow tunnel that has the 6 bolt Nissan dump assembly attached for direct bolt on application. The latest developments would be our ATR43SS1, and SS1.5. Those run our billet 64mm and 68mm compressor wheels. SS1 would be good for up to 230rwkws that makes full boost by 3750 RPMS, while the SS1.5 is good for up to 250rwkws with full boost by 4000RPMs. Figure above are evaluated on P98 fuel, based on SAE dyno configuration using a Dynapack dyno with ramp sitting of 12secs. In comparison, the SS1 is equivalent to a 2860RS with 10% more top end, while the SS15 is equivalent to a 2871 with better response and 5% more top end. Above are bolton options. For 400rwhp on an Australian dyno, you will need proper exhaust manifold and external gate. In which you can run one of our VNT based turbochargers that would deliver boost power and response.

I had similar issues two cars I imported almost 10 years ago. One was due to clutch fan issues, the car basically overheats and shut. Its a common Nissan problem which the Water temp gauge rise no higher then halfway point, so the driver could not be notified in the event of over heating. Other car with similar issue was due to an lose timing belt, probably skipped few tooth or what not, the issues was resolved after a new belt was installed.

^^ Thanks for the feed back. I do highly recommend people go on the HPA site and at least acknowledge the content in EFI fundamentals and road tuning before even think of modifying any cars. It would contain a good entry level information for a brief understanding of what the tuner does, what a good tune is, and how power and torque is generated in relation with supporting mods installed.

@Johnilicite: Thanks for the info. Using the adaptronic ECU in the VVT tab. This is for the Kia sportage. would you know what those sittings are corresponding for? Thanks. And Grimsy. Thanks for submitting the dyno result. This is using the current profile, the very distinct difference between the two, is the current model has no issues holding boost and much happier taking on timing. Great work.

The term of 1HP, is defined by people and more specifically to the people whom builds dyno meters. There are no obvious concepts proves one's terminology is at mistake, so there will not be an matching dyno reading between two branded dyno meters. On top of it, there are configurations determined by operator that could alter an precise output, as well as the extend of vehicle setup on particular dyno meters. Seeking psychological balance as well as for the sake of promoting successful businesses. Owners whom bought a lower reading dyno will likely to argue that their reading stand for the absolute accuracy while others are inflated, While operator with an higher reading dyno might argue the lower reading dynos are poorly calibrated, On the end every one is there to defend for their own investment, While the true focus of a car can only produce so much "HP" with given fuel and given supporting mods at optimum calibration is lost. Dyno is just a tool. so the quotation of what a specific setup is capable of doing is more accurately served based on past experiences of an likely setup. As I quote the capacity of my turbochargers to relatively common turbochargers which past collection of data is plentiful. Alternatively quote based on a percentage gain based on factory output. That way it is more meaningful then just a number. Besides, for people whom value the safety of their own and others on road, the maximum potential of a engine is rarely used. It might be worth while for some tuners advertising drive ability and fuel consumption rather then just peek power. Which I prefer if tuners might be able to put some explanations into their work and spend some time educate people how a car should be tuned based on Torque, AFR, Timing, and Fuel maps. That way not only ensures the vehicle is tuned to their maximum potential, and most importantly let customers understand what their maximum potential is, in reference to supporting mods installed.

Johnilicte: I'm doing a little bit of Noob tuning at moment following course from HPA. Would you be able to share some experiences in tuning Nissan VTC system in areas of ignition, fuel and dis/engagement? I'm using adaptronic ecu. Thanks.

?? It might be a wrong thread asking technically questions, I'm learning and doing noob road tuning. I will post specific inquires in my own thread. Different Dyno meter may interpret HP differently with terminology used. I'm not expecting two branded dyno meters to read similar numbers. Like I've said, I'm posting up comparison result to commonly used turbochargers for more accurate prediction. I there for has no bias or doubt in your own tuning abilities just because your dyno might read differently.

Broci88: In terms of tuning, lot of us do our own road touch ups and etc. can you explain some of the areas that you might be able to get the car run safer and better?

Trent has been tuning my cars since 2007, and I have had no dramas, all four cars he's been tuning is running fine so far. About the dyno differences. I'll post up comparison against a more know turbocharger for example the SS-4 Alpha model you've seen earlier. Standard GT3540 equivalent in .82 rear: R33 GTST, Factory spec engine, with high mount and external gate. 431rwkws @ 25psi E85 fuel, full boost reached at 4650RPMs ATR43SS-4 Alpha. That makes 435rwkws @ 25psi also, while making full boost by 4150RPMs, Nothing's changed except turbocharger: Using this turbocharger, you are expecting similar amount of power as a GT3540 with better response. So that might be making more sense to people operating other branded dyno meters. Also which workshop are you operating from?

Recon your $2500 500HP Garrett can beat one of mine $2500 500HP SS-Alpha in response? And Ball what bearing? I choice to not to for good reasons.

Power Enterprise 800cc injectors. I've used two sets in two of my cars, they worked great, better fuel economy too.

Ok, for the first dyno run, depending on how much boost used. It looks like an valve floating behavior. Dyno result below represent my R33 skyline with valve bouncing issue. This was at 22psi of boost on an old ATR43G3 turbocharger:

If you are using this fuel pump: You must run two earth. You can just Tee it from the factory wiring and connect it straight to - terminal of your battery. It will then work.

If you are using that Walbro 450L pump. Make sure you have an 2nd earth attached. Or very low fuel pressure. By the way Another 5 x O 1200cc injector seized up on my car. lol

There is nothing wrong with DIN or SAE configuration, I'm building VW turbos for few Chinese and European work shops, and their standard dyno meter configuration is in DIN, Many Jap dyno meters uses DIN configurations as well. Americans uses SAE. It is up to how people interpret what a horse power is. Just like the French might have an different opinion on what a Kilo-gram is. Trent at Chequrered Tuning said the difference between the two is 15%. I can't yet judge that. I will ask Trent to do a run on both configuration on my next tune.

First of all it appears the Standard Dyno meter interpretation used in NZ is DIN. Using that interpretation, the reading is higher then what it usually would be is in OZ. The bush bearing turbo does not have an affects in terms of strangeness in the curve, how ever the response is slightly affected by oil temperature. The Blue run of 285rwkws had a different name on it, That is not from your car is it? The power level seems to be ok for the amount of boost given and auto transmission.

Its 12 volt and draws a maximum of 100Amps, so it would be similar to a Starter motor. It only comes in for about 2~3 secs a time. It will be a long time before I can come up with some thing working properly. But VNT stuff do work. and do make a lot of differences. eg: Standard ATR45 (GT3582 equivalent) result based on: R33 GTST, Factory spec engine, with high mount and external gate. 431rwkws @ 25psi E85 fuel, full boost reached at 4650RPMs ATR43SS-4 Alpha. makes 435rwkws @ 25psi also, while making full boost by 4150RPMs, Nothing's changed except turbocharger:

Fist of all, Don't get too excited, this has a long way to go, and I'm just working on it with spare time as a Hobby. The electric version generated 3.2psi of boost once engaged. How ever engine consumes more air as it revs. So boost level declines as engine RPM increases. Still a very noticeable amount of gain compare to NA: Reds are with Electric assisted only. Green is NA. The electric motor can not be strapped onto the turbine shaft, it must be isolated when turbine shaft speed is greater. Per Boost curve above, Ideally would be having electric motor to detached at 70.000 turbine shaft speed, and that is 3.2psi on this specific compressor. This turbocharger the way it is, currently building 3.2psi at 2500RPMs. The Electric motor should add momentum to the turbine shaft, Once electrically assisted, we would have 3.3psi at 1000RPMs. So I'm expecting an difference of 1000~1500RPMs. in which we might see 490rwkws with 29psi reached by 3800RPMs.

Currently working on Electric assisted turbocharger prototype. It is currently getting the 490rwkws SS-5 turbocharger sitting on 3.2psi with car powered off. That is totally lag free.

I think thats why Brazil only kicked three goal against China in 2002. lol