govich

You buy the pump after looking at whether it's suitable for your application. If you only need 158lph at your desired boost level, the walbro can supply 204lph and the nismo can supply 300lph, why would you take the nismo at 3 times the price?

Who says you NEED 255lph at 14 psi? You have a nice graph that Mafia posted on the previous page showing you the flow characteristics for the pump. You can work out that at 52psi pressure it's supplying approximately 204lph. The next step in claiming that the walbro outright can't handle 14 psi would be to work out how much fuel the RB25 needs. From http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/FY...-Fl-t47081.html (you'd want to confirm this), the RB25 injectors flow 440cc/min at 52psi. 440cc/min = 26.4lph, for 6 cylinders that's 158.4lph. Less than 204lph if my maths is correct. So please stop preaching rubbish.

So it won't be able to handle a 2530 pushing 18psi on an RB25? Sure? I agree it won't handle 350rwkw, it's not rated to.

Are we conveniently ignoring the purple line? I think all that graph tells you is that you need to make sure you get the HP version (GSS342) of the pump for an application up to 500hp, as rated.

Well the lambo caught up through most of the field, was all over the GTR for half a lap and then dived in under brakes. What are you expecting the GTR to do, cut across? or just block the obviously faster car (at that stage anyway) 'til the end of the race.. I don't know about the porsches not being driven to potential either.. Hattori in the GT3 always drives hard and was being held up but the Turbo just doesn't look to be in the league.

I can vouch for this setup, pulls very hard. I swear Dave if you had this up a week ago i might have jumped on it, but i just spent lots of time and money redoing all the gaskets around the stock turbo/manifold How come you're getting rid of the manifold? Going high mount? Will be interesting to see how the 3071 compares. Good luck with the sale, shouldn't take long. (apologies for the useless post )

Alright, PM sent

250plus post to sydney for the infometer

Kilograms are a measure of mass, nothing to do with different planets.

Kilograms are not a measure of force guys. All you've calculated is the mass you'd have to apply a force of 927N to in order to accelerate it at 9.8m/s/s in ideal conditions, which has nothing to do with this. Stick with the 900N force, although in reality i think you'd find the conditions way, WAY more complex and delicate. Some sort of sensors would help

You're suggesting Nissan's engineers can't develop a good computer for the RB26? IMO you can't compare anything aftermarket with the sheer money the factory spends on engineering. Don't confuse the typical goals of running 11 second quarters and then putting up with no power until 4500rpm and a lack of driveability from a 2.6 litre motor with Nissan's goals of smooth power everywhere, acceptable consumption, complete legality emissions and noise-wise and the potential for the motor to last >200,000kms while still being faster than most factory cars produced. We're talking stock for stock. It wasn't a comparison i made first. If we're going to compare cars with aftermarket modifications we might aswell wait until some of the Japanese tuning houses get into VR38s. Weight to power: R34 260kW/1540kg = 5.92kg/kW New GTR: 353kW/1740kg = 4.93kg/kW

The VR38 peaks at 150kW more than the RB26DETT, from factory. Please explain how this is only torque? Are you aware of the direct relationship between torque and power? An engine CAN NOT 'only tourqu', if it generates a moment about the crankshaft and it spins, it's doing work and there is power output. What is the significance of the V layout for you? Do you know how long manufacturers have been making engines in this arrangement? It generally requires extra balancing over a typical inline arrangement, but with modern technology this is not an issue. Are you aware that dragsters that do 4-5 seconds over the quarter mile use 8 cylinders in a V-arrangement? I give up. My head hurts. ps. GTR is flappy paddle gearbox only for now.

A new, much better car is a lot more expensive than a 5-8 year old second hand inferior car, what's your point? Did you know that you can get a VL turbo to do 10 second quarter miles for about a fifth of the price of an R34 GTR? Clearly the RB30ET is a superior motor to the RB26DETT.

bkc, i suggest you talk to Nissan and convince them with your thorough reasoning that the RB26 is better. Imagine how much money you'd save them if they dropped this new V-engine R&D nonsense and chucked a good ol' RB26 in each new GTR. They could hit HKS up for a pair of 2530s and f-con, chuck on some 555cc injectors and a fuel pump which they could get at mates rates from the boys over at Nismo and then get her over to the workshop down the road to give it a conservative tune on 1.2bar on their dyno. Here's a short analysis of power and torque figures: Last (R34) RB26DETT: 206 kW @ 6800 rpm and 392 N·m @ 4400 rpm. At peak power, the RB26 is producing ~290Nm of torque ie. dying in the arse. VR38DETT: 353 kW @ 6800 rpm and 588 N·m @ 3200-5200 rpm. At peak power, the VR38 is still producing just under 500Nm of torque. ie. not dying in the arse. The VR38 develops a lot more torque and has a far wider spread of torque. It complies with the latest, strictest emission regulations, ie. it makes this power quietly and efficiently. Nissan have spent who knows how many millions of dollars making sure this engine runs PERFECTLY, in every sense possible. No misfire, no vacuum leaks, no setting the boost controller to get rid of spiking or boost drop, the boost delivery is flat and perfect, the torque curve is massive, the power smooth and endless. A tuned RB26 doesn't even come CLOSE to standing a chance (on any count other than outright power), let alone a stock RB26. HTH

Very informative discussion. I wish i had time to get away from uni studies and really look into this stuff and contribute. My stock turbo has started making some 'interesting' noises.. i was leaning towards the GT-RS kit and blindly trusting HKS's engineers (probably a safe bet) but reading this makes me reconsider. Out of interest, do you guys just estimate volumetric/mass flow rates and efficiency (etc.) for number crunching? I notice the Garrett site has some basic information (although non-SI units frustrate me, i'm tempted to 'translate' their site ).

Yep, there are SLIP and A-LSD lights on the tacho (see my avatar pic). SLIP for when the diff locks, A-LSD for when it fails (as far as i know/have been able to find out). I haven't had a problem with mine on the track or skid pan, but in general most people find them troublesome (probably because no-one knows anything about them). Paulr33 has looked into it..search for his thread.

http://www.gcg.com.au/Catalogue_Menus/Upgr...pgrade_gtst.htm You'll also need an upgraded AFM and a new fuel pump (nismo, tomei, walbro gss342 etc).

That wasn't my point, i mean the shape of the graph not the peak number. It should be a smooth curve peaking at way higher rpm. I certainly hope that's not his best effort as a full time tuner..

The power is absolutely horrible past 5500rpm, and your boost level trails off to 13psi. I don't know why a workshop would let a customer take a car out like that. You need upgraded injectors and AFM. Stock fuel pressure regulator is fine.

The power will be made if the original was a more significant restriction. Rekin's graph shows the second run has more boost everywhere, as was said. If anything, the fact that it gains more power at higher engine speeds where more airflow is required just backs this up even more.

If you're looking to get a stock RB25 turbo (assuming you're still using it) holding 12-13psi until redline it won't happen. It's not the boost controller, it's that the turbo can't flow enough air to keep the pressure up. They all drop towards 10-11psi. I see this response may be too late..

Yeah if the radiator is crumbling it needs to be changed, mine is in better condition than that. Sorry i glanced over the fact that it was 30+ deg ambient at the time, the last time i went was mid July i believe, and ambient temperature was at least 10 degrees less throughout the day. If you're planning on taking it regularly during summer look a few posts above at Dave's advice, he's pretty much said it all.

I'd be looking to test whatever you can in the system to be sure there are no problems. My own car - R33 GTS25t - puts down a peak of just over 200 kW at the wheels while still using the stock cooling system with decent coolant, and last time out i lapped wakefield (in blocks of 7-8 laps) until i was running on petrol fumes without issue (can't say the same for the brakes and tyres though..).

Noone on here will be able to tell you with certainty what your problem is. Grab your multimeter and start by checking the voltage across the starter motor when trying to start and if that's no good check for continuity (resistance) between the ecu (pin 43 i believe, but check this) and starter, check the fuse etc. There isn't much really to the circuit apart from the ignition barrell. If the ECU isn't sending the correct signal (eg. series 1 vs 2) then you have basically no chance. Is the ECU spitting out any error codes? Is there power to anything else? (water temp sensor, CAS, AFM, coils, fuel pump as random examples)

Problem solved. Knew from the above two that something was sus. Anyone in this position, have a look at your security system, they can play all sorts of shenanigans with the car. Deactivated it and the car was a black smoke machine for about 20 seconds, held it on the throttle though and it's purring now.