Legionnaire

First of all - what's ".73"? Is it a reference to HKS housing or something? Second - thought are that we should wait for real-world results. As of now this turbo does not seem to justify the price difference between it and conventional 3071. On the other hand price difference is not that big, 1392 USD for GTX3071 + housing that you can buy everywhere vs. 1448 USD for GT3071 [data taken from ATPTurbo site]. Personally I think (at this stage I have no real world data, so I can only assume) GTX3071 is the best of all medium-frame GTX turbos currently available and is not worse than GT3076. E.g. compressor requires less revs to reach similar airflow to 76mm GT compressor , and in general seems to spend shaft power more efficiently. The biggest concern of course is that GT3076 and RB25 combo is tried and proven many times, as is GT3071, whereas GTX turbos have yet to prove themselves. Are you sure? I'm not questioning your experience with GT3076, but some results I've seen for 3071's so far, particularly with .63 housings, look awesome in that they have factory-like boost threshold with 1.5 or more times power and make more torque everywhere, which I think is the key to a nice and fun street setup The same definitely can not be said about GT3076.

Also true, but don't you think you're trying to compare bad realization of a good concept to a good realization of worse concept? In this case it favours the latter. With a well-engineered setup there is no masive turbulence pre turbo. If I can find them, I'll post some pics of a honda setup, there is no source of turbulence there. But speaking of petrol burners we're still stuck with fixed geometry turbos for now, so we should better optimize what we have. But if i was one of the E85 users with their lower EGTs and sootless exhaust, I'd seriuosly consider some of VGT turbos currently available for CI engines. Update: found a pic of honda VFT setup. If by smaller you mean smaller area, that's exactly what "A" part of A/R stands for. But speaking of "quick spool" valve as in "blocking one scroll of twinscroll housing at the flange" valve I do agree it is dodgy as and wouldn't use it on my car

It actually depends on how you understand "response", how you define it. If response is the capability to rev engine faster, say, from 2000 to 6000 in 0.3 sec as opposed to 0.6 sec, you can use different approach - remove you radiator fan and get yourself 5.5" tilton or AP racing carbon-carbon clutch. You will be amazed with your new motorbike-like response, particularly with a RB20 but for the price you have to pay for it you can buy two GT2860RS's, walbro and injector set

Because with a "proper twinscroll" setup you stil have fixed housing A/R so you're optimising inherently ill concept and with quickspool valve you're one step closer to VGT? Kinda similar to buying adj. cam gears when you can actually have VVT. The latest engine I'm aware of that utilises quickspool concept is honda KA23A1 found in Acura RDX. What you actually want is to have continuously controllable turbine inlet pressure, i.e. have a VGT mechanism. GTX compressors are good. Too bad garrett didn't bother upgrading their turbines at the same time. I'd like to see a hybrid of BW TiAl turbine and Garrett compressor though, BW compressors produce desired flow figures at much too high pressure ratios to my liking, kinda reverse situation to Garrett - ultra-modern turbine with diesel-age compressor philosophy. GT/GTX 76mm compressor mated to 70mm EFR turbine must be good. As for spool, I still thing GTX3071 should spool slightly faster than GT3076. GTX3076 is a real comp/turb flow mismatch, it's not like 3582, more like 3082 - high TIP pressures and narrow powerband unless conservative cams are used.

Getting to the factory knock sensor location is going to be a bitch if the engine is still in a car, btw. As for sensor noize, it strongly depends on location on the block, flatness of surface you're trying to pick the sound at, how tight your connecting bolt is, etc. My amplifier is powered by two AA batteries. If after all noize eliminating measures you're still not satisfied with the quality of sound, you might consider using some kind of frequency bandpass filter. For a 86-87mm bore the frequency of detonation sound should be about 6.6-6.7kHz

You sure it's a good idea? Stock knock sensor location is great, I'm not questioning that, but unless it's an RB26 you're trying to listen, you've got a resonant sensor, which doesn't give you any usableable info if plugged directly as a mic. Use round knock sensor which has a hole in the middle of it - it actually is a microphone of sorts. I have never bolted det cans to a RB block, but since you rely on your own ears/brain to interpret what you pick up with them, I don't think that placement makes any significant difference, just stay away from any vibration sources (i.e. don't bolt it to the head or near ancillaries such as A/C or P/S pump). You can also try to reduce vibration by wrapping your pickup tube with some soft material.

What's the size of your current turbo? I mean wheel sizes as well as ex. housing A/R size. Since it's a RB25 highflow, I assume it has like 400-450hp worth of compressor flow and appropriate turbine to support that flow, so must be 2871 52 or 56 trim-sized. Now some easy calcs, just to verify. 450hp turbo on a 2 litre equals to 225hp/litre and should have similar response to a RB25 with a turbo, that provides 225*2.5 = 562.5 hp. This power fits right between GT30R and GT35R turbos, and RB25 spools GT30 at ~3500-4000 and GT35 at 4000-4500, depending on rear housing, so your response sounds right. Even SR20's spool 2871 at around 4000 rpm (again, depending on compressor trim and housing A/R), and having bigger capacity cylinders they tend to spool turbos better than RB20's. I'd change your current turbo to a Disco Potato or a 2860R and used it in a RB25 21U housing for more response or in a OP6 housing for slightly more power. But that's just my opinion.

The guy has been misled. MT SII RS4S is supported by Nistune for more than 3 years now. I'm using exactly 0V801 ECU with nistune and have a mate here who's using Type 4 board programmed with 0V801 image in his AT ECU. Neo ECUs are actually interchangable - I was running RWD R34 ECU (AA500) with my Stagea motor for two months with no problems at all.

The amount of air that goes through the bottle represents work done, more air means more work. Pressure inside the bottle represents efficiency - the lower the pressure, the more efficiently the work is being done. Different sizes of holes represent turbo sizes and how they affect efficiency. Bigger turbos generate more power than small turbos because of two main factors: 1)they pump more air mass more efficiently by themselves (higher airflow with lower compressor discharge temperatures) 2)they increase engine volumetric efficiency (big turbine housings are less restrictive than small ones)

Obviously you can go to nissan dealership with the following p/n: 41129-12U26 - this is a set of two nipples and caps. But if you don't want to pay eek price for oem nissan part (e.g. my dealer asked about 50$ for a set), there is a good bit of info - apparently a lot of brembo bleeding nipples are the same - M10x1.0mm thread, and 31 or so mm length. They are used on subaru STi, dodge Viper, etc. For example, I asked for a price for one Audi nipple and cap, got quoted ~ 7.5$. Audi/VW p/n in question is 8A0 615 273. Or search for an aftermarket set, shouldn't cost a lot.

But then it's ridiculously expensive, one piston shouldn't cost more than 40-50$

So the verdict apparently is that pure toluene or xylene may require more often engine rebuilds, but toluene mixed with petrol is a good thing and a safe way to increase octane number without significant adverse effects.

Being a cyclic hydrocarbon and containing 7 carbon atoms per 8 hydrogen atoms, as opposed to octane and other alkanes that have more than two hydrogen atoms per 1 carbon atom, doesn't toluene or xylene produce significant amounts of soot compared to usual petrol? It is not a problem for race engines that get rebuilt before every race, but may not be suitable for street engine that sees little maintenance.

I think what JonnoHR31 is trying to say is that AFM will be maxed well before factory injectors reach anything like 100%, and on a fully standard ECU air overflowing countermeasures will be activated well before AFM is maxed out. So dude is constantly hitting airflow limiter. Feels like crap, but unlikely kills an engine. There is no direct relationship between CFM and KW, but there is a relationship between lb/min (or KG/sec) and SFC/AFRs and KW. So equations look like this: power = mass flow, mass flow through AFM = certain voltage output, any voltage above 4 volts (a whole good volt to go to maxing AFM out) or so = fuel cut, fuel cut = no fuel, no fuel = no power to drive turbine = no mass flow. To OP: crappy and poorly thought out engine setups are hardly a unique problem. Read as much as you can on the subject, SAU is invaluable source of this kind of info and has examples for almost any king of setup you can think of, and get yourself at least some tuneable ECU, as mentioned above, MAP-based ECUs are preferred if you're going to keep that T04Z for a 2.5 litre engine.

Speaking of stock ecu, I believe it uses fuel cut. When certain amount of revs is reached, fuel gets cut and crank starts to decelerate until it reaches so called "fuel recovery threshold", RPM point at which ecu resumes fuelling, and crank accelerates again. So if you're flat on throttle by that time, i.e. sitting on the limiter, this process repeats and crank speeds up and slows down in rapid succession, hitting pump drive planes and wearing them. The (bad) solution for this is to set limit level 300-500rpm higher than rpm at which you shift to reduce your chances of hitting the limiter.

There is a kit offered by CZP for a 300ZX that apparently fits R-chassis and front S-chassis: http://www.conceptzperformance.com/Cart/description.php?II=3310&Car_Type=300&UID=2011020406134892.243.188.8 You can choose a kit with and without stoptech rotors or with no rotors at all, and buy rotors form your local supplier, which makes the kit somewhat cheaper. Browse their site. Good news is that massive 350x20mm rear rotor works with original parking brake (on Z- and R-chassis, that is). But I dont see the point of adapting those akebonos to Silvia ar Skyline. They are impressively big, yes, but is it a good thing? I personally prefer the caliper to have variety of pad compounds available, have appropriately sized pistons to maintain adequate brake bias, be stiff enough and not to flex under braking, and be as small and light as possible unless it hurts their stiffness. Do akebonos have plenty of different pads easily available for them? Not really. Are they stiff and light? I dunno about stiffness, but they are not particularly light. Are they physically big and do they require big dia. wheels to fit? Yes and yes - more unsprung weight and more expensive tyres. Plus they have axial mounts, so you'll have to use some dodgy adapters that aren't going to be extra stiff, nor will they be cheap or easy to fabricate. It's the similar situation to the EVO/Sti brembos discussed on here for a long time: http://http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/203896-evo-brembos-on-a-r32-gtr/. A substantial upgrade for under a grand will be a Merc or Audi rotor and spaced out factory sumitomo caliper. Same idea, but you won't have to spend money on calipers, just rotors and adapters. UPDATE: As for pad size, V36/Z34 pads are quite a bit bigger than R33/34/Z33 brembo pads and pads for sumitomo caliper Yeah, yeah, I know, as laughable as it looks, disregard pic sizes, concentrate on pads sizes in mm shown on every pic. Rear pads on 370z are bigger as well.

120$ for all eight pistons? That's cheap!

Excellent info Brad, thanks for reply, exactly what I wanted to see. I was confused with mentioning about "T-ing" prop. valve into rear line - didn't understand that term. So I just plug bias valve inline between BMC and ABS unit, on the rear brake line. Or do I have to remove ABS unit in order to use prop. valve? What kind of maintenance, if any, is required for a prop valve? I asked for pictures 'cause I wanted to see if factory hard brake lines are still in use with patrol BMC and prop valve. Judging by your pics the factory front line is reused with very little or no modifications at all. Rear seem to be bent and connected to the braided line that goes from prop valve - is this correct?

We're talking about 4 piston caliper here, right? If so then it's easy. P/N is 41121-30P00 for a piston, you obviously need 8 of them per car. You may want to buy a seal kit for pistons as well. Its P/N is 41120-30P25, apparently you need only one per car. P/Ns are identical for any Sumitomo Nissan 4 piston caliper, be it 300ZX, Silvia or Skyline. As for availability, I think you should check it with a dealer.

Do you happen to know if it is handbrake drum diameter, offset, or drum "depth" that is wrong? I was thinking about upsizing rears and was looking into using 350Z rotors. Although OEM rears seem to be disgustingly expensive for 350Z. P/N for them is 43206-CD005 if someone is curious.

Hi, can you please explain why do rears off a 350z not fit? Is it rotor related or caliper mount being not suitable?

Hey guys, a little update on this with OEM P/Ns, that can be useful for non-AU readers here who can't order using the numbers above After browsing FAST I was able to obtain following info: 1" BMC P/N: 46010-01G00, installed on European Patrol Y60 with RD28, Canadian D21 Pickup with VG30 and Jap Safari Y60 with TB42 engine only 17/16" BMC P/N: 46010-02J00, can be found in European Patrol Y60 with TB42E and AT as well as in Jap Safari Y60 with TD42 engine 15/16" BMC P/N: 46010-41G00, Canadian and Asian WD21 Pathfinder and Japanese WD21 Terrano with TD27 The list of models may be incomplete and somewhat inaccurate, as it was put together based on various catalogues available online. Part numbers are accurate though, as I took them directly from FAST. I'm also very curious to see results of external bias adjuster vs. in-built prop. valve, preferably with some pics.

Sorry for delay, didn't see your message. I used slightly fatter than factory lower o-rings + some kind of hard rubber for bigger manifold o-rings, I don't know how to properly call this part. Installation is somewhat messy, but there is no vacuum/boost leak, so it all works for me. I'm currently using factory injectors, so I didn't use any spacer for a rail. As for pics, I'll try to arrange that in a week.

I just got NEO fuel rail mounts rewelded to a position suitable for Greddy manifold. Costed ~20$.

I'm also interested in knowing how GTX3076 performs on an unopened DET neo, but I'd 350kw by 20 psi is impossible without cams on ULP. 350rwkw is ~ 470whp, how much flywheel hp is it? Let's say 530fwhp. To make this power using PULP you have to force around 55lb/min of air down the engine's throat. 20 psi is 2.43 pressure ratio, plot this poing on the compressor map. I'd say compressor efficiency is still pretty good at ~70% at this point. At 101% volumetric efficiency you will need ~7400 rpm to achieve this flow, at 95% VE it becomes 7800-7900 region, at 90% VE it's going to be 8300rpm. So either make sure your VE is adequate at this point (cams, etc), or increase boost or rev engine harder. Or use different fuel, like E85. And I guess for the new 76mm compressor with all that additional flow, .63 turbine housing will really struggle to flow enough exhaust gasses and will create some serious backpressure in the upper rev range. Looks like at least .82 A/R is an imperative from now on for GTX3076