M@&k

Just an update for what it's worth. After retune driveability issues are all gone. Cold start is great, and the issue I was having at part throttle has been tuned out. No limitations on Nistune there.

I don't regret any of the advice I got on here at all. I knew full well this was uncharted territory, which was part of the appeal, and it's hardly a disaster just slightly off what I was chasing. Just the question of how different it might have been with the 0.63 housing is a compelling one... Damn you people and your encouraging comments

Once I compared the results with GT3071 of similar setup I felt much better about the whole thing. Seemed to be in line with what you would expect. The problem is I was always after a turbo with better response than a GT3071. I had in mind something that could produce full boost, say 18 psi, before 3,500 rpm. When picking the GTX3067 I was of the understanding that the 0.63 housing would be used. When I found out it was being put together with the 0.82 I started to think maybe the trade off for more power might be worth it. Plus it was getting to the stage that I didn't want to cause any more delays by pushing for a switch. For me, it's not so much that it's not performing, more that it's not what I originally set out to achieve. Having said that I will follow Wolverine's advice and just drive and enjoy it for the moment and see if my sentiment changes in a few months. On a different note; went for a drive yesterday and Profec controller readout told me I hit peak boost of 144 kPa. The Interwebs tells me this is about 21 psi. Now I would guess the Profec is not the most accurate boost gauge but seems quite different from the 16 or so psi it was apparently tuned at. Should I be worried?

That Plazmaman kit is exactly what I was originally considering, but was talked out of it. Daniel, cutting into the chassis is almost certainly defectable, but I understand it is possible to get it engineered so long as your car isn't fitted with an airbag. If it does have an airbag stock then you run into big trouble. While I agree this type of piping would improve overall efficiency, I feel like the best bang for buck would be to change the turbine housing. I expect this would have the biggest effect on response and wouldn't take much spanner work to change and just a touch up to the tune. I guess a higher rated actuator at the same time might be a good option too. Would make an interesting back to back, but for now I need to get some more km's in. Hardly had a chance to drive it. Might see if I can get some video clips similar to Lith's showing response in different gears.

Yeah I did go for a decent drive on Saturday. In higher gears it's making positive pressure in low 2k rpm, but doesn't really get up and boogy until high 3s. The new power band will take me some time to get used to. I noticed it drop off boost when shifting from 2nd to 3rd, but I strongly suspect this was due to me short shifting which is probably a habit picked up from driving the stock setup. I still need to find some quiet roads where I can more safely have a proper crack. While I'm loving the power when it's on, I still feel like it would be nice if it came on maybe 500rpm earlier so the extra power is in easy reach on the street rather than being a stretch. As I said I definitely still need to spend more time getting used to it first. Not as crazy as 90% of the setups on SAU but a long way from the basically stock car I'm used to. If I don't get used to it in a couple of months I may consider changing to the 0.63 housing. I assume that wouldn't be a majorly expensive undertaking.

Haven't had a heat shield on since the exhaust was fitted a couple of years ago. Asked to see if they could fit one this time around but they couldn't find one in decent condition. Was something to revisit when I take it back for next checkup. I actually quite liked how they kept the solenoid in the stock position, but I see your point.

Some photos as promised. Note the turbo fits on without any space on the manifold unlike most GT30 turbos. Galvsport also decided to go with a split dump option which seems to work fine. Aluminium intake pipe was made and they've used black Speedflow fittings for the BOV return and cam cover breather also. Looks quite neat. They needed to weld on an elbow onto the turbo outlet, and they've remade the outlet piping until it reaches the stock rubber elbow at the chassis opening. Apart from pod filter all looks pretty stock still.

Interesting, I didn't think the cooler would be an issue provided I had a decent brand (i.e. Blitz). Was originally thinking Plazmaman, but was talked out of it in order to keep engine bay looking as stock as possible. You could very well be right Scott regarding PZP, especially seeing as they were doing the work second hand (via Galvsport). Just happy to have the car back at the moment, and looking forward to getting reacquainted with new performance. At least now I have a good idea of what next steps are!

Spec list as follows: 1994 S1 R33 ~165,000 kms, unopened engine Nistune ECU GTX3067 w/ 0.82 A/R Garrett internal gate housing [Note: yes the smaller 3067, not typo of 3076] Stock manifolds Pod filter - Alloy pipe intake Z32 AFM Splitfire coilpacks Blitz SE return flow FMIC Greddy Profec OLED boost controller Nismo 740cc injectors Walbro 465 pump 3" Custom stainless exhaust turbo back w/ high flow cat.

Yeah would have been good to be there when tuned. Will just have to satisfy myself with driving. Thanks all for feedback and support. Will post photos and comments on "real world" response on weekend.

Unfortunately I don't know anyone else with a Skyline for comparison Mick, I'm running a pod filter. Exhaust is custom 3" from turbo back. It's fairly quiet so could be some restriction. Dale, Disco, I went back and had a look at some previous stuff I'd put together and starting to think maybe just that my expectations were getting skewed by the hype and anecdotal evidence of this turbo. Below is a plot comparing my result with similar GT3071 result (i.e. stock cams, 0.82 housing). Seems about right? Results I have noted for Pro S are much better from 3-4k rpm, but those doing more than 260kW all had cam mods (either adjustable cam gear or poncams). Perhaps I was just a bit over-excited about the whole thing I'm due to go back to Galvsport after 1,000km for check up, and Josh mentioned he'd look at different actuator spring rate for then. Maybe that will help slightly. And lastly, Disco, unfortunately I can't access tune with the Nistune. Don't have software or consult cable, sorry.

This was also my gut feel, which was why I was wondering what other thought. I don't know if they tried higher boost without gains, but seems odd to me to limit at 16 psi given the GTX should be better at higher pressure ratios. This along with the seemingly laggy (on the dyno plot at least) response, makes me think that there is something about the setup which is holding it back. Maybe the actuator, maybe the 0.82 housing. Josh said he suspected the exhaust is becoming a restriction from the sound (higher pitch or something like that..?). Intake is stock. Running a Blitz SE turn flow cooler so mostly using the stock cooling piping in the engine bay. Had an aluminium turbo intake made based on much discussion about the stock one sucking shut. Didn't want to skimp on any supporting components. Wanted to make sure everything was in place to allow the turbo to do its thing... Don't have dedicated boost gauge, but do have the Profec controller in easy view. So far have only been able to boost in 1st and 2nd. Haven't even tried full throttle yet, lol. Honestly it's like night and day compared with stock. Stock used to build with extra push from high 2k rpm, but was gentle enough that you couldn't really tell where boost started. Now it's like hell breaks loose somewhere just before 4k rpm. Probably mundane for most of you guys, but for me at the moment it's a quite a handful, lol. It's loads of fun so far, looking forward to getting a free run on a freeway on ramp If I'd seen the dyno plot for this turbo I wouldn't think it's a compelling option. Too laggy (going purely from dyno) for the power generated. I would even think that better results would be had with GT3071 on RB25. Given results / feedback I've seen on the 3067 on other vehicles, I can't shake the feeling that something about my setup is not quite right. Will try and get real world impression of boost threshold and spool and report back. Thanks for comments guys, much appreciated.

Sounds easy enough to check. I assume it won't hurt anything if unplugged? Lith, it definitely feels laggier than stock turbo. Need to get out on the weekend when less traffic around so I can try and get a better feel of when boost builds. I will say though that it feels like it ramps up real quick, whereas on dyno plot looks like more of a gentle increase. Josh did mention that PZP's dyno tends to read low, but I'm not going to put any stock in that unless I can confirm somewhere else. Can I also get some advice from you guys? I was told that to make use of higher boost, I really needed to look into freeing up flow more (cams, cam gears, and possibly freer exhaust). I was told the turbo actually has quite a bit more to give seeing as GTX series like higher boost, but couldn't get there without these changes. Does that sound right?

I have the Z32 ECU with Nistune so should still have VCT. Aiming to get a decent drive in on the weekend, but power does feel great when it comes on. But impossible for me to gauge how it is compared to other setups except stock.

Also for sh!ts and giggles, here's comparison with previous stock turbo (just with exhaust, pod and tune). When I get a chance will take some photos of install (looks very neat), and hopefully can feedback on driving impressions.

Just picked up the car. Haven't had a chance to go for a proper drive yet, but here's the dyno plot: Boost is both lower and later than I was expecting. I got the impression talking to Josh that they didn't quite solve the boost issue they were having. He mentioned potentially using a different rated actuator spring to improve things (currently 10psi). Very happy with the quality of the install they've done though. They really took the effort to keep the stock / black theme, and using quality fittings for things like BOV return. Can post up pics if anyone is interested.

Cheers, I wasn't too far off then. Looks like Scott's GTX3071 has similar boost threshold / spool characteristics as the GT3071? Although I guess not really comparable on different engines... Edit: I realise they're both SR20s, just they've been built differenty. No numbers as yet. Might have to wait until I pick it up. Unfortunately, it's pissing down rain here today. Won't be able to go for a decent drive for a couple of days probably...

Results look great Scott. What engine speed does 100kph correspond to on the Silvia? Around 3,800? Was impressed with how quickly it built boost in the vid you posted as well. Yes Lith, pick up date has slipped again, but looks like only by a day. Received a quick email late last night saying it had come back from the tuner yesterday afternoon. In Josh's words: "drove it this afternoon, really loving how the power is coming on". They're giving it a check over today to make sure it's ready for pick up. I'm hoping to be able to get it after work today.

You're absolutely correct of course Dale. I'd be very surprised if I could even tell the difference between 250 or 260 kw driving it. Still, I did set a target for what I was chasing.

Agreed on all comments on 0.63 v 0.82 housing. For whatever reason MTQ and Galvsport decided on 0.82, and when I queried, they said boost response was good. Won't know for sure until we see results. Also agree I shouldn't inflate expectations, but honestly I'll be disappointed if it only manages 250.

Thanks for taking the time to edumecate me gents. Update from me. Heard back this morning. Apparently the issue was that the actuator was faulty. They were swapping that out and then put it back on the dyno to confirm. I know I've said this many times already, but should be finished this afternoon. Provided there's no more issues, I hope to be picking it up tomorrow.

I see. I always thought the turbine would effect the map as well. I've read elsewhere that the compressor to turbine wheel ratio is much better on the 3067 vs the 2867 which would lead to higher efficiency. I assumed this would show up in the comp map as well as perhaps a slight shift to the right given the larger turbine. Thinking about it now though, I guess the compressor should flow what it flows, and turbine only has an effect on the shaft power coming in at a given rpm. Attached is comparison of 2871 vs 3071 both in 56 trim which I was referring to. They do use different A/R comp housings though. Would that alone explain the difference between these two maps?

Not sure what actuator is being used. I know they tried adjusting already, and now my understanding is that they're looking at getting a different (maybe higher rated pressure) actuator. Lith, where did you see the compressor map for the GTX3067? The only one I saw from Garrett was identical to the GTX2867. I had to compare the GT2871 and GT3071 to get an idea of what difference the bigger turbine would make. I've been told the tuning is mostly complete, just that they're trying to sort out the issue of the wastegate opening prematurely. Only indication of performance is that it's making "good hp". I hope that means it's meeting expectations.

Nah, thanks. I'm just keen to get it back on the road now.

So you're saying a slightly larger A/R comp housing would be of benefit? Never quite got my head around compressor A/R, but thought main effect of going larger was increasing efficiency at lower pressure ratios. Or in other words moving efficiency island downwards on the map.