discopotato03

From memory the chemically correct ratio (burn all fuel and oxygen) for E85 is around 9.7:1 . What everyone forgets is that petrol engines are throttled or strangled if you like and its the dynamic or effective compression ratio that becomes very important at part throttle cruise . What high ethanol content fuels allow you to do is to advance the ignition timing up to the point where you get best torque or reach the detonation threshold . Most tuners will tell you that E85 gets you a LOT closer to BMT (best mean torque) timing that most pump ULP fuels do so the gain is more optimal cylinder pressure rise on the power strokes . Where you light the fire and where the innitial prressure rise occurs at the beginning of the power stroke is absolutely critical to torque and specific fuel consumption . When you can get an engine to make more efficient use of its air (oxygen) and fuel it needs less of both to make comparable torque - so it gets better fuel consumption . I wouldn't like to say that you could get on par as far as L/100Km goes but it's the cost of fuel that concerns most people so $/100Km is probably a more practicle yardstick . 80's into early 90's OEM turbo engines may not be the ants pants for getting good squirt and reasonably good fuel consumption . The generally lower static CR that was used to help control cylinder pressure and detonation (on boost) goes against you when other ways are found to supress the detonation . Part throttle dynamic (effective) CR is pathetically low in engines like my dinosaur Subaru (7.7 static) , Turbo 280ZX's similar and VLT's . None of them had any form of intercooling and they all had to use advanced low load timing just to move from rest . This is part of the reason why I don't agree with real low CR's and high boost to get some grunt . I prefer higher CR's (~ 9 - 9.5) and things like larger turbines and their housings (not necessarily larger compressors and their housings because with reasonable fuel octane and intercooling I believe you can get a better (almost larger NA engine like) result . It makes the turbo configuration look a bit more diesel like and like them the higher CR petrol engines can stand on their feet better before the onset of boost . More NA like drivability is a plus in my book . A lot of the reason why turbo engines detonate is because they become restrictive on the hot side - the combustion conditions turn to shit and the cure all for detonation is to retard the ignition timing and or hose in more fuel . When it gets to that stage we are in damage control and struggling to save the engines life , fuel consumption not surprisingly goes through the roof . In this day and age of high powered turbo endurance race cars and limited fuel stops , doing an Indy race and never dropping below 13.7:1 AFR has to say something . Out of fingers again , cheers A .

A huge grey are exists between black and white on this specific topic . The sad fact of life is that a "bolt on turbo" is often a unit thats been compromised in an effort to make it "bolt on" in the std location . I can't think of any production vehicle that ever came factory std with a Garrett petrol spec GT3076R , the fact that the water/oil/air plumbing is totally different to anything Nissan have on any of their engines tells me that they won't "bolt on" . Generally the most difficult part of any non OEM turbo is making it fit between the std exhaust manifold and exhaust pipe/dump pipe . All sorts of bastard hybrid things are out there but few are designed to work as the turbocharger manufacturer intended them to . Once you go to a non std exhaust (or compressor) housing you've changed the turbos configuration and it won't operate as the manufacturer advertises - in other words throw away all the compressor and turbine maps for that unit because they'd now mean zip . To me staying with a std (or copy) Hitachi turbine housing has serious limitations if you want the best results . Really making a dump pipe for the Garrett IW GT30 turbine housings can't be that hard and at least then you'd know that the turbos turbine and housing are the critical matching set . A real petrol spec GT3076R is an ~ 500 Hp capable turbocharger at its limit , I find it very hard to believe that the Hitachi 3 litre turbine housing (OP6 type thing) can handle anything like 500 Hp worth of exhaust gas so I can't see why anyone would want to go there with one . Just a note on my expectations of that turbo , I mean 500 with its largest 1.06 A/R genuine Garrett GT30 turbine housing and don't forget it has the largest available (56T) version of their GT37 compressor wheel . Now I can't say that the particular bolt on version you're looking at won't work , I strongly doubt that it would get anywhere its potential so hence the grey area . One other thing I haven't mentioned on this board before , the only Hitach copy turbine housing I ever looked at was not real impressive compared to the real thing . When the waste gate flat valve was open its passage was partially blocked by what looked like like to me at the time an undersized main passage . How or why this is I don't know and I havent seen one since to see if they've improved . It's this sort of detail you can't see with the turbo in place . Another problem I have is that those aftermarket housings have been "intended" for std and up to GT30 turbines and I can't see how they make a properly formed turbine nozzle function with different sized "holes" in the center of the housing . To me turbine families are matched to turbine housings with internal shapes to suit that turbine family . The stand out seems to be GCG's BB Hi Flows and no I don't know why , they are arguably one of the few bolt on Hi Flows that seem to work well - provided the rest of the engine is tuned to suit . I think the bottom line is that if you truly want to run a GT3076R you need to run Garretts matching GT30 IW T3 flanged turbine housing (3 A/R sizes available BTW) . Really the only extra thing to make is the dump pipe because everything else besides the mounting flange is non std anyway . Cubes , Mafia here and a few others have done it and there are some long threads about it here too . As Nismoid would say do a search , cheers A .

The last time I bought some (in fuel containers) that pump wasn't locked . The first time I went there they came running out thinking I didn't know what it was but once you tell them that you take full responsibility for using it theres no probs . Recently I changed the fuel pump and hoses in my mid 80's flat four MON/RON test engine just to be sure . I don't see too many probs with E85 and probes or cats from a longevity point of view , I haven't read anything that gave cause for concern . My father was a lab tech and said it (Eth) burns away to C02 and H20 . The car to watch is that flex fueled Commode Door - if it ever gets into production . I don't like your chances of getting the EPA/RTA to waive the converter even if the numbers come up right , I reckon they'll always argue that someone somewhere will stick ULP in (by accident or design) and they won't wear that . Until they can come up with a way of forcing people to use E85 only in a car tuned specifically to run it I think legally the cat will have to stay . My biggest issue with high ethanol content fuel is the water absorption one , as I said SK once mentioned an inline seperator of some sort and I really think we need to investigate that one . Another significant one is ethanols higher vapor pressure and what it could do to the evaporative gear cars have - charcol canisters . There must be a way around that one too . Personally I'm going to wait until E85 becomes more available because I can't see the point in tuning a road car for something that is only available through one or maybe two pumps in Sydney - none close to me . It would be interesting to try one of those plug in conversion kits floating around in the US but not sure if any are out here yet . Cheers A .

Aftermarket turbine housing , grey area . A .

This is from the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club (NASIOC) , it gives a bit of feedback from someone Stateside that wanted to push the envelope (a little) in a noughties or post 2000 era car . http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=803341 Enjoy , cheers A .

It's ID tag numbers would fill in a few gaps . One wonders if it uses a production Garrett cartridge like for example T04Z's do . Not really in the market for a ceiling fan ATM , cheers A .

I went into this a while back and this was what I found at the time . The R33 GTS25T BMC is 15/16 bore and mine is non ABS so it has 3 ports , one pointing 45 deg downwards and has a hexagonal steel bodied thing which I take to be it's proportioning valve . ABS masters only have two ports - one for front and the other back - via the ABS unit of course . If you search the American boards they go into the differences between Nabco and Tokico branded BMC's for Nissans but , that but again . You pretty much have to ignore part no's for LHD cars because usually the steel lines exit the BMC on the opposite side to RHD cars BMC's . Some of their sites quote proportioning line pressure limits and the general opinion is that Z32 BMC proportioning is wrong for anything but a Z32 , they must be very front heavy cars . Also something worth considering is that in years gone by Nissan and Subaru used same/similar components in some areas so BMC's from RS Turbo Libs and Ram Raider may be worth a cursory glance . Don't quote me but 99+ Rexes with four piston/two piston brakes are very similar hydraulically to some R32/33/Z32's , the rear ally two piston calipers are almost identical dimensionally . I'm glad to see quotes in the 3-400 range because when I asked at John Robinson Nissan in Rockdale (Syd) the numbers were huge . I'd like to know more about Protex if possible , cheers A .

SWR , I think FJ20 and L series are the same dimensions on the cranks nose . A .

From memory Atsugi is a contractor in Japan that made various OEM parts for Japanese manufacturers . You'll probably find that different era FJ20's - and other Jap engines - have used Atsugi parts at one time and another suppliers component at another . A good example is engine electricals , some used Mitsubishi alternators/CAS and others used Hitachi or some other . Look at brake master cylinders , some Nabco others Tokico . Nothing to worry about if it is an all original engine . A .

Most interesting , to much cheese an crackers involved in long strings . I know where my JDs go , cheers A .

Hi all , need some info on rear calipers from Z32 300ZX/R23/33/34 GTST Skylines and WRX's . Firstly I believe that Z32/R32/33/34 calipers are the same as those used on MY99+ WRX's except the Brembo equipt ones . Does this mean that all the piston sizes are the same or was there some variation between the models ? Cheers A .

Jeez those manifolds look heavy , ages ago I had one Alex (In the pre Pulse days) made for an FJ20 and it was really heavy for a four cylinder manifold . It makes me wonder if more compact high (well up from under) twin manifolds and IW twin dryers could be simpler/lighter ? Cheers A .

Looks like a HKS Pro S turbo . I've never fitted one but is there any chance that the compressor cover (housing) needed to be rotated so it pointed a little further away from the exhaust manifold ? Cheers A .

Pretty sure Nissan five stud is 5 x 114.3mm . A .

Continuing , there's 4 TD04 turbines and A TE04 thats a little larger than the largest TD04 (HL) and a little smaller than the entry level TD05 turbine . People with European cars claim 300 odd hp from TD04HL-19T turbos so not too bad for what they are . Always remember that Mitsy turbos are generally bush rather than ball bearing so they walk a fine line between boost response and power range . A .

No time ATM but that TD06SL2 turbine is bit of a special and supposed to be a Trust spec item , the Evo crowd really like them in reverse rotation twin scroll form - with the "Right" compressor . Will get back later but there are some interesting possibilities with the larger TD04 turbines - TD04HL and TE04H , and some of the I think Volvo or Saabs had a 7cm housing and a sort of T3 style flange . Later , A .

The term being bandied around for ethanol/petrol blend juice is "Flex Fueled" cars . These are the ones manufacturers set up to self calibrate for any ethanol blend up to 85% (E85) . It took a bit of searching but what they do is use an electrical conductivity sensor in the fuel circuit to tell the brain what the ethanol content/percentage is . Obviouslt the ECU needs alternative mapping in order to be able to change AFR's and ignition timing settings , not surprisingly late Vomit door V8 ECUs have it but Aus spec ones need an edit to enable them . The grey area with running higher than E10 blends is how the different properties of ethanol can affect your fuel system . Alcohol being hygroscopic (readily absorbs water) can be corrosive particularly to aluminium though most Skylines appear to use steel fuel rails and hard lines from what I've seen . I have searched and had no luck with trying to find ethanol compliant EFI rubber hose so I have to assume quality new hose is alright . I did read that with the arrival of ULP back in 85 standards changed for fuel hose because of the nasties ULP has in it . This is significant because there would be pre ULP cars out there with older hose and it may not appreciate having apple juice (LOL) pumped through it late in life . Best idea I think is to replace all fuel hoses of unknown age just to be safe . Fuel pumps tend to be made from Aluminium so if your up for a new one check to see if its able to pump ethanol fuel blends , I intend to keep an eye out for flex fuel cars to see what fuel system components can be used with our cars . SK Gary mentioned to me a while back that in the methanol race fuel days there was some kind of (I think sintered bronze) in line strainer that passed alcohol but not water , I'd really like to know more about these because a device that continuously separated water from alcohol fuel blends would help keep the fuel (and system) clean . There has been some mention of high ethanol petrol blends possibly attacking the lining in the metalic fuel tanks of older cars . The rule of thumb seems to be that the later (newer) a car is the better the chances of it having an ethanol blend compatible fuel system . As for buying fuel , don't just assume that "E10" from anyone is 95/96 octane , a lot of it I found ran like mouthwash so make sure you ask what the octane rating of the "E10" is . My daily water cooled Dak Dak runs fine on AP's 95 E10 and the price is good , my R33 gets Shell V 96 mainly because fuel sits in it for longish periods of time and ethanols liking for water means it may not get used before it got a bit tacky . Roll on the Generals Alcodoore , at least E85 should become more readily available then . A .

SK filter element solution is to use a Piper Cross one , Faber Midel sell them in Sydney . You'd have to ask him but I think I remember him mentioning higher than 260 odd Kw ? A .

Your call but I reckon a little more turbo and a little less boost , jeez those 2535's aren't real big on the hot side and the restriction generally leads to a thermal thrashing . Pro S and IW GT3071R's cost a bit but you get much less restriction from them on the hot side and a more modern compressor wheel as well . Again IMO the whole dump flange system from the std Hitachi footprint is not the best one to go beat the world with . I understand that bolt on turbo solutions have to keep it but it has its limitations . A .

Cost/benefit ratio = bang for buck . Always best to have an engine in a healthy condition if your not going inside it . Usual deal IMO externally , PFC , Z32 MAF , injectors , IMO cams ie Tomei , proper spec bolt on turbo . Basically my path over time - though I'm getting a head modified and which means things like healthy valve guides and a bit off to raise the lowish CR are part of the re co that goes with a good head . I agree with those above meaning 300's a higher state of tune than you may like to live with . I wish people would lean more towards having bucket loads of mid range torque and nice throttle response . I reckon Hp/Kw numbers mean little aside from bragging rights , being engine rev based numbers they means jack unless you drive everywhere at peak revs . Make it go like buggery in the mid range because the average passengers butt dyno cops enough of a hiding to make them think its pretty enthralling . My opinions only , cheers A .

Hi Chris , if it were me I'd use a pulse divided exhaust manifold like either your HKS cast RB26 manifolds or (IMO) the Rolls Royce - one of Geoff raicers (FullRace Motorsports in US) brilliant fabricated stainless steel ones . I know most will baulk a fabbed stainless ones but Geoffs ones are without peer . Don't take my word for it , search Full Races site and bash Geoff out some E mails . Every performance turbo site I've seen in the US swears by FR's turbo manifolds , they may swear at the prices but very few question the results . Ask him but I'm reasonably sure he'd suggest a Garrett GT4088R and has had a lot of success with them . You get into a grey area with GT3582R's because there is no propper twin scroll turbine housing made for them - well not for the higher EGT petrol version of the GT35 based turbos anyway . FullRace has used a turbo cobbled together by Turbonetics called F135R which you can see on his site but it's not a cash and carry from a local distributor here like the GT4088R is . Geoff is one of the very few who has played seriously with single turbo RB26's in the US and I believe his opinions are well worth listening to . Lets know where you go with it , cheers A .

Looks to me like A Garrett based T04Z , if the center section has water fitting holes (and the single BB type threaded oil inlet hole) it would be a ball bearing one . Comp cover may be a precision one . Garrett BB T04Zs were cheap compared to some BB turbos a while back , it would make sense to buy an off the shelf item here if the price is similar . A .

No one above , Garrett virtually always call their turbos by the units turbine series number ie GT30 GT35 GT40 GT42 T4 etc etc . The thing you will notice with large frame Garrett ball bearing "T" series turbos ie T04Z and T51R is the method of fixing the turbine housing to the side of the bearing housing (center section) . T series turbos use clamp plates and bolts where Garretts large frame bush or ball bearing GT series units have four "ears" on the back of the center section through which bolts screw into a series of threaded holes in the side of the turbine housing . Its just a way of making a more modern cartridge fit the old T series turbine housings which make a matching set with the old T series turbines ie T04 P trim and T51 turbines . Pay no attention to the American term "T67" compressor wheel , it's a flawed method of attempting to identify a compressor wheel by it's inducer diameter which in the case of the T04R compressor (used in T04Z turbo) is ~ 66.7mm . Precision over there sometimes calls their version of the T04Z PT67 meaning T04 P trim turbine + "T67" compressor . I've no doubt HKSs housings are lighter and more compact than Garretts , the volute and nozzle sections of their housings are very different and more like the TiAL stainless steel ones . A HKS spec T51R is not exactly a compact turbocharger , I suggest people search around for pics of GTRs with them fitted . A .

Nope , T51R's use a T51 turbine which is why for some reason they're called "T51R" . GT42's (4294 and 4202) use GT42 turbines . There is also a GT4094R which not surprisingly uses a GT40 turbine . A .

I reckon some form of 2530/GT2860RS/GT2871R (in 48T only) on HKS's T3 flanged GT28 IW turbine housing is probably the place to be for a reasonable useful power range . That last one ie the GT2871R in 48T is basically a GTRS but with a 48T vs 52T compressor wheel . It would give a few more Lbs of air than a 2530 or 2860RS so possibly another 30 odd horses power potential . A .