discopotato03

I cannot see the sense in fitting an iron block inline six for 230 horsepower , upset the chassis balance and cooling system for something than can be done with a twoish litre four cylinder . Still can't work out why people hate KA24 twin cam engines . Good enough for Nissan .

I don't see a much point in asking people to guess , a 7163 is what it is and the variables will be the turbine housing and the engine hanging off it . The fella at Full Race probably has more experience with them than most others so why not ask him to make an informed prediction . As to people not necessarily wanting things like the recirc valve and boost control solenoid I can see their point of view . Skyline/RB specific customers generally have these covered by Nissan or other owner options . I'm not sure if there's much that can be done with the IW turbine housing lengths because BW obviously want the turbine bypass to flow as much as possible because the aim was to have EWG performance with an IWG . And yes the centre section is long compared to a GT25BB one but to be fair the bearing cartridge is too and they have twice as many turbine and compressor end seals as Honeywells . Best I can come up with that's it's been said to me that the 7163 should be one of the best 500 wheel pony turbochargers in its size range . It may not in the real world do that much better than a GT/X 3076R with a biggish turbine housing but I think the value is the range it performs over rather than the outright power potential . If you have been following this units development news you'll know that the producers aim was to raise the bar on what their 6758 can do in the same sized package . It was not a clean sheet unit though the turbine wheel and housings are not just more mm's of the same 6758 . There's obviously limits to what an EFR B1 cartridge and compressor housing can support but you'd think this time there will be little if any capacity left in them and impressive response/transients from the low inertia mixed flow turbine . Who knows , maybe we'll see these on shelves soon . Better to guess when than what the exact results will be . Have a safe any merry one over the festive season , cheers A .

No the old VG30 single ceramic BB turbo does have a smaller compressor wheel than RB25 turbos and I know because I have them both . If you want to prove it gently try fitting the compressor housing off the VG turbo on the RB25 cartridge but it won't go on because its profile machined for a smaller wheel . The housing casting is the same but it's machined differently and also doesn't have the anti reversion groove machined into its snout . To remove the T housing people generally hold the center section in a vice and heat the T housing while tapping with a soft faced hammer . You want to do this evenly so the housing doesn't cock sideways and chip the ceramic turbine blades . A .

Dale wanted to see my current ignition map . Timing is being increased as I get the chance to experiment . A .

I reckon a reasonable compromise could be the lowest cost/octane ULP plus water meth injection - and use it in any situation where the engine may try to detonate ie even when not boosting . It is known that higher octane ULP doesn't make any extra power at all where there is no detonation . If you can supress the detonation with a cheaper anti detonant than oil company additives it's all good . A .

My point is that there are certain AFR and timing settings that will be ideal in any set of circumstances and the further away from them you are the less ideal the engines performance will be . I don't know where tuners draw the line with "safe tunes" as in how rich the actual AFRs get or how retarded the timing is . Generally road cars with extra performance are not driven flat out often or for any length of time because the system will get you . I am talking about less than WOT driving where you can often "feel" when the fueling/timing isn't on the money . I reckon you get heaps of latitude with high eth fuels to the point where your engine can run like a total bag of shit without hurting itself . IF you can tune close to whatever brew you have at the time you should be getting smooth tractable running and good consumption relative to what's in your tank . I wouldn't be happy with a "fat tune" because I reckon isn't doing the engine any favours and throwing money out the pipe means you're spending some hours at work for zip . A .

I think it comes down to having a wide band 02 sensor system at least when playing with fuels/tunes because without it you haven't got a clue what's actually going on at the time . If it was a choice of 02 or E% I'd go 02 because it well tell you rich or lean instantly and you can then do temporary map mods enough to get around . If you have both you can make modified maps to suit blend variations and then just load them to suit . I went with Caltex E70 because it's more widely available and I'm not looking for every last wasp and Nm . probably easier to get acceptable consumption from too . As I've said in the past I believe the only safe way to make a reliable flex tune is to blend the ethanol with ordinary 91ULP , reason being that United and Caltex won't be blending alcohol with 98 ULP and the nock rating will drop as the ULP percentage rises . I think tuners fear flex tunes because they know detonation will be a problem if they tune for E + Pulp and some idiot gasses up partly with 91/95 ULP . If The blend is E + some 91ULP percentage using higher octane ULP isn't an issue but at least you can use anything that isn't diesel if caught out . Blown engines don't give tuners good reputations so the only way they are going to be able to tune closer to the fuel in the tank is to have a known petrol content octane characteristics . It sounds to me like safe flex tunes with protections built in are a bit self defeating when reliability is the no 1 priority , particularly for a road car . Ahh also wide bands and E sensors can be removed if the car is bent or sold so not bad investments if you continue to be a petrol/E head . A .

I can't post my current timing map because it isn't saved to this lappy , only the computer itself . It now has more light load advance like 42 degrees in some areas Can't bitch anymore because I managed to scrape 435 km out of this last tank of E70 and that was from neck to stumbles . The fuel light came on at 394 and I kept driving till it had the one stumble and the AFRs started leaning out . I had 10L in a container just in case . Actually that 10-11 L only got the needle back up to the empty line so R33 gauges are hardly accurate . I'll try posting that map tomorrow , cheers A .

I suppose I can go higher with light load timing but I think you're referring to highway type running conditions may be 80-90 plus , I can't see it liking those sorts of numbers in the 18-2400 rev area . Yes warm up when running/driving , usually it gets about a minute to have all the fluids circulating then it's driven sedately till it get some heat into it . Obviously the lappy is online from pre start because the temperature climbs too quickly to add/remove fuel - and you only get one crack at it per day . I didn't find the crank settings too hard to sort . CLL , as I said earlier you can see clearly how much this adds or subtracts and hitting the space bar goes to the active cell on the map so homing in for less correction is easy enough . Can become a bit erratic if the target number is out for what the engine wants . Gotta run family stuff , later A .

Hi all , I've searched around to see what's available to suit an RB turbo engine . It seems you need the sensor and an amplifier box to change the signal output to 0-5V for 0-1000 deg C . I'd like to have this wired into a Vipec ECU so I can monitor it and maybe build in some fail safes . I was thinking of mounting the probe into a steel T3 spacer plate and lining up with the cast manifolds divider to reduce flow losses - and avoid tapping into iron with differing expansion ratios . Also upstream of the turbine should read closer to actual EGT . Can users report on what they're using please , cheers Adrian .

Good to know , I'd like for him to have a fiddle with my tune if available . Latest , I've been into the timing and fuel IAT corrections trying to get some balance because inlet temps affect drivability with lean AFRs and traffic driving in warm weather hauls the temps up . Cold starts are a bit more interesting with lean mapping . It always fires up easily hot or cold but likes some enrichment virtually to running temp A .

No I'm well aware that not all four valve engines are created equally , too many other variables . GTs RB30 was using standard turbo cams in the early period of that thread . I don't like making big changes to fuel or ignition tables because I find it harder to correct the correction tables . My engine I had idling at around 0.93/94 Lambda but its now more like 0.90/91 which is more stable and seems to have lost the odd low intensity miss or pop . Those lockout settings are more like 5 and 7 now which gives a more constant steady state AFR , I use Garys Whiteline Bilstein suspension and it's sometimes hard to keep the throttle steady over uneven surfaces . At 2 and 2 the correction would have been switching in and out far too often AFRs I'm trying to keep in the 0.98 to 1.01 in light or cruise loads but jumping pretty quickly to 0.85 as the pressure goes positive . The original tune was done by Insight using their 02 probe system and the Vipecs auto tune software so I had a good basis to start from , and I only do the off boost sections anyway . Yep pyro probe would be a good thing and may fit well in a T3 spacer lined up with the manifolds central divider . A .

I bashed out a different response , Dale , but deleted it afterwards . Basically no I have not been to Vipecs forum for ages and there wasn't many Skyline people there at the time . The Help section is good but doesn't often answer questions on tuning specifics , too many variables . No the answer for me was to go back through Guilt Toys threads on E85 and his Vipec install and tune . There are lots of useful pointers particularly in the E85 threads regarding AFRs and timing . The biggie for me was lower EGTs with ethanol than 98 when tuned lean for consumption . Also 30 pages in he mentions in that his car liked 13.2 AFR at idle , will try that . I know he had a lowish CR RB30 and a 1.06 AR GT3582R but I think trends would be sort of similar in an RB25 , cruse and in the burbs stuff I mean . I'm now braver with leaner AFRs particularly in the 2500-4000 rev area but the 1500-2000 areas are creeping up as well . As long as the drivability remains I'll keep slowly leaning in light load areas . One area I need to play with is the closed loop enabled parameters - MAP and TP deltas because they are set at 2kpa and 2 degrees which is 3/5s of 5/8s of SFA . If it switches out at very small transients then that could be causing slight rich spikes with very small throttle changes opening and closing . It makes the correction system work a little harder to maintain constant AFRs at fast cruise . We need Guilt Toy back in Oz ! Cheers A .

I know this doesn't help but I suspect the 7163 has taken so long because it was a work in progress and the company fronting the bucks makes its bread in OE ranges . Also if it went through development phases from competition use that can be very slow . Good chance the TI material is hard to work with so time and resources to get it as effective as possible . I really hope BW has been churning this turbo out in volume and only holding them back to have big stocks on release day . I also really hope that mixed flow turbine works as well as those in the know say because it will be a game changer if it does . In pics it doesn't look very long along its axis so maybe laying the scrolls over lets them get away with minimum material and mass/inertia . Fingers crossed this turbo will be the gun in its power range and some of its smarts may flow over to other units in larger frame sizes . The bitch in me hopes other manufactures like Honeywell are watching closely because it might light a fire under their lack of performance turbo hot side development . A .

I'm having a go at using a bit more timing in the sub atmospheric area 2-4000 revs . It floats around in the 30s now and doesn't seem to drive too badly . It's hard to tell how much is too much and all I can do is try feel more or less torque and any less throttle for the same torque . The fact that the mixtures change slightly with timing changes proves altered combustion but trying to home in on sweet spots is a bit hit and miss . The 02 feedback and trimming percentages are interesting to watch . Coolant temps are sometimes a bit higher like going uphill at lowish revs and high gears so the EGTs must be up at times too . Beyond the scope of this thread but I'd like to know how much of a difference it made when Nissan went to more compact chambers and flatter pistons in RB25 Neo turbo engines . To justify what they did the R33 spec RB25DET probably wasn't going to cut it emissions wise with leaner mixtures and detonation avoidance in the later 1990s . A compact chamber would have a bit less surface area as would a flatter piston crown so maybe a bit less heat absorption , maybe better water jacketing around any hot spot areas as well . If I was going from scratch I'd do a Neo 25 for sure . A .

I started a reply yesterday but didn't post it because much of it is just my opinion . Anyway . I suppose if you went out to build a four cylinder that could take a lot of boost rally engine style then it could make impressive looking numbers though the drive experience and the effort to keep it reliable might be something else . Note that it's hard to believe a GTX2867R is going to make GTX3071R type wheel wasp numbers using Garrets GT28 T2 flanged 0.64 AR IW turbine housings . I'd say very nearly impossible without Methanol and I don't know even then . I generally look at what manufacturers like Garrett rate their as supplied turbos at and err on the conservative side a bit . Their aim is to sell turbos and if people read GTX3067R rated at 275-500 Hp they like to think that maximum number is an easy given . And sure , if your engine and support systems cope with maybe 25 pounds of boost it could be a reality . I don't think most roadies want to do that to a production engine and go with a bit more turbo and a bit lower boost pressure . Just my thoughts , cheers A .

Not 100% sure but I think I'm now getting more like 14/100 or a tad better ATM round the burbs . I've noticed at times that the water temps can be a bit higher and can't smell as much ethanol from the exhaust . It seems you can get more heat from this fuel in part throttle use but I'm really stumbling in the dark timing wise . I've no idea how much is right and if the exhaust gas temp can get too high . At this stage an EGT probe pre turbo would be handy , cheers A .

If you can get United 100 you may push a little harder than you can on 98 ULP without the fuel system changes needed for E70/E85 . The rule of thumb I hear is about plus 30/40 Kw for high eth fuel - maybe 270 from 240 with the lil GTRS . A .

Nah keep the balls rolling . Actually I think there is a bit more to the 2835 Pro S than a GTRS . HKS went from GT28 and T04B sized housings to GT30 and I think T04E ones . The physical dimensions of the wheels didn't change lots though the turbine trim went from 76 to 84 . And compressor trim from 52 to 56 . Yes the GTRS has its limitations and part of the compromise is being an almost direct replacement for the std Hitachi ceramic turbo . Really aside from water and oil lines a GTRS falls in between the std suction hose and dump pipe , and straight on the manifold . Quick easy reliable and tunable - within limits . Don't forget what you replace when you flick the standard fragile hissy fit turbo and remember what Japanese workshops charge . The 2835 Pro is more of the same but you get the exhaust and inlet bits to make it a bolt on system . Also these kits were out long before Garrett made IW T3 flanged GT30 turbine housings so in those days you had to use some bastardised alternative T housing and or went external wastegate . There are still gaps in the range but they are closing and there are more alternatives too like from FP and BW . And Hypergear as well . A .

I did a bit more searching on this GTX3067R but still nothing conclusive . The thing is that it's a 47 lb/min compressor side which in bleeding edge theory might get 470 worth of airflow but this is the real world . On the site I was just at someone claims that 9 hp/lb of air on E85 is doable so maybe 420 crank ? I can just as easily suggest 8 hp/lb on 98 ULP so 380 crank ? All theory - based on hot air ... Even if the 420 or 380 was the case it isn't going to to be either at the wheels . It's hard for me to see this turbo as being much more than a GTRS with a bit better hot side . This whole 300 kw/400 Hp at the bags seems to be hard to do neatly with Garrett turbos because it's right in the crossover of compressor housing sizes B to E so you just miss out or overshoot . To get 49-50 + lb/min flow means the E housing and either 71 or 76mm compressors . My gut feeling is that this turbo , or the similar GTX2867R , is better suited to two litre fours and that 2.5L sixes need bigger housings and enough free flow to let the engine work properly off boost . It should be making ~ 25% more torque anyway so sizing the dryer to boost a little later wouldn't be a bad thing . A .

Hi all , I'd like to use 324mm front discs on a GTS25T and I'm interested to hear what people have to say about moving the std caliper out with these adapters . I want the calipers to fit without mods and the pads not to overhang these discs . Thoughts ? Cheers A .

I'm nearly out of rear brakes ATM so that's taking priority . A GTX3067R would be a bit more compact than a GT3071R . I don't want to start a war but it seems that HKS got the best all round results with the 71mm GT compressors and they did it with the cropped GT30 turbine and their unique turbine housing . I think it's obvious that they'd have tried the full sized turbine first before getting Garrett to shorten the blades a few mm - bit higher gas speed to liven the compressor speed up . Honestly Garrett must have tested the GTX3067R and I think if it had been a flop they would put their reputation ahead of customer R and D . Woolverine has good things to say about his 2835 Pro S and if you PM him he could tell you how he got his . I hear they are not available new anymore but there may be some old stock out there if you want to spend the coin on a new kit . Just remember that the only non Garrett parts on those turbos is the housings and dump pipe , the cartridges should still be available new . Heaps of threads to read here at SAu on 3071Rs and 2835 Pro S turbos . A .

Well there's a few ways to look at that turbo and the biggie IMO is where to go if it juuuust falls short of expectation . The positives are that it's more compact on the compressor housing side so may not need the T3 spacer to clear the exhaust manifold . Compact means less lethal looking to hostile eyes ... The negatives are that it's a dead end because it's unlikely bigger turbine housings would do much for it . To go further means another turbo and quite likely another turbine housing . My thoughts only but I think Garrett reached the GTX wheel flow limit for that T04B comp housing with their 67mm wheel . The next size up is the T04E housing on the GT3076R and GTX3071R/76R . AFAIK the GT3076R 52T is the mild option for the T04E though there may not be a big difference between it and the 56T version . Whatever the difference - it should be on the right side of its bigger brother spool wise and even more so compared to a GTX3071R . It's what I have and my hopes are that it will be reasonable spool wise for a turbo that can crack 300 wheel wasps with not much left in it . Only you can know what you want to end up with power wise and the thing to avoid is buying two turbos to get it right . High ethanol content fuels will help you get the best out of a turbo if it's marginal size wise so that's a possible option too - provided you can get it locally . Lastly you can try too hard for a fast spooling turbo and it can be challenging to work around if its a bit limiting on the hot side . Over to you , cheers A .

Best guess is similar results . The Garrett has a tad more turbine in a tad smaller AR housing so the result is probably quite similar . If Mafia got good spooling from a 0.63 AR GT3076R 56T then it's hard to imagine a smaller comp wheel and housing update doing worse . I think flying results with a 0.68 AR 2835 Pro S is a bit under 300 wheel wasps and that's about where the GTX67s map points to IMO . Probably comes down to money - if you could get a 2nd hand runner 2835 Pro kit for the right money and you like them do it . If not consider a GTX3067R . I can't promise ~ 300 out of it but gut feeling is possibly 280-290 on ethanol if everything is spec'd and working well . It should be responsive too but so far no ones had one on a 2-2.5L inline six AFAIK . Can you live with almost 300 at the bags ? A .

Yesterday I made up a modified AFR target table with more resolution in the 40-100 Kpa absolute area and it gets the very light load areas into the 0.97-1.00 L range . It seems to cope well enough like this and I'm shooting for 100 or better km from 1/4 tank (13.75L/100) and I'll find out tomorrow . I modified this target table again inching the pressure rows higher but I have not tried that one yet due to destroying an expensive tyre and getting it replaced . This second fiddle includes a bit more timing in the 2-4000 area because it may be a bit conservative there . I'm curious to see if ethanol copes with leanish and advanced settings - and still "feels good" . These are current and next try target and timing tables . A .