Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Unfortunately not, caste hill exhast's dyno is off for refurb

Ok results are in.

HKS 2530's with stainless manifolds 380rwkw @24psi

GT2860R-5 with stock manifolds. 361rwkw @26psi

350rwkw @25psi

341rwkw @23psi

335rwkw @22psi

The low to mid reponse is an identical overlap to the 2530's would be interesting to see with the same stainless manifolds

Edited by BOOSTD
Unfortunately not, caste hill exhast's dyno is off for refurb

Ok results are in.

HKS 2530's with stainless manifolds 380rwkw @24psi

GT2860R-5 with stock manifolds. 361rwkw @26psi

350rwkw @25psi

341rwkw @23psi

335rwkw @22psi

The low to mid reponse is an identical overlap to the 2530's would be interesting to see with the same stainless manifolds

Edited by BOOSTD

good results there mate thanks..was running 28psi ringing the neck of the 2860s..on a whole from experience are the 2530 a better in your opinion????as price for price there alot dearer aint they

28psi was past the efficiency peak for sure, they are quite happy at 1.6-1.7 bar. With my stainless manifolds I would expect them to make similar power to the HKS 2530's...then again I only ran the 2530's at 24psi and they made no more power after 26psi.....sort of goes against thecompressor trim.

I think GT2860R-5 ported to match a pair of N*power manifolds ($299 of Ebay) is the way to go. Expect to have to clean up and face the manifolds tho. They turbo inlet is 38mm X 40mm and the manifolds are 38mm x 47-48mm (N1 spec). I can say my standard cast manifolds did not increase my low-mid response. I'll be re-installing my stainless manifolds soon.

Edited by BOOSTD

i just fitted the 8cm T517Z to our car and it is far better than the 2860's ive used previous. i dont recommend the 10cm T517z's though as they are a bit laggy for my liking.

our car made 290rwkw at 14.4psi and 328rwkw at 17psi std dumps.

i just fitted the 8cm T517Z to our car and it is far better than the 2860's ive used previous. i dont recommend the 10cm T517z's though as they are a bit laggy for my liking.

our car made 290rwkw at 14.4psi and 328rwkw at 17psi std dumps.

In what way are they 'far' better??

I have results showing otherwise, with a big difference in midrange... bush bearing turbos versus twin ballbearing turbos....

For example, at 128km/h in fourth gear, my car was making around 160rwkws with the T517Z's(8cm), and with the 2860r-5 is now making 240rwkws....

I know which setup I'd prefer.... :)

Care to show us your comparison????

Go to post #29 in this thread for mine....

Ok results are in.

HKS 2530's with stainless manifolds 380rwkw @22psi

GT2860R-5 with stock manifolds. 361rwkw @28psi

350rwkw @25psi

341rwkw @23psi

335rwkw @22psi

The low to mid reponse is an identical overlap to the 2530's would be interesting to see with the same stainless manifolds

I'm not quite sure I follow here. you say the mid-low range is the same between the 2530s and the -5s. but the -5s need 6psi more, to make 20kw less? and at the same psi make 45kw less? but yet you think the -5s are good? I'd be putting those 2530s back on post haste!

I think the point to take away is that the std manifolds are crap for anything over 350rwkw and definately do not improve response over the chinese ebay stainless mainfolds

517Z's, 2860R, HKSGT2530@24psi and my 2860R on std manifolds@26psi

At 95km/h, 85kw 95kw 90kw 85kw

At 112km/h, 105kw 140kw 130kw 130kw

At 128km/h, 155kw 240kw 200kw 200kw

At 145km/h, 255kw 305kw 296kw 317kw

At 160km/h, 330kw 325kw 315kw 350kw

At 178km/h, 360kw 350kw 355kw 361kw

At 194km/h, 365kw 358kw 372kw Chart stops

I do have a chart that keeps going and power drops off after 178km/h as does boost also....down from 26psi to 24psi at 200km/h The drop in boost starts at 169km/h at the 350kw mark. The 2530's with the stainless manifolds did not drop boost at all.

Full Boost is also made at identical points compared to the 2530's (134km/h)

Edited by BOOSTD
In what way are they 'far' better??

I have results showing otherwise, with a big difference in midrange... bush bearing turbos versus twin ballbearing turbos....

For example, at 128km/h in fourth gear, my car was making around 160rwkws with the T517Z's(8cm), and with the 2860r-5 is now making 240rwkws....

I know which setup I'd prefer.... :D

Care to show us your comparison????

Go to post #29 in this thread for mine....

i am putting it back on the dyno tonight to chase up a electrical problem encountered in adelaide, i will post dyno chart tommorrow.

i am putting it back on the dyno tonight to chase up a electrical problem encountered in adelaide, i will post dyno chart tommorrow.

BUGGER :D

Had it on the dyno last nite...... uni broke.... holed the floor pan..... nuff said. (plently of SAU on lookers)

dyno sheets next week.

Edited by URAS
For example, at 128km/h in fourth gear, my car was making around 160rwkws with the T517Z's(8cm), and with the 2860r-5 is now making 240rwkws....

I know which setup I'd prefer.... :D

LOL, really? My little RB20 is making 232rwkws at the same road speed. Though you guys all walk away from about 135km/h :D

LOL, really? My little RB20 is making 232rwkws at the same road speed. Though you guys all walk away from about 135km/h :D

yeah im not sure what the issue is there as our cars (8cm T517Z's) both make way over that at those road speeds. i can only assume you had the 10cms not the 8cms. i hate the 10cm version as they are laggy... very similar to hks GT2540's.

ah well once the tailshaft is replaced i will run it up again and do a speed and rpm (bit of a hassle but all good) based graph.

Edited by URAS
yeah im not sure what the issue is there as our cars (8cm T517Z's) both make way over that at those road speeds. i can only assume you had the 10cms not the 8cms. i hate the 10cm version as they are laggy... very similar to hks GT2540's.

ah well once the tailshaft is replaced i will run it up again and do a speed and rpm (bit of a hassle but all good) based graph.

Now your insulting me, I know what turbos went on my car, and they weren't the 10cm version...

I'm very interested in seeing how the T517's are making much more power than mine at those speeds, how many GTR's have you done with the T517's and the 2560R's???

Dyno graphs will prove your claims, so get them up, surely you must have at least one graph after all the GTR's you've done??

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • That's odd, it works fine here. Try loading it on a different device or browser? It's Jack Phillips JDM, a Skyline wrecker in Victoria. Not the cheapest, but I have found them helpful to find obscure parts in AU. https://jpjdm.com/shop/index.php
    • Yeah. I second all of the above. The only way to see that sort of voltage is if something is generating it as a side effect of being f**ked up. The other thing you could do would be to put a load onto that 30V terminal, something like a brakelamp globe. See if it pulls the voltage away comepletely or if some or all of it stays there while loaded. Will give you something of an idea about how much danger it could cause.
    • I would say, you've got one hell of an underlying issue there. You're saying, coils were fully unplugged, and the fuse to that circuit was unplugged, and you measured 30v? Either something is giving you some WILD EMI, and that's an induced voltage, OR something is managing to backfeed, AND that something has problems. It could be something like the ECU if it takes power from there, and also gets power from another source IF there's an internal issue in the ECU. The way to check would be pull that fuse, unplug the coils, and then probe the ECU pins. However it could be something else doing it. Additionally, if it is something wired in, and that something is pulsing, IE a PWM circuit and it's an inductive load and doesnt have proper flyback protection, that would also do it. A possibility would be if you have something like a PWM fuel pump, it might be giving flyback voltages (dangerous to stuff!). I'd put the circuit back into its "broken" state, confirm the weird voltage is back, and then one by one unplug devices until that voltage disappears. That's a quick way to find an associated device. Otherwise I'd need to look at the wiring diagrams, and then understand any electrical mods done.   But you really should not be seeing the above issue, and really, it's indicating something is failing, and possibly why the fuse blew to begin with.
    • A lot of what you said there are fair observations and part of why I made that list, to make some of these things (like no advantage between the GSeries and GSeries II at PR2.4 in a lot of cases) however I'm not fully convinced by other comments.  One thing to bare in mind is that compressor flow maps are talking about MASS flow, in terms of the compressor side you shouldn't end up running more or less airflow vs another compressor map for the same advertised flow if all external environmental conditions are equivalent if the compressor efficiency is lower as that advertised mass flow takes that into consideration.   Once the intercooler becomes involved the in-plenum air temperature shouldn't be that different, either... the main thing that is likely to affect the end power is the final exhaust manifold pressure - which *WILL* go up when you run out of compressor efficiency when you run off the map earlier on the original G-Series versus G-Series II as you need to keep the gate shut to achieve similar airflow.    Also, how do you figure response based off surge line?  I've seen people claim that as an absolute fact before but am pretty sure I've seen compressors with worse surge lines actually "stand up" faster (and ironically be more likely to surge), I'm not super convinced - it's really a thing we won't easily be able to determine until people start using them.     There are some things on the maps that actually make me wonder if there is a chance that they may respond no worse... if not BETTER?!  which brings me to your next point... Why G2 have lower max rpm?  Really good question and I've been wondering about this too.  The maximum speed *AND* the compressor maps both look like what I'd normally expect if Garrett had extended the exducers out, but they claim the same inducer and exducer size for the whole range.   If you compare the speed lines between any G and G2 version the G2 speed lines support higher flow for the same compressor speed, kinda giving a pretty clear "better at pumping more air for the same speed" impression. Presumably the exducer includes any extended tip design instead of just the backplate, but nonetheless I'd love to see good pics/measurements of the G2 compressors as everything kinda points to something different about the exducer - specifically that it must be further out from the centerline, which means a lower rpm for the same max tip speed and often also results in higher pressure ratio efficiency, narrower maps, and often actually can result in better spool vs a smaller exducer for the same inducer size... no doubt partly due to the above phenomenon of needing less turbine speed to achieve the same airflow when using a smaller trim. Not sure if this is just camera angle or what, but this kinda looks interesting on the G35 990 compressor tips: Very interested to see what happens when people start testing these, and if we start getting more details about what's different.
×
×
  • Create New...