Turboing A Vh45de

[GTROB]

Hey all.

I'm considering turboing VH45 and putting it in my falcon ute. Not looking at getting HUGE horsepower. More after something that is going to make good smooth reliable power and isn't going to chew the amount of fuel that the 5.8 ford cleveland it will be replacing does. I would be real happy If I could get the same or a bit more power out of it than the old ford which is making around the 360 rwkw. Are these as strong as the 1UV. What kind of boost can they handle and what kw figures can they make. What should I look out for when buying one and what are (If any) their problems.

Cheers

Craig.

[markturbo]

Hey mate,

I am doing that at the moment.

Check it out.

http://forum.r31skylineclub.com/index.php?topic=111013.0

Mark.

[VB-]

use a 1UZ, its a proven thing

edit - i am not up to date with the nissan V8 tuning scene, they make work very well, point was heaps of people have turboed the 1uz, whereas the nissan seems to be more uncharted waters, not saying its a bad motor or anything

Edited October 15, 2008 by VB-

[STATUS]

use a 1UZ, its a proven thing

edit - i am not up to date with the nissan V8 tuning scene, they make work very well, point was heaps of people have turboed the 1uz, whereas the nissan seems to be more uncharted waters, not saying its a bad motor or anything

yeah agreed, the VH45 has a few issues, i have had a few infinitys through that have shat themselves all with chain guide issues which have ended in catastrophic engine failure... if you belive it is only isolated feel free to read this forum (infinity forum) which outlines the issue in great detail.

once you determine which year you engine is and whether or not is has had the guides done then yes they are a killer engine, if not the are pretty much a time bomb.

http://forums.nicoclub.com/zerothread?id=25201

[discopotato03]

Does it have to be a V8 ? , I'm hardly a Ford person but an XR6T engine may go in ok and at least spares are available .

Sadly for Ford I think the current turbo six makes slightly more torque than their V8 though possibly not off idle .

A factory turbo engine has most of the updates to make it live in a forced environment and the manifolds and dryer are obviously all there . Specific things like injectors cams pistons and maybe rods are usually more suitable than NA stuff .

Getting the paperwork to run a local spec engine should be easy too .

Cheers A .

[juggernaut1]

OK my 2 cents.....why not an LS1 or 2. Light, compact and arguably more aftermarket parts than any other engine.

My brother runs an APS twin turbo kit on his LS2. Cost $14K for the kit including fitting plus twin 3 inch exhaust and makes just over 500rwhp at under 8 psi of boost on stock motor. And you have a meaty 6500 rpm power band. Fuel economy, we averaged 8.5 litres per 100 klms on the trip back from Sydney (where the kit was fited) to Perth. Yes thats better than stock fuel economy at highway speeds.

[juggernaut1]

Dyno for abovementioned LS2 comparing before (red dyno) and after turbos were fitted (black dyno). Sorry about the other hand scrawl dyno plot we were comparing another engine on this plot.

Edited October 16, 2008 by juggernaut1

[Phobic]

Yes thats better than stock fuel economy at highway speeds.

beter economy on a long drive, thats a common known fact that your economy goes down on long journeys at highway speeds. the stock rating would be an average of city and some highway driving.

[juggernaut1]

beter economy on a long drive, thats a common known fact that your economy goes down on long journeys at highway speeds. the stock rating would be an average of city and some highway driving.

By 'stock fuel economy' I mean actual acheived fuel economy on the way from Perth to Sydney - achieved approx 10.5 litres per 100 klm on the way over and 8.5 litres per 100 klm on the way back.......not comparing highway to city driving. Therefore, we are more or less comparing apples to apples.....unless Perth is downhill from Sydney.

One of the reasons I see for the improved fuel economy is due to the huge torque of the engine with the turbs ....even at low revs.....which doesn't require downshifting on the tall 6th gear. Whereas before the turbs, it was necessary to downshift to 5th or sometimes 4th for brisk overtaking. If you look at the dyno, the torque at 110 klm's has nearly doubled. In 6th gear 110 klm's equates to around 1600 rpm.

Edited October 16, 2008 by juggernaut1