Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Equinox - That dyno chart is fine assuming you mean run about 1bar at manifold, 2.25 ratio. Remember the compressor charts are a ratio of output pressure/input pressure at the compressor housings (after losses).

output pressure = pressure before losses through piping and intercooler plus normal atmosphere (estimate 2psi loss = 16.7 + 14.7)

input pressure = pressure after vaccum loss to air filter and piping. (estimate 12.7psi, ie. 2psi vacuum relative to atmosphere)

Ratio =

(16.7 + 14.7)/12.7 = 2.5

(brackets are guestimates - I do not stand by them at all) :)

Not being a smart arse just trying to create some clarity for those using compressor charts. :P

Ohh and I agree GTRS would be my turbo of choice (if I wasn't so broke). HKS quote 225rwkw at 0.9bar I beleive on RB25, seems to be on the money.

Edited by simpletool

Looks like this is shaping up to be a GTRS vs 2835 Pro S thread.

I am installing a 2835 Pro S in around 2 weeks. I went through the whole turbo analysis phase and came down to a choice between these two. My requirements where 250-280rwkw on stock internals (I have all other supporting mods) whilst maintaining response. It was a hard choice, but I had heard more positives from people who had a 2835, hence I went for that!

Surely the .68 vs .64 A/R would make a minimal difference in response? I have heard 2835 users state boost comes on as early as 2.5k rpm?

Don't forget that the GTRS uses a HKS enhanced GT"28" turbine housing where the Pro S turbos use HKS enhanced GT "30" turbine housings . If you had the turbine housing off a T3 flanged (RB spec) GTRS and a 0.68 A/R Pro S one sided by side you could see a marked difference .

Personally I suspect it's a price thing going on here GTRS vs 2835 Pro S , if the price was line ball I'd go for the 2835 every time .

What would be interesting for comparison price wise would be a GTRS kit supplied with their dump pipe and all the extras to get it on an R33 GTS25T .

As for SR20's , they use T28 flanged exhaust manifolds so you could fit either a 0.64 or a 0.86 A/R GT28 turbine housing to a GTRS . Neither Garrett or HKS made T3 flanged 0.86 A/R GT28 turbine housings , Garrett do the 64 and the 86 in T28 flange and HKS do the 64 in T28 and T3 flange to suit CA/SR or RB engines .

A .

a bit out of left field but what about using the twin spec turbo in a single spec setup?

that is, using say a 2835 from a twin GTR kit on a single turbo setup.

troy (roy) has a twin trust turbo setup, but is only using a single turbo on his rb20.

it has one of the best curves and setups ever seen on an rb20.

there's a 2835 kit in twin form for the GTR with twin external gate.

i dont think you can order a 2835 in single form with external gate.

any ideas / ball park on the specs of the 2835 ex gate version from the GTR twin kit?

I would have to check Paul but often the larger HKS spec (larger that GT28xx) twins use smaller (than 56) trim compressors like from memory HKS GT2835's for RB26's used 52T 71mm compressors , I think some 3037's were the same deal . Their GT3240 is just a cropped GT35 turbine (cropped to ~ GT32 dimensions) and the compressor was a 54T version of the GT3582R's compressor .

The GTRS (GT2871R 52T) was a later addition to their line up and its 71mm GT35 compressor is 52T as well .

That's why I was always keen on 3037 52T's in the past . It's not always easy to get maps for the smaller trim compressors but the usual trend is (all else being equal) as compressor trim falls turbine efficiency rises .

Brett at GCG reckons all bets are off between HKS and Garrett now and their altered spec cartridges should be available - maybe special order though . Trouble is you probably won't get HKS's housings from Garrett and Garrett don't do T3 flanged turbine housings for the cropped GT30 turbine .

You may be able to rat up a second hand GT2835 Pro turbine housing and buy a 52 comp trim cartridge for it .

Information is scarce but there may have been a 48T version of the 2835 intended for Subaru or Toyota , I can't remember which .

Anyway HKS catalogs show 48 and 52T versions of 2835s and 3037s .

Cheers A .

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

    • Yeah, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...