Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey everyone

Lately I've been seeing more people looking at doing the DE+t conversions, and more that have done so successfully with quite impressive results.

The way things are going I expect there'll be more DE+t's in the future with power restrictions and all.

The power results of forced induction on a DET engine aren't exactly comparable to a DE+t. High compression amongst other things make for different torque/power gains.

So I've decided that in addition to the N/A Power Results thread, to have a DE+t Power Results thread for those with N/A Skylines who travelled the path less taken.

This should also help give a comparison to those who are deciding between all out N/A performance, or doing the +t Turbo Conversion, and as such I have added a cost component to the layout.

Please try to keep layout to the following example:

Model - R34 25GT

Engine - RB25DE

Modifications / Parts Used - R33 S2 Turbo, Factory Manifold, R34 GTT Injectors, HKS Super Dragger Catback, etc...

Engine Management Used - eManage Blue with optional Injector and Ignition Harnesses

Fuel Used - BP Ultimate 98

Boost Used - 7 PSI

Dyno Tune Results - KW/HP @ RPM

Misc- Other Details, perhaps reason for using certain parts, or other things to elaborate.

Costs - Parts: $xxxx.xx Labour: $xxxx.xx Tuning: $XXX.XX

Dyno Graph

A dyno graph will help give a visual of the power curve that a DE+t engine has; and also not all dyno's are the same, so it will help give a comparison amongst Dyno's used.

Please keep chit chat to a minimum, there is already a "How to turbo your N/A Skyline" thread that 666DAN started right here: http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/tu...N-A-t33407.html

Please only results from turbocharging a Naturally Aspirated skyline engine. Posting results of a DET engine transplant in an N/A shell defeats the purpose of the thread :)

Cheers

Nathan

Model - R32 GTS-T (old DET engine died after 356,000km)

Engine - RB20DE

Modifications / Parts Used - R33 S1 RB25DET Turbo, factory RB20DET actulator, Custom low mount extractors, Factory RB20DET inlet manifold and injectors, custom 3" dump pipe, custom 3" exhaust (very straight), walbro fuel pump, sard adjustable fuel pressure regulator, turbo smart plumb back BOV, 450x300x75 front mount intercooler, K & N pod filter

Engine Management Used - factory RB20DET ecu

Fuel Used - shell 95

Boost Used - 9psi

Dyno Tune Results - 175 rwkw or 234rwhp @ 6550RPM

Misc- Most of the parts we already had lying around waiting to be fitted or were fitted to the original DET engine before it died, only brought the 3" exhaust and the extractors for this build

Dyno Graph dyno graph shows the old RB20DET engine in red before it died, and the blue is the RB20DE+T results

R32dynoRB20DET1.jpg

model, gts25 engine,rb25de

mods,r33gtst turbo,xs power 3"exhaust,480cc injectors,power fc,modified plenum,fmic,25 row oil coolerfuel, shell v-power

boost,10.13 psidyno,378 bhp atf,6670rpm

costs,parts £3100,labour £0graph, sorry thats an old dyno sheet i'll get a more recent one

post-46611-1230048060_thumb.jpg

Edited by lammy426

Adam First's 33 GTS4

Model - R33 GTS4 S1

Engine - RB25DE+T

Modifications / Parts Used -

Engine/Electronics:

Turbo conversion, Hypergear TR43, 15psi on bleed valve, Nismo 740 injectors, Apexi Power Fc + Commander, Splitfire coils,Walbro fuel pump, GTR Bov

Gearbox/Drivetrain/Suspension:

Exedy cushion button clutch, 4wd torque controller, Front sway bar, Pedders shock absorbers

Exhaust/Intake:

Z32 airflow meter, Hybrid FMIC, Custom KKR dump pipe, MoMo 3 1/2inch exhaust system + 5 inch tip, Metal cat, Exhaust cam gear, Apexi power intake, Heatsheild, CAI, pod

Brakes/Wheels:

5 stud conversion, turbo brake upgrade, DBA Slotted Rotors, QFM pads, 17inch Mak Performance rims

Doof Doof:

JL 500/1 Monoblock,JL E4300 4 channel amp, JL 6 inch splits, JL 6*9s, JL WV3 sub and a pioneer headunit.

Also, got the stock 33 gtst manifold, crossover pipe

Engine Management Used - Power Fc

Fuel Used - Shell Vortex

Boost Used - 15 psi

Dyno Tune Results - Currently around 230rwkw but that was due to miss firing plugs, 32 degree day and Sam's dyno not having a weather sensor for correction- Will post up final results in early Jan after it has a run on another dyno

Costs - Lost count... bout 10-14 grand? I mostly do the upgrades myself, apart from injectors, brakes and tuning.

Dyno Graph

Will Post up in early Jan!

model, gts25 engine,rb25de

mods,r33gtst turbo,xs power 3"exhaust,480cc injectors,power fc,modified plenum,fmic,25 row oil coolerfuel, shell v-power

boost,10.13 psidyno,378 bhp atf,6670rpm

costs,parts £3100,labour £0graph, sorry thats an old dyno sheet i'll get a more recent one

thanks for moving it eugpost-46611-1230301559_thumb.jpg

post-46611-1230301591_thumb.jpg

post-36975-1230820419_thumb.jpg

:action-smiley-069:

nar but seriously, from what me and my tuner have discussed and tested,

the car is in good shape and we slowly increased the boost.

mind you, I have had it turboed for over a year now and in that time I have had a few

stages of boost to see how my baby would handle it.... I didnt just wake up one morning

and chuck on a boost controller with 15psi off a big turbo.

something along the lines of:

7psi stock turbo

10psi stock turbo

12psi stock turbo

stock turbo did an oil seal

-------------------------

12psi tr43

15psi tr43

here is the last dyno sheet i did at Sam's with all the issues mentioned

in my above post, power doesnt look fantastic on this graph, but just so you can see im not crapping on about boost.

post-36975-1230820962.jpg

atm i'm pretty happy with the car's performance, shes going on a dyno in less then a week to get an accurate measure of power.

Adam

mine as 315bhp at the hubs at 10.13psi boost,wytsky as 310bhp at the wheels running 15psi boost,looking at that they must have retarded the timing to stop the det with the high comp,so no gain in bigger turbo or extra boost,i can't wait to get my methonol/water injection on,less det and turn up the boost hopefully 400bhp+atf

nar it is worth a larger turbo, we made the timing pretty retarted because, as I said, hot day, missfiring plugs, and an inaccurate dyno...

doesnt help at all!

the reason I say a larger turbo is still good is because I have close to peak 700nm of torque at about 5,000rpm...

i dont always play the numbers game, it also about torque/response/feel... so this feels a heap better...

not to mention, 15psi at only 2680rpm from a turbo almost double the size of standard doesnt really keep the wheels down... and mine is a gts4!

lammy426 can we see your dyno graph for repsonse? not just pressure? only reason I ask was mine was only at about 190rwkw when I did the standard turbo... so I havent seen response on a standard turbo at those figures, didnt know they could go that high? which would be good to see.

Car will be on a dyno this Wed with all issues sorted and a very accurate dyno (status tuning) will post my dyno sheet after!

nar it is worth a larger turbo, we made the timing pretty retarted because, as I said, hot day, missfiring plugs, and an inaccurate dyno...

doesnt help at all!

the reason I say a larger turbo is still good is because I have close to peak 700nm of torque at about 5,000rpm...

i dont always play the numbers game, it also about torque/response/feel... so this feels a heap better...

not to mention, 15psi at only 2680rpm from a turbo almost double the size of standard doesnt really keep the wheels down... and mine is a gts4!

lammy426 can we see your dyno graph for repsonse? not just pressure? only reason I ask was mine was only at about 190rwkw when I did the standard turbo... so I havent seen response on a standard turbo at those figures, didnt know they could go that high? which would be good to see.

Car will be on a dyno this Wed with all issues sorted and a very accurate dyno (status tuning) will post my dyno sheet after!

its in post number 5 the bottom one of the 2 sheets surprised you haven't seen it

ahh thanks, my comp was playing up last night couldnt see any attachments... I thought I saw that graph before, now on a different comp it came up...

now comparing power wise, although top end there were issues with mine, you can still see that it pays to have a larger turbo...

compare rpm vs power in both our graphs.... remembering that yours is in hp and mine in kw...

Some nice results here guys! I should have my result up by end of next week :P I'll only be using an R33 Turbo though, but maybe further down the track I might look at a bigger turbo like you've done Adam.

Bhp any different to hp? Because 310 hp is why wytsky got of bhp is different than that would be higher number

I'll post my results when I get home it's too hard from the iPhone

Ok now that ive done my research the brits measure power output at the engine not at the wheels so your 315bhp is around 235kw at the engine there's no way you'll make more than 220rwkw on an old stock r33 turbo in other words your rwkw figure is around 185rwkw

And now that I've seen the graph it's actually 185rwkw so 250hp at the weels so your down 60hp on him + he's got 4wd so that's at all 4 wheels

sounds good n-dawg.... wana see what power you making on the 34...

and thanks for the clarificaiton DaGr81... i knew you couldnt get 230RWKW from a standard turbo :P

bad news though :) I couldnt get my front drive shaft out because the bolts are rooted and I dont have enough leverage under my car....

SOO.. im going in on sat when there will be more time to get it off and then dyno ... no accurate results for a few more days :D

Yeah, i'm not going to have too high expectations, I will after all be using a 2nd hand R33 turbo, but I'll be running 3" from the turboback with hi flow cat, FMIC and Apexi Pod, so things should flow quite nicely. It goes in to Hi-Power Racing on Monday :P

cuz its a slightly newer car I will say 180-190 to be optimistic :)

gl with the tuning mate!

why the 33 turbo though? why not 34?

you did make the right choice going stock turbo for now, I did that to, to see how my engine would go...

slow and steady wins the race :P

Yeah I can always upgrade the turbo later :) Plus with a bigger turbo will probably be bigger injectors and then you know how it goes from there lol I need to have something to look forward to later on too :P

I picked up the R33 turbo for a reasonable price and I didn't see any R34 turbos around that time, only seen 2-3 since then and I got it quite a few months ago and I didn't particularly want to go through the steps of selling again and buying again... Besides the conversions been done with R33 turbo's before with pretty good results.

I was estimating around 180 RWKW but I don't want to aim too high though, I'd rather expect less and get more. Besides I'm more after useable power for the streets and a high compression set up is going to give me what I want. It's a daily driver which will be seeing the occasional track day...no point having all that power if you don't get out on the track to really enjoy it :D

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, all the crude is used for fuels and petrochem feedstocks (pesticides, many other chemicals, etc etc). But increasingly over the last few decades, much of the petrochem synthessis has started with methane because NG has been cheaper than oil, cleaner and easier and more consistent to work with, etc etc etc. So it's really had to say what the fraction either way is. Suffice to say - the direct fuels fraction is not insigificant. Heavy transport uses excruciatingly large amounts. Diesel is wasted in jet heaters in North American garages and workshops, thrown down drill holes in quarries, pissed all over the wall to provide electricity to certain outback communities, etc etc. Obviously road transport, and our pet project, recreational consumption camouflaged as road transport, is a smaller fraction of the total liquid HC consumption again. If you're talking aboust Aussie cars' contribution to the absolute total CO2 production of the country, then of course our share of the cubic mile of coal that is used for power generation, metallurgy, etc adds up to a big chunk. Then there is the consumption of timber. Did you know that the production of silicon metal, for example, is done in Australia by using hardwood? And f**king lots and lots and lots of hardwood at that. Until recently, it was f**king jarrah! There are many such sneaky contributors to CO2 production in industry and farming. NG is used in massive quantities in Australia, for power gen, for running huge water pumps (like, 1-2MW sized caterpillar V16 engines running flat out pumping water) for places like mine sites and minerals/metals refineries. And there are just a huge number of those sort of things going on quietly in the background. So NG use is a big fraction of total CO2 production here. I mean, shit, I personally design burners that are used in furnaces here in Oz that use multiple MW of gas all day every day. The largest such that I've done (not here in Oz) was rated to 150MW. One. Single. Gas burner. In a cement clinker kiln. There are thousands of such things out there in the world. There are double digits of them just here in Oz. (OK< just barely double digits now that a lot of them have shut - and they are all <100MW). But it's all the same to me. People in the car world (like this forum's users) would like to think that you only have to create an industrial capability to replace the fuel that they will be using in 10 years time, and imagine that everyone else will be driving EVs. And while the latter part of that is largely true, the liquid HC fuel industry as a whole is so much more massive than the bit used for cars, that there will be no commercial pressure to produce "renewable" "synthetic" fuels just for cars, when 100x that much would still be being burnt straight from the well. You have to replace it all, or you're not doing what is required. And then you get back to my massive numbers. People don't handle massive numbers at all well. Once you get past about 7 or 8 zeros, it becomes meaningless for most people.
    • @GTSBoy out of the cubic mile of crude oil we burn each year, I wonder how much of that is actually used for providing petrol and diesel.   From memory the figure for cars in Australia, is that they only add up to about 2 to 3% of our CO2 production. Which means something else here is burning a shit tonne of stuff to make CO2, and we're not really straight up burning oil everywhere, so our CO2 production is coming from elsewhere too.   Also we should totally just run thermal energy from deep in the ground. That way we can start to cool the inside of the planet and reverse global warming (PS, this last paragraph is a total piss take)
    • As somebody who works in the energy sector and lives in a subzero climate, i'm convinced EV's will never be the bulk of our transport.  EV battery and vehicle companies over here have been going bankrupt on a weekly basis the last year. 
    • With all the rust on those R32s, how can it even support all the extra weight requirements. Probably end up handling as well as a 1990s Ford Falcon Taxi.
    • Yes...but look at the numbers. There is a tiny tiny fraction of the number of Joules available, compared to what is used/needed. Just because things are "possible" doesn't make them meaningful.
×
×
  • Create New...