Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

More update for the SS profile:

BP 98 Fuel, No boost controller, No wastegate controller 286rwkws @ 17psi.

atr43ss286rwkw.jpg

atr43ss286rwkwboost.jpg

Stao can you confirm specs of this turbo?

Is it the Billet 71mm compressor in RB25 SS profile?

How much would this cost with generic internal gate T4 rear housing?

I want to fit this to a 1JZ (2.5L) so please recommend turbo and housing, as states aiming for 280rwkw but very good torque and boost response.

The SS profile looks good. so that's compatible with a stock r33 turbo or a separate turbo all together?

also, is the HKS strengthened actuator compatible with your turbos after hi flow?

thanks stao there looking good

Ive bought the SS turbo off Stao as he plans to start with the next design and what not. I will be reporting all my experiences, dyno graphs and other data to him and I shall start a build thread about it!

Ive bought the SS turbo off Stao as he plans to start with the next design and what not. I will be reporting all my experiences, dyno graphs and other data to him and I shall start a build thread about it!

Excellent news mate, I think its the better way for you to go. You were honestly shit out of luck with 2nd hand mismatched shit.

Will be good to see you finally sorted with a near bolt on alternative.

More update for the SS profile:

atr43g2front.JPG

atr43g2rear.JPG

BP 98 Fuel, No boost controller, No wastegate controller 286rwkws @ 17psi.

atr43ss286rwkw.jpg

atr43ss286rwkwboost.jpg

BP 98 Fuel, No boost controller, Wastegate controller wastegate controller set

320rwkws @ 20psi

atr43ss320rwkw.jpg

atr43ss320rwkwboost.jpg

I'm very happy with this results, Its not only as what appeared on paper, its made an very fast street car. boost comes in nice and early, smooth acceleration, minium wheel spin, hard pull till red line.

looks awesome for a local turbo option.

If I was in the market for a turbo Id be getting one of these.....

would be interested in the comparable cost VS a GT3076R. Bolt on of course. ie complete cost to bolt on ready for tune.

a custom gt3076r with ported stock nissan comp cover, avo .73ar 6-bolt rear housing, lines etc comes to around $2400

what would the ATR43SS cost, including all lines,bolts,nuts to bolt on ready to go?

result looks fantastic to be honest

For the 1JZ member: Rear adapting pattern of the ATR43xx can be made into a Vband internally gated or 5 bolts pattern for external gate.

Today I've removed the ATR43SS and replaced it with a ATR43G3 with .70 comp and .82 FNT tri-nozzled rear.

atr43g3comp.JPG

Haven't had it tuned, driving around gently, it seems like it comes to 0psi on 2nd gear by 2500RPMS and pulled hard to red line.

If I call the stage of where the turbo comes on "song" (that spool sound before gone into jet sound just before 0psi), then this turbo seems to be on song as soon as accelerator is pressed, very good response and very conformable to drive on road with lot of useable power and torque band.

With larger housings its really torquey and smooth, I think this is another brilliant road turbo.

comparing to the current ATR43g3 .82 .70, The FNT version picked up lot more mid range with far better response, I will find out if its going to affect top end or not on Tuesday.

In comparing to the SS I’ve just removed, the SS produced a lot sharper sort of acceleration, while The G3 with FNT more felt like power increase due to increasement of engine cubic size.

Price wise the RB25det Bolton SS with billet comp and FNT turbine, I will need to charge $1900 including GST, oil line and high pressure actuator to cover up all the extra labor spent in manufacturing. The Vband version is $150 cheaper.

The Standard ATR43G3 with FNT cost additional $200. Once dyno confirmed, any one with a standard .82 ATR43Gx / PU high flow can send theirs in for FNT integration at $200.

I've made a 3 nozzled ATR43G3 .82 turbo, installing it tomorrow. By re-directing air to a more efficient spot improves the current response and driving ability, in combination with large size housing it should produce possibly better power with greater torque.

If works it can change the current ATR43 .82 and PU high flow's power and boost behavior, making a powerful car lot more street friendly.

Installing it tomorrow, will write up some DIY instructions.

what does 3 nozzled mean/refer to?

Price wise the RB25det Bolton SS with billet comp and FNT turbine, I will need to charge $1900 including GST, oil line and high pressure actuator to cover up all the extra labor spent in manufacturing. The Vband version is $150 cheaper.

Please PM me when this turbo is available at your usual realistic prices. $1900 is not far from purchasing one of the new borgwarner EFR turbos (about $2200 landed for state of the art tech).

I do understand that the cost of tooling and machine work needs to be accounted for yet believe the price is still a touch rich for my liking.

The additional funds were paid into labor and materials in manufacturing, its not cheap when every thing is made in Australia with qualified engineers. Plus the turbo it self is engineered to be a bolton solution, so even been $1900 you are saving lot more then $300 at the stage of when its running.

Only way I can see it been cheaper is to send out all of our machinery work overseas, its a hard ethical decision I'm tempted but not yet welling to make. Cheaper solutions will be announced when available.

This is for people who's asking to see the fuel and timing map for ATR43SS-2 Billet FNT turbo.

(hope I got the nistune software to read correctly)

Timing map:

timingmap.JPG

Fuel map:

fuel.jpg

Stao what size is your turbine wheel in the ATR43SS??

I would like to see the billet 71mm compressor mated to a 55-60mm turbine with high flow (low trapping effect) in a compact housing with FNT.

Please elaborate on SS specs (to help justify costs)

Well you don't need a .82 rear for 230rwkws. Its more made for high torque 300rwkws applications, that would make a laggy 230rwkws on road. I think high flow based on stock R33 turbo would be your best option for a fast street driven 230rwkws.

Also with the ramp rate, you won't really know it unless its been addressed. Few obvious tails I've noticed with the Dyno pack dyno that I've used:

atr43ss315rwkw12sechighlight.JPG

Notice the high lighted dip and flat bit, you will find that with 12 sec ramp timing on stock Rb25dets. I will do runs on both ramp speeds from now on.

Funny because I also have the dip and flat bit on my graph but it's definatly done on a 9sec ramp rate... When we did a 12sec ramp rate it also moved the graph a whole lot more left than yours moved so I don't think picking the difference is as simple as you have portrayed!

CCF16122010_00000.jpg

Also I noticed how you are now putting on STP correction which gains a lot of power, the run below only makes 388rwkw without STP correction on.

2011-02-03205959.jpg

Edited by SimonR32

There could be more tails, I'm only referring to Status dyno with 98 Fuel. Also high ramp also makes exhaust side hotter, which means large famed turbos will show affect of been advanced, also not sure of effects of E85 fuel. Note 12 sec run vs 9 sec run based on a KAI R33 2iU high fow, its showing same trace:

357658cheat.jpg

357658boost.jpg

Don't know what those corrections are maybe Trent can add in some input. How ever the SAE labled dynosheet above produced more power then STP, probably other way round.

Dyno tune didn't go very smooth today. car's ended up with ignition issues after few runs. need to sort out its issues and do another try.

This is a short 9sec run based on a .82 rear FNT turbine housing ATR43G3 with .70 comp internally gated on 98 Fuel with little miss fire. in comparison with a standard .82 ATR43 based on the same ramp speed.

atr43g3fnt315rwkw.JPG

atr43g3fnt315rwkwboost.JPG

Note how the FNT made more torque down low, held torque longer up on top and held boost lot better.

Above only captured engine behavior in 4th gear paddle to the floor. Big improvement in road driving ability, boost comes in lot earlier in lower gears, lot faster off the lights or 0 to 100KMs acceleration. Most important, this nothing then massive pull tyre spinning every where behavior has been replaced by very solid and smooth acceleration with almost none wheel spin specially in 2nd gear. Very strong increasement of Gforce as RPMs engage red line. Overall a lot faster road car.

I’ve got few more drawings of FNT turbine setups, will try them out in later stages.

Next to come is the an smaller version of SS that is made for 250rwkws, and hopefully the new parts replaced (CAS, Ignition model, one coil pack) stops this miss-firing issue.

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

    • 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.
    • Yup but for me its the HR ! Cut my teeth on the old holden 6s in the day ! And here's me thinking in the day it was also the 300ZX and the Mitsubishi GT3000 ! All, as well had good lines, but always seemed to need finishing off, style wise.
×
×
  • Create New...