Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Tao and all.

just wondering which turbo (or CHRA) you would recommend for a 2L 4-cylinder engine with short stroke & big bore (unlike the SR20DET) for a responsive upto 300rwkw?

I have read the 581 pages (wow what a read) and given the atr28ss2 would give me what i need, would like to know how the ATR28 & ATR43 differ and which one can ideally be suited to my T3 flange.

Hi Tao and all.

just wondering which turbo (or CHRA) you would recommend for a 2L 4-cylinder engine with short stroke & big bore (unlike the SR20DET) for a responsive upto 300rwkw?

I have read the 581 pages (wow what a read) and given the atr28ss2 would give me what i need, would like to know how the ATR28 & ATR43 differ and which one can ideally be suited to my T3 flange.

anyone?

given my manifold has T3 flange it seems i'll need to go for a ATR43 based CHRA. Just not sure how it will perform on my engine.

does anyone know the difference b/w the ATR28 & ATR43 turbine ends?

You can use our Atr43g3sat model in ceramic ball bearing assembly externally gated

thanks Tao.

any guesses when i'll roughly see fullboost?

alos, what would be the next smaller CHRA i could use?

thanks Tao.

any guesses when i'll roughly see fullboost?

alos, what would be the next smaller CHRA i could use?

Also, would it work ok with an A/R .63 turbine housing?

Atr43g3sat would be laggy on sr20 its already quite laggy on a rb25

One size down would be the atr43ss2

No ones tryed it on a sr20 yet

Would be quite good on a t3 highmount manifold and cbb

.63 rear externally gated

Would be quite responsive but may choke the engine over 300kw

On e85 might be ok but pump 98 may get detonation early

Depends what you want the car for

Responsive street setup .63ar or all out power drag .82ar just may be more lag

.63 t3 housings make heaps on 4 cylinders(350+),much more than the little

t2 housings ever will

You havnt got no where near as much backpressure as a rb25.

You could try the 20.5g he builds. Ss2 comp.l2 turbine 8cm housing.

We have one on stock bottom end sr. Does 315rwkw atm on low 20s boost and e85.

We used a china cast mani which had no boost control.

Now gone 6boost and 45mm gate,trying to get it booked in for tuneatm and will be put "on kill" shortly....

Another guy in qld did 370rwkw on one on 27psi ish with a bit left in the tank so be interesting to see what it makes.

We fitted a small water injection nozzle pre turbo this time aswell

Have a atr45sat ss here aswell ..have joked about fitting that..lol

Cheers

Darren

Atr43g3sat is the latest model that is more responsive then the ss2.

Thats the one made 317rwkws with 20psi @ 3550rpm P98 fuel. I think the larger model referred to was the Atr45sat.

Not a Sr, for a short stroke 2L depending on CPR, can run in a .63 or .58 rear.

Atr43g3sat would be laggy on sr20 its already quite laggy on a rb25

One size down would be the atr43ss2

No ones tryed it on a sr20 yet

Would be quite good on a t3 highmount manifold and cbb

.63 rear externally gated

Would be quite responsive but may choke the engine over 300kw

On e85 might be ok but pump 98 may get detonation early

Depends what you want the car for

Responsive street setup .63ar or all out power drag .82ar just may be more lag

thanks for the response.

ultimately the car will be street driven and maybe the odd track day (for some fun) given its heritage.

given this, it will need to stay with the original A/R .63 internal gated housing - i'd also like the engine bay looking factory spec.

and i'll prefer to stay with P98.

.63 t3 housings make heaps on 4 cylinders(350+),much more than the little

t2 housings ever will

You havnt got no where near as much backpressure as a rb25.

You could try the 20.5g he builds. Ss2 comp.l2 turbine 8cm housing.

We have one on stock bottom end sr. Does 315rwkw atm on low 20s boost and e85.

We used a china cast mani which had no boost control.

Now gone 6boost and 45mm gate,trying to get it booked in for tuneatm and will be put "on kill" shortly....

Another guy in qld did 370rwkw on one on 27psi ish with a bit left in the tank so be interesting to see what it makes.

We fitted a small water injection nozzle pre turbo this time aswell

Have a atr45sat ss here aswell ..have joked about fitting that..lol

Cheers

Darren

i'd assume the T3 .63 would flow better than the T28 .64.

the 20.5 (ss2) turbo does look tempting, but per my previous post, i'd prefer to stick with internal gate to keep the factory look.

it seems like i might need to look at the atr43ss2, possibly in CBB.

Atr43g3sat is the latest model that is more responsive then the ss2.

Thats the one made 317rwkws with 20psi @ 3550rpm P98 fuel. I think the larger model referred to was the Atr45sat.

Not a Sr, for a short stroke 2L depending on CPR, can run in a .63 or .58 rear.

so does this ATR43G3SAT have a CBB core?

what size is the turbine wheel because i might look at having my housing machined to suit?

yep, short stroke (over-square) engine with twin cams, forgies, etc, CR will be around 8.0:1.

given it's my weekend street car, response and strong mid-range is important.

it's not a track broad minded person or dyno queen.

so does this ATR43G3SAT have a CBB core?

what size is the turbine wheel because i might look at having my housing machined to suit?

yep, short stroke (over-square) engine with twin cams, forgies, etc, CR will be around 8.0:1.

given it's my weekend street car, response and strong mid-range is important.

it's not a track broad minded person or dyno queen.

What engine exactly are we talking about here? It will help people here to assist you.

What engine exactly are we talking about here? It will help people here to assist you.

Not sure why he hasn't actually said engine, but I'm going to guess a YB* series Ford. Given his name, I'd say he owns an RS500.

Not sure why he hasn't actually said engine, but I'm going to guess a YB* series Ford. Given his name, I'd say he owns an RS500.

i didnt think it would really make any difference, but correct, it's a yb cosworth engine.

CBB will give you day and night difference with transient response compared to its journal bearing brother.

I went from a SS2 journal to CBB (ceramic ball bearing) and the difference is day and night.

  • Like 1

2016 version of SS2 has many changes made to earlier models. The difference in end result would be a combination of alterations made.

Ceramic ball bearing system makes difference in throttle response and becomes very apparent when working with low CPR, None VCT engines as well as cars with Auto transmission. It is definitely recommended for that Cosworth engine.

2016 version of SS2 has many changes made to earlier models. The difference in end result would be a combination of alterations made. Ceramic ball bearing system makes difference in throttle response and becomes very apparent when working with low CPR, None VCT engines as well as cars with Auto transmission. It is definitely recommended for that Cosworth engine.

Speaking of Non VCT, low cr engines, did you ever end up doing any development with an RB20 Tao?

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

    • Oh, that's grim. Something bad has been happening there.
    • Put an endoscope down the hole and saw this. Not quite all around the bore but a good 60% at least. Chin to the chest and towards further disappointments I guess.
    • 2 does "sort of" applies, maybe......but looking at what parts would be needed for the swap to get engineered, registered, and insured, and basically that's everything under the car, the modifications the make it legal would be problematic and horrendously expensive, all for a street car that just cruises around and hits a few twisty roads on the weekends Also, from looking at the NSW rules and Regs, with all modifications that is required just to make the car safe and not twist itself to pieces, and then actually get registered for street use, may still be impossible nowadays As for 1, when you add in a fresh engine, fresh transmission, rear cradle and diff, tailshaft, suspension, brakes, cooling, and all the other fabrication required, your probably looking at up to $100k to do it right, all for a 20 year old MX5 that is over engineered and you would never be able to actually use the power it has on the street, much like your beastie, which I love, but you actually track that thing and can use all of its powers in anger, in a safe environment  Hell, the old Bogan Cruise Ship had more power than I could use on the street, and in hindsight, I went a bit silly on that thing, it didn't really need the 500hp it had for what I actually used the car for, it was fun, but basically unusable on the street if you value your licence  As for cams, yeah, I'll probably book it in for them to get installed and tuned soonish, like next month after MX5 Mania are back at work....... and yes, I've already sent a email to bin the turbo quote and quote instead to install cams and a new Fluidampr balancer that will suit the 2.5 better than the OEM 2.0 balancer that is swapped over for the 2.5 install, as the balancer needs to get pulled to time the cams it's a while your in there sort of thing I did think a bit about flex fuel for a laugh, but being na, and no where really around locally anymore to get E85, I've binned that idea, so no sweet sweet corn smells are set for the car I wish E85 was more of a standard fuel, it's better for the environment, better for tuning, plus that sweet sweet smell we all love As for fitting in the family, that's not needed, as everyone in the family already owns a car that can seat 5 humans comfortably enough, the MX5 is "my toy" As for buying a car that is already built, nah, I would rather pick and choose my parts, I enjoy the process, and in the big picture, the additional cost is well worth the enjoyment, and the occasional frustration, I get out of doing it, albeit with other people spinning the spanners, and me, just paying the invoice 🤣
    • Excuse me, but 2) does apply 1) Would also apply if you consider how much is spent in the alternatives. Also there's the option of 3), buy one pre-built that you can put your family in (it's me, it's my car)   That said, I went on a ~500km drive the other day. I didn't use anything more adventurous than 3rd/4th gear at about ~3000RPM and 50% throttle and I was going as fast as anyone has any sense doing on a public road, with enough grip to the point where I didn't want to go any faster. I was obviously under the limit of the current car etc etc. MX5 with 2.5 N/A to achieve the same speed would be more fun for any road scenario. Maybe consider cams. I wouldn't boost it. The use case is just not there and it won't actually make the car more enjoyable unless you really do plan on wringing gears from 1st to 3rd (at least) at 100% WOT on a public road to 150+kmh.
    • Great if: 1. You had all of the money for everything else that is required  2. Lived in a country where you could actually do this and drive it legally on the road Sadly, neither applies to me As for the turbo, I am having second thoughts, mainly for engineering/registration legality reasons and insurance  Not saying I've finished doing stupid things that I probably should do to the MX5, but boost, and V8 engine swaps isn't on the cards Strange, but true 
×
×
  • Create New...