Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Interesting to note the SR22VET is superior on all accounts. Its over half a litre smaller.

It goes to show that cylinder head technology pays out a lot more than cubes.

I think there is more to it than that - compare it with similar sized smaller and "higher performance" wheels to an HKS T04Z, and even the larger (and older tech) HKS T51R Kai on an RB28 running pump gas: kaibb%26%2Bto4z%2Bpower.jpg

Going by that, a T04Z spools better than both turbos - and a T51R Kai is not far off them at all.

Regardless, yeah - SR22VET is way up there in terms of efficiency, while RBs are not so much... by todays standards.

The head on Ninos's engine is top shelf and costs more $$ than what most people are prepared to pay, hence a nice result. That and his engine is a result of endless testing by Advance Motor mechanics and associated companies/people.

Its is all about combo rather than bolting on an "awesome" turbo and expecting to get the same results as others.

Interesting to note the SR22VET is superior on all accounts. Its over half a litre smaller.

It goes to show that cylinder head technology pays out a lot more than cubes.

The head on Ninos's engine is top shelf and costs more $$ than what most people are prepared to pay, hence a nice result. That and his engine is a result of endless testing by Advance Motor mechanics and associated companies/people.

Its is all about combo rather than bolting on an "awesome" turbo and expecting to get the same results as others.

Glad to see we agree.

I was not implying the VET head alone is all the difference, but the technology implemented in that cylinder head is clearly a winner. That means both the factory VET side of things and the work the said firms have put towards it.

Lith when I look at those graphs I still see that the RB28 you posted is behind. I typically look for the point where the incline starts to nose over and I consider that to be the point where the motor has hit its threshold. The said VET is hitting that point at 4,700 whereas the RB28 you posted is 5100 on one of the turbos and 5500 on the other.

Obviously there are only hundreds of RPM in it for vastly older tech turbos but I think it notable to consider the big difference in capacity between the two motors. Plus, my comments were actually specific to the two results shown rather than general. I am more than confident that we can find a VET result which is shadowed by an RB.

Agree Ninos engine is sensational and I'm expecting similar results with mine but isn't that RB28 on 93 octane? If so then not really a like for like comparison or even comparable IMO.

Those turbos on 93 octane are not going to perform anywhere there capability on any engine let alone that one.

Edited by SRS13

Yeah definitely, the thing that really does impress me about it is that power is huge for a 64mm compressor on pump gas - I reckon. I'm not sold on the power delivery, though - I think there are competitors which would do that with better delivery at this stage.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Went out again last night with new suspension, looking forward to a prepped track and getting the car to hook up. Ran a PB on lower trap speed and a slower 60ft so that's a good start! 2730lb, only thing removed was the passenger seat and side pipe fitted. Looking forward to get this thing to hook up so we can tap out the 7175!

Different angle with incar

Edited by PJ.

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



×
×
  • Create New...