Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

boost = torque yes?

if your making 21 psi @ 3000 rpm then your peak torque is pretty low.. and therefore you'd be rapidly accelerating from that point onwards.

I guess I'm trying to say its good for a dyno test. But its not a real world situation. I can say I have full boost at 3000rpm, that only happens in a situation you would never use. 4th gear, 3000rpm is about 80km/h. I would be in 2nd or 3rd gear if I wanted to have some fun.

Hey, why not load it up in 5th gear going up a hill and see how quickly it builds boost.

Take it easy. Mad skids uleh.

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Well isn't "today's" turbo engineering is trying to get away from the tire frying behavior and concentrating on displacement? Power curve with sudden increase in power and torque are more likely to fry tires, while consistent increases are more likely to stick the car on road. Car that do stick on road during acceleration is lot faster then car that loses traction.

boost = torque yes?

if your making 21 psi @ 3000 rpm then your peak torque is pretty low.. and therefore you'd be rapidly accelerating from that point onwards.

Exactly!

You also don't need to wring the balls off the motor with boost coming in nice and early.

You just dont rev to 7500rpm - you shift sooner to stay back in the solid/meaty area of torque and surging forward.

It's like a win-win as less RPM the better for reliability.

I made 400hp on stock internals

Gt30/76r turbo

Haltec e11 ecu

3.5" exhaust

700cc high flow injectors

After market fuel pump

Running 18psi on pump fuel with a good tune from addrenline imports in mackay

Except there is nothing beyond the claim that the GT2835 spools that fast, dyno plot makes it look like almost 500rpm laggier than the numbers referred to here

Lith, the HKS2835ProS on the stagea makes 16psi at 3300rpm (150rwkw at 3500rpm and 180rwkw at 4000rpm). I am not sure how much earlier power could be brought on with more time on the dyno but this where it ended up last time out.

The car was on the dyno on a bull$hit hot >40deg day and the skinny OEM radiator wasn't coping well with temps becoming uncontrollable . Additionally we hit a boost limit around here where it wouldn't make more power...I think I have sorted that issue out as I suspect the stock BOV was cracking open here. This needs to be dynoed at some point with the new radiator and BOV mods.

Well isn't "today's" turbo engineering is trying to get away from the tire frying behavior and concentrating on displacement? Power curve with sudden increase in power and torque are more likely to fry tires, while consistent increases are more likely to stick the car on road. Car that do stick on road during acceleration is lot faster then car that loses traction.

Less lag and more tine under the curve is faster. You need to setup your suspension to put the power down

tune is more important than power level, loads of cars driving around pinging their tits off, especially when people flog it in summer when it has been tuned in winter with no temperature correction set up.

quite easily blow it up with only 220kw if the tuner has been quick and nasty

Exactly!

You also don't need to wring the balls off the motor with boost coming in nice and early.

You just dont rev to 7500rpm - you shift sooner to stay back in the solid/meaty area of torque and surging forward.

It's like a win-win as less RPM the better for reliability.

Virtually any motor needs to shift at red-line to make the fastest 1/4's.

It's cos torque at the wheels = engine torque x gear ratio.

Just do the maths and see.

Unless your torque is dropping off massively at red-line then shifting to a longer gear (upshift) is invariably going to result in less torque at the wheels.

Virtually any motor needs to shift at red-line to make the fastest 1/4's.

It's cos torque at the wheels = engine torque x gear ratio.

Just do the maths and see.

Unless your torque is dropping off massively at red-line then shifting to a longer gear (upshift) is invariably going to result in less torque at the wheels.

Yep, basically you need to shift to maximise power under the curve, this usually means shifting above peak power and well above peak torque. Torque can drop off quite massively towards redline yet it is still faster to shift up there.

With street gear ratios I'd say shifting on the limiter is going to be the fastest a lot of the time.

I think nismoid realises this though, he was just saying you don't need to rev it as much to get the same average power.

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

    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
    • Holy hell! That is absolutely stunning! Great work!!!
    • It does when you start adding everything else in. But it's not just compute. It's the logic. Getting your timing right (I'm not meaning ignition timing for the engine). Making sure of your memory mappings, seeing your interrupts. Microcontroller devices only have so much capacity. For the most part, you want all those timers and interrupts in use on your engine control, which means you're left with less than ideal methods for timing and management of other control functions.   Let's put it this way, my job is all about building custom hardware, that goes into cars, and integrates with them. We're also waiting on a media confirmation from SpaceX too fora world first we've just completed with them in NZ too. It's not just the little toys I play with. But you know, you can think and believe what you want.
×
×
  • Create New...