Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Yeah, nice try again. But you're still forgeting the temperature rise of the air affecting the volume of air as well.

(Quote Sydneykid: What you seem to have ignored is the 1 bar of boost in the RB25DET example, that effectively doubles its air consumption ability. Plus an RB is 90% efficient in its air consumption, so 250 litres per second X 90% = 225 litres per second. So the 0.008 of a second difference in airflow through your super duper inlet system makes SFA difference to the response. Which is what I said in the first place....)

This wasn't about response. It's about the turbo having to spin faster before producing boost, thats rpm closer to the "FAILURE POINT" so if we can spin it slower for the same amount of air, safer for the turbine.

I'm not saying I'll get 220+ at the wheels, it was just raised as a not too far fetched goal to create interest. It was never a proven claim, just an eye opener to what "MAY" be available.

I wasn't aware this was a spelling bee. Want an elephant stamp for that one?

We'll end it there ay, Or should I say you guys will end it there as I know you cant resist having the last word, else you wouldn't be resorting to feeble attempts to insult me because you dont understand the laws of physics.

Maybe It'll work, maybe it wont. But I'm not scared to try something different. My car made (with slight detonation in the top end, Damn townsville air.) 108 RWKW when stock as a rock with even the factory exhaust. I'll let you know how I went, and anything unusual or helpfull along the way.

Doing it different

sprint32

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

OMG,

Sprint... For christ sake..

It's about the turbo having to spin faster before producing boost, thats rpm closer to the "FAILURE POINT" so if we can spin it slower for the same amount of air, safer for the turbine.
This does not happen UNLESS the turbo was the worse mis-match turbo in history as SK has previously stated.

You need exhaust gases to spin the turbo.

laws of physics.

pfffff as I said previously... You skim read.. lol

Sprint... I think you are a little dense.

You are beginning to make a fool of your self.

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

    • They are what I will be installing. 640s for me.
    • Hmm... From my experience you get about 0.25° camber change per mm of RUCA length change. So, to correct from -2.5 up to less than -1° (or, more than -1° if you look at the world as a mathematician does) then you'd be making 6-8mm of length change on the RUCA. From a stock length of 308mm, that's 2-2.5% difference in RUCA length. My RUCAs are currently very close to stock length - certainly only 2-3mm different from stock. I had to adjust my tension arms by 6mm to minimise the bump steer. That's 6mm out of 210, which is 2.8%. That's a 2.8% change on those, compared to a <1% change on the RUCAs. So the stock geometry already has worse bump steer than is possible - you can improve it even if you don't change the RUCA length. If you lengthen the RUCAs at all, then you will definitely be adding bump steer. Again, with my car, I recently had an unpleasant amount of bump steer, stemming from a number of things that happened one after another without me having an opportunity to correct for them. I only had to change the tension arm lengths by 1mm to minimise the resulting bump steer. (Granted, I also had to dial out a lot of extra toe-in in the rear, and excessive rear toe-in will make bump steer behaviour worse). Relatively tiny little adjustments having been made - the car is now completely different. Was horrifying how much it wanted to steer from the rear on any significant single wheel bump/dip. And it was even bad on expansion joints on long sweepers on freeway entry/exits, which are notionally hitting both rear wheels at the same time. My point is, the crappy Nissan multilink is quite sensitive to these things (unlike the very nice Toyota suspension!). And I think 99.75% of Skyline owners are blissfully ignorant of what they are driving around on. Sadly, it is a non-trivial exercise to set up to measure and correct bump steer. I am happy to show my rig, which involves nasty chunks of wood bolted to the hub, mirrors, lasers, graph paper targets and other horrors. Just in case anyone wants to see how it is done. I'll just have to set it up to take the photos.
    • What do you have in that bad boy ? Ill go with the 725cc since I'll be going with Nistune ( would definitely like more engine protection but Haltech is too far out of reach at the moment... plus, Ill probably have a pretty safe tune as its a daily, not gonna be chasing peak power 24/7 ahahah ). Are Xspurt a safe choice?  Pete's great. He didnt mention anything about traction arm length so I reckon it may be good. When I get some new wheels/tire later down the road I'll ask him about it and get his opinion on em. I heard from Gary that you've got the bilsteins too, are you running the sway bars too? and what other suspension goodies do you have installed or would recommend?
    • In true Gregging style...  
×
×
  • Create New...