Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

The time has come to get the GTRS into my GTS25T and I don't think the R34 GTt SMIC is going to cut it soo I need something a bit better .

Last trip to SKs I noticed a black Toyota looking IC on a shelf with its barb fittings on the same end so I asked the question and its looking for a new home .

At this point I should add that I'm not doing great feats of re-engineering with this S2 Coupe so any updates now will be adequate and thats all meaning no overkill . I'm looking for an OE type intercooler that needs minimul work to fit , no cutting , and using as much of the factory plumbing as possible . I want the engine bay to look as std as possible and to date it does bar an Apexi boost control valve and Z32 wiring at the AFM .

Anyway I suspect this intercooler is either from a 7MGTE powered MA70 Supra or possibly , or hopefully , from a slightly later JZA70 one . Modified with straight inlet/outlet .

Anyhow this IC last saw use in Garys race R32GTST when it had the RB20DET in it a while back . He thinks it was originally from a Celica GT4 Group A Rally model roadie but I cant find pics of their std intercooler .

Anyway whatever all the IC has to do is be about twice as good as a GTt SMIC and it will be good enough for my roadie with maybe 240-250 Kws .

ATM she has a ported head with Poncams and a Nismo catback with a 3" cat . The usual PFC/Z32/740 Nismo injectors .

Fingers crossed I'll have a torquey responsive low to mid 200s car that looks about as factory as possible provided you don't look too close to the HKS turbo .

Thoughts ?

Cheers A .

I reckon it would work fine as I was considering the same at one stage..You dont strike me as the sort of guy to be getting your turbo super hot sitting on redline for any extended periods of time (or am I mistaken) so it shouldn't have to much trouble keeping your intake temps under control..If you were sliding it around a track all day I'd consider something bigger though. Although remembering efficiency is just as important as size, those little GKtech coolers seem to do a good job on the 2lts and its not very big at all..I would think a stock supra cooler would be fairly efficient.

going back in my mind, the old supra stuff, while being a good size, has a bad pressure drop, i had one in

my corrolla 10yrs ago, made 110rwkw on 20psi on a toyota 5K , i picked up to 140 rwkw on 20psi going to a decent core, from memory the pressure drop was 6 ish psi. Whilst not first hand also saw the same thing with a dyno test on a vl turbo in a magazine at 180-200rwkw ish.

I'd go china return flow in flat black myself

cheers

darren

Yes I've been searching and most people say the same thing , poor internal flow . Maybe ok for stdish RB20 but thats about it . The 2JZGTE powered ones I think used a really thick side mount but debatable if it would fit and work in an R33 .

Does anyone know if anything is available that has the inlet and outlet at the same end like the Supra ones that would fit in the nose of an R33 ?

I'm a bit reluctant to use a cheap return flow front mount but I don't think the aftermarket caters for much that doesn't need cutting to fit and is well made .

A .

Those toyota ones also split the tanks easy, makes it hard to trace that boost leak. I don't get your reluctance to run china?,

why overcomplicate something so simple? they are cheap and work better than anything anyone is proposing or the toyota one you where

contemplating

cheers

darren

The layout of the Supra cores should be good for two things. 1) Low pressure drop. 2) Low thermal efficiency.

This is because they have a larger number of shorter tubes, giving a lower velocity and less length to flow through. That causes both the lower pressure drop and the reduced efficiency.

Sadly, because they are a shit design (the tanks are basically just constant diameter pipe leading to high velocity at one wnd and low at the other and hence poor distribution across the core) they instead exhibit low thermal efficiency AND high pressure drop, so they suck badly. Perfectly good for a low power 7M-GTE, but little else.

I haven't used one on a skyline but my old JZA80 sidemount now resides in a mates S13...needed some custom piping to fit it as its a chunky mofo...but it was thick for a side mount...almost a cube shape...

FYI the standard jza80 sidemounts are as decent as sidemounts get...many guys with supras are pushing upwards of 260rwkw with the stock units...they flow and cool extremely well but being small they are more prone to heatsoak so probably not suitable for trackwork or drifting...but if you can get it to fit in a daily you can't go wrong...decent ducting to the cooler is also as important as the cooler itself...

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

    • Great interview on damper settings and coil selection by HPA https://www.facebook.com/HPAcademy/videos/30284693841175196/?fs=e&s=TIeQ9V&fs=e
    • Yeah, it was a pretty deep dig.
    • The values for HID colour are also defined ~ see https://www.legislation.gov.au/F2006L02732/latest/text  ~ goto section 3.9 onwards ....
    • So, if the headlights' cutoff behaviour (angles, heights, etc) are not as per 6.2.6.1.1 without automatic levelling, then you have to have to have automatic** levelling. Also, if the headlight does not have the required markings, then neither automatic nor manual adjusters are going to be acceptable. That's because the base headlight itself does not meet the minimum requirement (which is the marking). ** with the option of manual levelling, if the headlight otherwise meets the same requirements as for the automatic case AND can be set to the "base" alignment at the headlight itself. So that's an additional requirement for the manual case. So, provided that the marking is on the headlight and there is a local manual adjustment back to "base" on the headlight, then yes, you could argue that they are code compliant. But if you are missing any single one of these things, then they are not. And unlike certain other standards that I work with, there does not seem to be scope to prepare a "fitness for purpose" report. Well, I guess there actually is. You might engage an automotive engineer to write a report stating that the lights meet the performance requirements of the standard even if they are missing, for example, the markings.  
    • Vertical orientation   6.2.6.1.1. The initial downward inclination of the cut off of the dipped-beam to be set in the unladen vehicle state with one person in the driver's seat shall be specified within an accuracy of 0.1 per cent by the manufacturer and indicated in a clearly legible and indelible manner on each vehicle close to either headlamp or the manufacturer's plate by the symbol shown in Annex 7.   The value of this indicated downward inclination shall be defined in accordance with paragraph 6.2.6.1.2.   6.2.6.1.2. Depending on the mounting height in metres (h) of the lower edge of the apparent surface in the direction of the reference axis of the dipped beam headlamp, measured on the unladen vehicles, the vertical inclination of the cut off of the dipped- beam shall, under all the static conditions of Annex 5, remain between the following limits and the initial aiming shall have the following values:   h < 0.8   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   0.8 < h < 1.0   Limits: between 0.5 per cent and 2.5 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.0 per cent and 1.5 per cent   Or, at the discretion of the manufacturer,   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The application for the vehicle type approval shall, in this case, contain information as to which of the two alternatives is to be used.   h > 1.0   Limits: between 1.0 per cent and 3.0 per cent   Initial aiming: between 1.5 per cent and 2.0 per cent   The above limits and the initial aiming values are summarized in the diagram below.   For category N3G (off-road) vehicles where the headlamps exceed a height of 1,200 mm, the limits for the vertical inclination of the cut-off shall be between: -1.5 per cent and -3.5 per cent.   The initial aim shall be set between: -2 per cent and -2.5 per cent.
×
×
  • Create New...