Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Did a few tweaks to get new power level:

- Exhaust Cam gear (OS Giken), 5° retard

- Tubular SS exh manifold (didn't make much difference on its own unfortunately)

- Swap to better Matrix mode tune with LT-12 Mictotech from old-style mode (leans out some rich spots I had)

Shaun at BoostWorx did the work, excellent stuff as per usual.

Green plot is old setup. The old power curve indicates better low down power but that's due to different ramp rate on dyno helping to spool turbo earlier, so if Shaun had done that same ramp rate, <3000rpm power with the new setup would have been better.

Not sure why he does that because it can make a dyno plot look like shit at lower RPM??? Anyway, if we have another dyno day, we should make sure ramp rates are the same for all, within reason of course.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/41572-280rwkw-at-12-bar/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Cheers all.

Clint, will also be very interesting to see outright engine vs chassis dyno figures when you're done.

From all accounts it's a linear relationship re engine vs chassis numbers, not a multiple like 1.3 for eg.

So a smallish FWD car might loose 40rwkW through drivetrain whether the engine is pushing out 100 or 200 kW.

A mid size RWD, I have read, is a 50kW drivetrain loss, so for example when I first got my car it had 136rwkW, which = 186kW. Now 280rwkW = 330kW.

For bigger cars like old Falcons, Monaros and also 4WD GTRs, typical losses are 60rwkW.

We'll see as yours is full R33 and GTR running gear is that right? So you might expect 50-55kW loss.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/41572-280rwkw-at-12-bar/#findComment-852429
Share on other sites

Excellent results mate :( I gotta see Shaun real soon....as soon as this damn gearbox goes on AARRGGHHH!!

 

So is this result going from the std manifold with the external gate mounted on it to a tubular one?

Thanks. I have internal gate turbo, so just a swap from stock cast manifold to tubular SS manifold.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/41572-280rwkw-at-12-bar/#findComment-852804
Share on other sites

was it in the exact same position as the stock turbo?, like to one autobarn has, as they are not as good in my opinion looking at the way the runners merge

Yep that's the one, I thought the same re cylinder 5 runner in particular however at the same time I thought it was much better than stock simply by virtue of the larger ID of the runners. Who knows, the extended power range at the top end I now have might not have been achieved with the old manifold. I read around on various forums and the consenses was that three into one from each bank of three was better than six into one. The manifold from Tilbrooks (Mick Stanic...is he still there???) is oen of the best around, but again much more expensive.

Anyway, for the price (less than half of anything else I have been quoted) I'm happy enough.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/41572-280rwkw-at-12-bar/#findComment-853127
Share on other sites

Excellent stuff Lach' :D As per usual, Shaun comes up with the goods.

Our cars are damn near identical in terms of power/torque now mate! I do run more boost (~20-21psi) to make ~ the same power, but that's to be expected with the lower comp ratio. I'm still using the stock ext manifold, but it was cleaned up and port matched.

You'd better be out at the next AIR meet with me mate! We can try and run vs. each other. It'll make a damn good grudge match :P

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/41572-280rwkw-at-12-bar/#findComment-853986
Share on other sites

Nice result Lachlan.

The manifold at Autobarn looks alot like the trust one, which is around 3 times the price. I agree 100% on the merge the gasses before they hit the turbine housing, and as you say, bigger ID is all good.

At least it will sound alot tougher, I reckon the note is worth the price alone:)

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/41572-280rwkw-at-12-bar/#findComment-853989
Share on other sites

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

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...