Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Depends on where you want to compromise and what you think you will get the most reward from, you can definitely save a reasonable amount of money and still get respectable performance - however with this there is less risk you are going to look back and think... Maybe this could be better, but now I have spent the money.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2

Hehe sounds familiar :ph34r:

And if the Mat now could talk to the Mat who was angsting about whether to spend that money, what would you tell yourself?

STFU and buy it!!! ;)

Yeah power to the ground and I can't get full bore with 245 Michelin PSS and supposedly 271 at the wheels .

My gut feeling is that the 3073HTA in an 82 housing should be a good all rounder in an RB25 provided you don't mind having what looks like a GT3582R under the lid .

A .

harden up princess, buy wider tyres. 245 wide was so 1993

harden up princess, buy wider tyres. 245 wide was so 1993

:laugh:

I stick to 265/35 as its close enough to stock speedo reading! AND at 390kw power to the ground doesnt happen..... At 360ish you can get it to grip up at the start of third if you mash the pedal from the get go..... So at 271 there is no excuse OR poor suspension setup...

I stick to 265/35 as its close enough to stock speedo reading! AND at 390kw power to the ground doesnt happen..... At 360ish you can get it to grip up at the start of third if you mash the pedal from the get go..... So at 271 there is no excuse OR poor suspension setup...

Yep, I ran 255s on the back of mine and at the ~270kw area it was fine - maybe you could feel the tyres struggling a bit in 2nd, but only enough to make it obvious they were earning their keep.... nothing that required lifting of the throttle to let hook up or anything, unless it was wet.

harden up princess, buy wider tyres. 245 wide was so 1993

I can't think of a better tyre than a Michelin PSS.... The traction issue described is far from a fault of the turbo or the tyre (size/make)..

Definitely a fault of the current alignment (or lack thereof)

So are all atp housings crap or is it a hit and miss affair?

People have had mixed bag with their luck with them - so far anyone I have heard of (including on forums) I know who have had issues are ones who have been running the turbo HARD. One of my mates has been running his EVO with an ATP TS 1.06 HTA3582 on pump gas for years (~330-360awkw max) as a time attack/hillclimb car with no issues. That case I showed was actually the only case I know of first hand, no one else I know has had a specific issue - and that car had been run to >500kw @ hubs on an SR20VET with a GT35 hotside and typically raced at race events (not time attack, actual laps) at >400kw so it was pushed pretty hard.

Not saying it WILL happen, but the potential is there.

:laugh:

I stick to 265/35 as its close enough to stock speedo reading! AND at 390kw power to the ground doesnt happen..... At 360ish you can get it to grip up at the start of third if you mash the pedal from the get go..... So at 271 there is no excuse OR poor suspension setup...

fo sure!

I keep hearing the same bs about not being able to get traction from a sub 250kW car, it's becoming a broken record disco, get wider tyres, fix up your dated suspension and stop mentioning you have no traction.

There are plenty of guys making over 300kW and I never hear them having traction issues.

fo sure!

I keep hearing the same bs about not being able to get traction from a sub 250kW car, it's becoming a broken record disco, get wider tyres, fix up your dated suspension and stop mentioning you have no traction.

There are plenty of guys making over 300kW and I never hear them having traction issues.

This exactly.

I had 266kw and coming on boost in 2nd it would spin my Kumho 245 KU39's (comforty/sporty) tyres pretty hard. The car would snap out to 45 degrees, and bash the limiter and go nowhere really,

Then I got pineapples fitted and Nitto Invo's at the rear in 255 when the setup changed a bit and now it doesn't spin 304kw when the rubber is warm.

The setup is king.

A decent diff helps too, the viscous LSD is a piece of poo, as it's a viscous coupler there will be always some element of slip between both wheels.

Correction. As it's a viscous coupler there will always be a shit load of slip between the wheels as soon as you have more than standard power available.

got a decent diff? with 255s mine's not toooo bad at 340, retune in a few weeks might be worse after that :D

Nismo diff in my car! love it!

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

    • My understanding is that UV tends to accelerate the aging process. If the car has been garaged, then you could probably get away with extending beyond 10 years. FWIW, in 2015, I had tyres on my 180B SSS that had a 3-digit code (2 for week, 1 for decade), ending in 0, so could have been more than 30 years old, but still worked fine. I did replaced them very quickly, though, once I discovered what the code meant!
    • But we haven't even gotten to the point of talking about stateless controllers or any of the good stuff yet!
    • You guys need to take this discussion to another thread if you want to continue it, most of the last 2 pages has nothing to do with OP's questions and situation
    • And this, is just ONE major issue for closed loop control, particularly using PID. One such issue that is created right here, is integrator wind up. But you know GTSBoy, "it's just a simple PID controller"...  
    • Nah. For something like boost control I wouldn't start my design with PID. I'd go with something that originates in the fuzzy logic world and use an emergency function or similar concept. PID can and does work, but at its fundamental level it is not suited to quick action. I'd be reasonably sure that the Profecs et al all transitioned to a fuzzy algorithm back in the 90s. Keep in mind also that where and when I have previously talked about using a Profec, I'm usually talking about only doing an open loop system anyway. All this talk of PID and other algorithms only comes into play when you're talking closed loop boost control, and in the context of what the OP needs and wants, we're probably actually in the realm of open loop anyway. Closed loop boost control has always bothered me, because if you sense the process value (ie the boost measurement that you want to control) in the plenum (after the throttle), then boost control to achieve a target is only desirable at WOT. When you are not WOT, you do not want the the boost to be as high as it can be (ie 100% of target). That's why you do not have the throttle at WO. You're attempting to not go as fast as you can. If the process variable is measured upstream of the throttle (ie in an RB26 plenum, or the cold side pipework in others) then yeah, sure, run the boost controller closed loop to hit a target boost there, and then the throttle does what it is supposed to do. Just for utter clarity.... an old Profec B Spec II (or whatever it is called, and I've got one, and I never look at it, so I can't remember!) and similar might have a MAP sensor, and it might show you the actual boost in the plenum (when the MAP sensor is connected to the plenum) but it does not use that value to decide what it is doing to control the boost, except to control the gating effect (where it stops holding the gate closed on the boost ramp). It's not closed loop at all. Once the gate is released, it's just the solenoid flailing away at whatever duty cycle was configured when it was set up. I'm sure that there are many people who do not understand the above points and wonder wtf is going on.  
×
×
  • Create New...