Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

At least I drive mine, unlike your hoist queen.

How do you know how much I drive my car? 

In fact I bet its been driven more than yours between engine breaks and builds. 

 

16 minutes ago, Mick_o said:

How do you know how much I drive my car? 

In fact I bet its been driven more than yours between engine breaks and builds. 

 

and 0 times on the track.

At least I gave it a go, thrash the shit out of it at a few events and killed it. Now it's going to a proper shop to be built.

Anyhow, ignore list you go.

Dose, a proper shop? Before you claimed your engine was NASA spec and led everyone to believe you reinvented the wheel, when in reality you blew the motor due to your bicentric throttle control and the lead weight you have for a foot. Limiter bashing is for Honda drivers m8... it’d make more sense if you put a B18C in given the 100kw might just cope with your driving style 

 

18 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

Nah, just unlock the original and merge threads.

This!  I was gutted when the trolling started in my original thread which ended up with it being locked, now there is near 12 years of quantity over quality to browse on the topic - I'd take an obscene bit of pride in starting the longest running technical handbag fight on the interwebs!

Edited by Lithium
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
32 minutes ago, Lithium said:

This!  I was gutted when the trolling started in my original thread which ended up with it being locked, now there is near 12 years of quantity over quality to browse on the topic - I'd take an obscene bit of pride in starting the longest running technical handbag fight on the interwebs!

Lithium, the only people that seem to bicker & moan are the people that "DON'T" run EFR turbos.

The blockheads that have never used an EFR are the ones that have busted a sewer main in this thread. They just can't seem to stick within their oil spewing Precisions & big bubba Garretts threads 

18 minutes ago, BakemonoRicer said:

Lithium, the only people that seem to bicker & moan are the people that "DON'T" run EFR turbos.

The blockheads that have never used an EFR are the ones that have busted a sewer main in this thread. They just can't seem to stick within their oil spewing Precisions & big bubba Garretts threads 

I don't fully agree, sadly.  And given I'm the one that started going on about these turbos ~12 years ago its hardly that I'm biased haha.  There has been some pretty good conversation for, against and about from one side or another and it is still fairly frustrating that the conversation has been going for 12 years and there is still pretty f**k all data on them.   I don't blame people for having doubts.

  • Like 2
  • 2 weeks later...

anyone know what angle the turbo can sit at? the max angle im trying to aim the ass end down as much as possible on my wrx build. 

 

But its pretty steep and I don't want it smoking. I know the garrets are only good for 15 deg, does anyone know what the EFR is?

I think the only available guidance is from gut feel.

If the bearings were hydrodynamic bushes, I would suggest that there would be only a very small angle that could be tolerated. Hydrodynamic bearings offer no axial location at all and would allow the weight of the rotating assembly to float downhill and the thrust bearings would be carrying that load all the time. That would likely be counter to the design intent of the thrusts.

If the bearings were ball bearings (and EFRs are, right?), then things are probably a bit different. A ball bearing will offer some axial load carrying capability when placed on an axial angle. The rolling elements will work up against the side of the race. The manufacturers of all such bearings do provide some information on what's acceptable in that regard. So whilst BW might not have said anything, it might be possible to infer what the limits are from inspection of typical similar rolling element bearing datasheets.

Even without finding real values, the gut feel engineer in me says that you probably wouldn't want to be running higher angles than around 15°. That seems to be enough to me to make the rolling elements displace away from the centreline of the race. That gut feel may be just too damned conservative. For all I know they could be fine working at 30+°.

This SKF chart shows that single row roller balls can work at light axial loads up to angles a bit higher than 30°. After that you need to use more special bearings or arrangements. I don't think that paired (ie, two separate single race ball bearings) would change that except that obviously every extra bearing you add reduces the axial load carried by each bearing.

image.thumb.png.58438473073103a4dd0617079714d85f.png

 

So, my non-scienticious gut feel is to stay below 30°, and well below if possible.

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

    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
    • Yup but for me its the HR ! Cut my teeth on the old holden 6s in the day ! And here's me thinking in the day it was also the 300ZX and the Mitsubishi GT3000 ! All, as well had good lines, but always seemed to need finishing off, style wise.
×
×
  • Create New...