Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, MaximuSmurf said:

 Otherwise I'll just say f**k it and grab 2 x 38mm gates and go external setup which SHOULD get around the boost holding issue.

I posted something similar in this thread and Geoff from Full race said that it wouldn't make any difference.
Said it was more to do with the rear housing design than the internal gate.

Nice numbers by the way.

  • 3 weeks later...
4 minutes ago, sneakey pete said:

Is there an ETA or any more info on the 8474?

I haven't heard anything beyond what is already in here, I'd definitely update the thread if I have information which I'd be able to share.

The information already in here is basically; shown off at SEMA 2016, someone had one on an evo earlier this year that made ~10% more power and that's about all we know?

Hadn't really paid much attention to it but a mate may be interested if they're going to be a thing before mid year.

How are you finding it on the 2.8?   Must be pretty perky at that power level [emoji3]

Comes on much much earlier than I thought, very sketchy at this power. I usually have it on 29psi setting still a handful to drive tho.
  • Like 1

comparing the dyno charts from both Umair's youtube videos, the 9180 looks to be pretty much 900rpm later than the 8374 everywhere. same engine, both 1.05A/R housings.

8374 is at: 200kw at 4450rpm | 300kw at 4650rpm | 400kw at 5050rpm | 500kw at 6800rpm

9180 is at: 200kw at 5460rpm | 300kw at 5470rpm | 400kw at 5910rpm | 500kw at 5910rpm

it appears the 9180 is being brought on a bit more gradually, then peak torque being liimited by timing (unless wheelspin?) as well

 

great to see some proper back to back figures!

8374vs9180.png

Edited by burn4005
added picture
  • Like 1
1 hour ago, burn4005 said:

comparing the dyno charts from both Umair's youtube videos, the 9180 looks to be pretty much 900rpm later than the 8374 everywhere. same engine, both 1.05A/R housings.

8374 is at: 200kw at 4450rpm | 300kw at 4650rpm | 400kw at 5050rpm | 500kw at 6800rpm

9180 is at: 200kw at 5460rpm | 300kw at 5470rpm | 400kw at 5910rpm | 500kw at 5910rpm

it appears the 9180 is being brought on a bit more gradually, then peak torque being liimited by timing (unless wheelspin?) as well

 

great to see some proper back to back figures!

8374vs9180.png

I did change from a 5 speed to a 6 speed (with factory 33 diff) between those tunes, which would have a material impact on the dyno graphs. I.e. it's not as bad/laggier as the dyno shows it to be.

1 hour ago, usmair said:

I did change from a 5 speed to a 6 speed (with factory 33 diff) between those tunes, which would have a material impact on the dyno graphs. I.e. it's not as bad/laggier as the dyno shows it to be.

If the ramp rate is the same and the rpm is set up correctly that should have no effect

I did change from a 5 speed to a 6 speed (with factory 33 diff) between those tunes, which would have a material impact on the dyno graphs. I.e. it's not as bad/laggier as the dyno shows it to be.

How are you finding the 6 speed mate?? Was it a headache to convert?

Also just out of curiosity why is it dynoed in 3rd. I know it doesn’t matter much but just curious as every tuner wants to dyno at 1:1 ratio or close to it

the 1:1 thing is a bit of a wives tale.

Final drive ratio has an inversely proportional relationship to velocity, and a proportional relationship to Torque.. so the gear ratio completely drops out of the power equation. 

Actual torque is really high in lower gears, any torque plot is just a 'normalized' plot at 1:1 mechanical advantage... really just brake torque neglecting drivetrain losses

dyno in a high gear so the dyno doesn't have to work as hard to retard the engine (especially if you want a slow ramp on a powerful car), but also at a speed that is considered safe.

300km/h is a lot of rotating momentum.

Edited by burn4005
  • Like 2
3 hours ago, Buraz said:


How are you finding the 6 speed mate?? Was it a headache to convert?

Also just out of curiosity why is it dynoed in 3rd. I know it doesn’t matter much but just curious as every tuner wants to dyno at 1:1 ratio or close to it

pretty straight forward to convert although apparently when converting into a 33, you have to remove a part or not connect a part (or something...... my mechanic mentioned it to me once) so on idle/at traffic lights the box just rattles lol. bit annoying but you get used to it.

other than that its awesome for street use. Not so awesome for the strip or roll racing as I'm changing into 5th just before the line.

Also a bit worried if i break something then it would be a very expensive exercise to repair.

Also an FYI - if all goes to plan I'll be heading out to WSID on 11th April to see what this extra power does for ET and MPH. Stay tuned.

  • Like 1

Wouldn’t you be starting in second for roll racing anyway?

cause I was using 1st to 4th in the 5spd and now with the 6spd I’m guessing I’ll be using 2nd to 5th, so itll be the same number of gear changes 

11 minutes ago, r32-25t said:

Wouldn’t you be starting in second for roll racing anyway?

cause I was using 1st to 4th in the 5spd and now with the 6spd I’m guessing I’ll be using 2nd to 5th, so itll be the same number of gear changes 

Might try starting in 1st to get the 9180 to come quicker.  See how 50km reacts in 1st lol

37 minutes ago, usmair said:

Might try starting in 1st to get the 9180 to come quicker.  See how 50km reacts in 1st lol

With the 5spd I was at 6500-7,000 at 50kmh in first so was starting at 40 to make it useful, so with the 6spd I imagine it being even higher lol 

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

    • From the pictures I have when doing the job the flywheel is the same diameter, I don't think they're playing weird tricks like putting weights at the outer diameter to increase flywheel inertia or anything like that. The OEM flywheel is definitely heavier, but it's not a huge difference. Quoted weight savings of the clutch is 2 kg so I can't imagine the flywheel being lighter than ~7 kg. Kind of regret not weighing it before the clutch went into the car but as far as driveability goes I have no complaints.
    • HKS trigger kit should be very easy to integrate with a Link. It's a 36-2 crank trigger. Hard part is finding the motivation to take off the timing belt and everything on the front of the engine to install it. You also need to cut out a hole in the oil pump housing so the sensor can read the trigger wheel. Changing out the cam sensor for a 24 tooth setup is probably good enough but as others have mentioned depending on what underlying assumptions are changed it becomes more of a problem. Reading the crank state off of the cam is an abstraction that works in the general case, but if you have an edge case it makes less and less sense. There is a GTX2860 gen 2 that can take a compact 5 bolt housing so it's direct bolt on but I'm not 100% sure of what's involved. Peak compressor efficiency drops off a bit on these turbos vs -5s, 77% vs 73% but you get way, way wider region of operation. The -5s have a really strange surge line in their compressor map that is all over the place. If you think the hot side on the -5s aren't open enough you can try the Tomei T550B turbos which a local tuner seems to be happy with:
    • i need a complete tail light for my R33 GTR if you have please let me know.
    • I need a great maintenance workshop around Idaho, if you know one please let me know..
    • Hello friends, i have a good friend in Canada that looking for a good condition 1993 GTR around him please if one or know someone around you that is willing to let it go please let me know so that i can inform him.....Thanks
×
×
  • Create New...