Jump to content
SAU Community

Lack of Power/Lack of Boost - RB26


Recommended Posts

Comp map shows peak efficiency around 22-24psi, which is roughly target boost. 

Oh and I should have clarified, 9kw less, but now has cams, so would have been more if it still had the stock cams in it. 

The point was that hopefully the cartridge is still be decent if it's spinning well enough to support that power. 

Anyway, the purpose of the thread was to help me determine what the lack of power and response was, thanks to all who provided suggestions and assistance, we know now the issue and will get it sorted :) Looking forward to having it running well again. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, ActionDan said:

 

Able to diagnose a turbo failure without seeing it/the car/knowing the rest of the setup etc? 

Where were you when I was chasing the issues that lead me to pulling it down and finding the problem. I could have used your magical diagnostic powers lol ;D

 

You're the 1 who has said your turbo has failed not me? 

Im telling you why and i can almost guarantee Its just the usual problem. 

Compressor maps dont mean a thing. Looked at the new maps garrett supply now? 

They incorporate TURBINES into the equation and give you a compressor flow based on turbine selection.... Gee I wonder why they did That???

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Kinkstaah said:

Other than stealthiness there's really no reason to buy more twins nowadays. If you buy two new twins, you could buy a single + manifold/fab to fit that for the same money.

Obviously cheaper if you replace it by buying one single, but then again the real savings are in known good second hand turbos ;)

Still curious how a turbo can fail causing only a 9kw loss though? Maybe just detune the thing to 300kw and drive it around for awhile.


New set of -5s are $2500, a Borgwarner EFR is $2600 minimum, $1300 for a manifold and then your intake piping, exhaust piping, lines and fittings... Not even slightly the same money.

My two cents is, you've bought ANOTHER set of second hand turbos after your first set of second hand turbos failed? Not a great idea... Rebuild your original ones or go a single would be your most reliable options.

Also, your car would be faster with stock cams in it.

Link to comment
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
 Share




  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Maybe SAUNSW could see howany members would do a motorkhana day if Schofield's is still available for a reasonable price...
    • Skip the concrete, we just need to smooth a field. Mark knows how to drive a grader Duncan   I reckon 100x100 flat area for skid pan style, and then some sort tracks for rally... Duncan's already got a rally car on the premises to...
    • Well, yeah, the RB26 is definitely that far off the mark. From a pure technology point of view it is closer to the engines of the 60s than it is to the engines of the last 10 years. There is absolutely nothing special about an RB26 that wasn't present in engines going all the way back to the 60s, except probably the four valve head. The bottom end is just bog standard Japanese stuff. The head is nothing special. Celicas in the 70s were the same thing, in 4cyl 2 valve form. The ITBs are nothing special when you consider that the same Celicas had twin Solexes on them, and so had throttle plates in the exact same place. There's no variable valve timing, no variable inlet manifold, which even other RBs had either before the 26 came out or shortly afterward. The ECU is pretty rude and crude. The only things it has going for it are that the physical structure was pretty bloody tough for a mass produced engine, the twin-turbos and ITBs made for a bit of uniqueness against the competition (and even Toyota were ahead on the twin turbs thing, weren't they?) and the electronic controls and measuring devices (ie, AFMs, CAS, etc) were good enough to make it run well. Oh, and it sounds better than almost anything else, ever. The VR38 is absolutely halfway between the RB generation and the current generation, so it definitely has a massive increase in the sophistication of the electronics, allowing for a lot more dynamic optimisation of mapping. Then there's things like metal treatments and other coatings on things, adoption of variable cam stuff, and a bunch of other little improvements that mean it has to be a better thing than the RB26. But I otherwise agree with you that it is approximately the same thing as a 26. But, skip forward another 10 years from that engine and then the things that I mentioned in previous post come out to play. High compression, massively sophisticated computers, direct injection, clever measuring sensors, etc etc. They are the real difference between trying to make big power with a 26 and trying to make big power with a S/B50/54 (or whatever the preferred BMW engine of the week is).
    • Is the RB26 actually that far off the mark? Honestly from where I'm sitting a VR38DETT is not actually that much more advanced than the RB26. Yes, there is a scavenge pump on the VR38, it's smarter in a number of ways but it's not actually jumping out to me as alien technology. Something like a B58 or V35A-FTS on the other hand has so many surprising little design features that add up to be something that just isn't comparable. 
×
×
  • Create New...