Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

So I got my gtx3076 gen2 v band, I think .83 housing on v-band setup, 6 boost, turbosmart wastegate Installed. 1 bar base spring, it’s a pro-gate lite 50mm on a rb25neo, unopened  

 

on mapping at base pressure it creeps to 1.35 bar. Is this a known trait of them ? 

Had some boost control issues too so need to narrow it down to either the hks controller which is difficult to set, or possibly check that a grub screw has not fell out of one of the ports to block off unused 1/16th npt ports, 

but if I get that sorted I aim to run 1.4 bar through the controller, is that likely to creep too or would that stabilise a bit in that I’m wanting to use that pressure rather than dump it?

i will get some details as I actually get time to go play with the car, left it at that on Friday and actually tuned the creep as a minimum but I want to have a regulated 1.4

Edited by Eager
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/474334-gtx3076-gen2-boost-creep/
Share on other sites

Got any pics of your gate + piping setup?  Gate takeoff angle and plumbing is a critical aspect to achieving proper control.

Graph showing how boost ramps and what control through the range without BC active would be useful.

Have you spoken with either the fabricator, or your turbo equipment supplier?

I have had a 6boost and 45mm and 50mm gate in the past, with a 3076, 7670 etc.

Never had creep, so not entirely sure what is going on there, but that setup should be able to hold a nice low boost if you want it to, it is certainly not 'normal'

What kind of ECU do you have? You can probably get better boost control with the ecu controlling a Mac valve.

NB wastegate comes off turbo housing

See below - Link + Mac Valve + Synapse 50mm W/G

 

2013.11.21 Boost curve 001.jpg

Quick pic I have of the exhaust side built up,

im thinking there should be a better angle to the wastegate joined on with a length of pipe? I aim to run 1.4 bar through the hks evc and hoping that may stabalis things, and bring the boost in harder 

150D46B2-7FA1-405D-BD00-E4952CC49BBF.jpeg.3861949394c6c47dde6ade55e1121505.jpeg

 

AD651B7C-5235-4347-A074-A7A0825BA34B.thumb.jpeg.d596fb2d01afbc8c96ed5811b8af2729.jpeg

 

 

currently just on the wastegate as we couldn sort the boost controller but I will sort that and it’s a hks evc 6 controller, on a power fc

Open to all advise lads, thanks

 

22 hours ago, Kinkstaah said:

I have had a 6boost and 45mm and 50mm gate in the past, with a 3076, 7670 etc.

Never had creep, so not entirely sure what is going on there, but that setup should be able to hold a nice low boost if you want it to, it is certainly not 'normal'

Greg for interest/comparison, do you have pics of your gate setup?  This may help with conversation here.

A lot of effort went into my 6boost gate takeoff angle but we found measured/logged boost pressure around 6 pounds higher than the rated (and bench tested) weight of the gate spring (50mm Pro Gate).  Boost was steady/consistent, just higher than we expected.  Solution was to run a lighter spring than what the actual target is.  Pragmatic but effective; and lots cheaper than more fabrication work.

From my for sale thread:

I had the default spring in the 50mm gate, but mine was a progate as opposed to a progate lite, so it was holding about ~9-10psi on gate pressure with a 14psi spring in the thing, on a 2.8L Neo at the time.

I was going to one day up the spring pressure to compensate but 18psi was 400kw at the time so I honestly never really needed to go more, but control at over 18psi was starting to get really wonky with a 9-10psi base spring pressure.

I wasn't really happy with the angle either. Its a T4 TS manifold with an undivided gate. The previous 45mm gate was on the turbine housing done by Scotty here. I was able to run as little as 4psi through that (and up to 25psi with a 4 port). Coming from that, the 6boost felt terrible, but honestly functioned really quite fine in the real world.

6boost.jpg

IMG_20180602_130629.jpg

I agree - mine is functional too,  just found it annoying that it the observed boost level so out of whack with the spring rate.

Probably fair to say that with the engine/turbo combinations we really aren't legitimately targeting 1 bar boost though.

15 hours ago, Eager said:

 I aim to run 1.4 bar through the hks evc and hoping that may stabalis things, and bring the boost in harder 

currently just on the wastegate as we couldn sort the boost controller but I will sort that and it’s a hks evc 6 controller, on a power fc 

Open to all advise lads, thanks

 

AD651B7C-5235-4347-A074-A7A0825BA34B.thumb.jpeg.d596fb2d01afbc8c96ed5811b8af2729.jpeg

 

As per Johnny's comments, you need to make 100% sure the boost control plumbing is correctly hooked up.

That boost graph scale is terrible, but trend seems to be creeping from 3800-4800.  That's where your controller should be doing its thing and bringing up boost (and torque) in that range.

That said, how's it drive right now - does it put power to the ground through that range, or turn tyres?

Hi chaps

 

so tonight I got the exhaust vband released from the turbo and plugged a port on the wastegate, that was meant to be plugged with a 1/16th bung. So up until now I’ve actually just had the controller turned off

however, I’ll now attempt to set the controller over the next few evenings. As for driving, it drives nice, a touch laggy but unless provoked it puts all power to the ground without breaking traction. 

I get what your saying and that’s a fair point? Run a lower rated spring and use the controller to bring it up to 1.4. That may prove to be more steady

i looked at how the wastegate is mounted to the manifold, there isn’t a lot of room on there for a install that allows a more ideal mounting with easier gas flows

To add, I’ll describe my boost control lines if one of you could maybe confirm for me I’m correct ?

its a hks evc 6

on the solenoid, looking down on it, barbs out the top

Right barb, goes to inlet manifold

centre barb reads pressure from nipple on intercooler pipe, also T’d over to stock map sensor and To middle port on wastegate

left barb, goes to end port on wastegate 

 

included a pic of the manual and solenoid as described above

FB080612-C173-4978-AE58-55F7707E4D4C.thumb.jpeg.3760ef3655fa6ea5b628508c31bd01c1.jpeg

 

6C342863-107D-4B47-BC3A-37ADA0286354.thumb.jpeg.abfff5c69585da512ec721ef0ba6ad2b.jpeg

 

Can see here the grub screw was missing

EAE73048-39A2-4F8C-A357-74FBF70E2C42.thumb.jpeg.cf4c6c53a46883a5db808ebe9840d741.jpeg

now replaced the missing bung 

look ok lads?

 

Edited by Eager
1 hour ago, Eager said:

As for driving, it drives nice, a touch laggy but unless provoked it puts all power to the ground without breaking traction. 

I get what your saying and that’s a fair point? Run a lower rated spring and use the controller to bring it up to 1.4. That may prove to be more steady

i looked at how the wastegate is mounted to the manifold, there isn’t a lot of room on there for a install that allows a more ideal mounting with easier gas flows

It comes down to what you want to achieve with this setup. For me, traction is king.  Some want maximum mid range punch and enjoy the struggle to master throttle/skid control even on dry roads.

My particular setup allows for more/less boost via a dashboard knob, for driveability in various track conditions. (relatively easy process with an ECU that's newer/more advanced than the Power FC).

In your case, I think what you could try is to get that boost controller functioning, and have the boost come up to the targeted value earlier across that 3800-4800 rpm band.  Given that your target is 1.4 bar, and you're getting 1.35 bar from a 1 bar spring, it's probably fit for purpose.

End of the day, a rock steady flat boost curve might look good on a graph, but not give the desired driving experience. It's down to your preference. But play with the controller and see what you like from the result.

 

It’s a grip car so that’s what I’m after, and I’m guessing that progressive way the boost does come in helps that too,

I’ll try get the controller running. Does my plumbing make sense ?

1.4 is my target on 97 Ron fuel but if it seems reliable I’ll possibly try 1.5, i don’t want to forge the engine however so baby steps I guess. What’s the opinion ? On a safe level for a unopened neo

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...