Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Guys,

Im about to order my T04Z from Garrett and I woud like to know what peoples recommendations for the exhaust housing size are

My engine specs are:

RB26 Head

HKS 272 Step 1 Cams IN and EX

RB30 Bottom End

CR 8.5-8.8

Rev Limit 8000rpm

Cheers Guys.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/93599-garrett-t04z-which-housing/
Share on other sites

Guys,

Im about to order my T04Z from Garrett and I woud like to know what peoples recommendations for the exhaust housing size are

My engine specs are:

RB26 Head

HKS 272 Step 1 Cams IN and EX

RB30 Bottom End

CR 8.5-8.8

Rev Limit 8000rpm

Cheers Guys.

.84 split pulse

.81 single pulse

id go .84

0.81 suits the 26 perfectly so will be abit small on a 3L i reckon....

Hey StageZilla,

What is wrong with the .84 split pulse? Why is the .81 far better?

Just really interested as there have been a few threads about these turbo's in respect to response. R31Nismoid said these turbo's may be able to make the 500rwkw mark; what exhaust housing would you use for this application? And will it loose its 2530 type response?

although i dont remember outwardly saying 500rwkw anywhere  :)

Yea, you did. Quote below.

With fuel and boost 700rwhp i think it would get close too with more boost. I dont think pulp will achieve it... but you never know

It was the post about the TO4Z results.

I used the "SEARCH" button. You must be proud of me! :P

Edited by manage13
Hey StageZilla,

What is wrong with the .84 split pulse? Why is the .81 far better?

Just really interested as there have been a few threads about these turbo's in respect to response. R31Nismoid said these turbo's may be able to make the 500rwkw mark; what exhaust housing would you use for this application? And will it loose its 2530 type response?

i was only going by the hks t04z's sorry, they only do the 3 housings, 0.64, 0.81, and 1.0 i think, and as r31nismoid said it depends on ya manifold and whether it is split pulse.

cheers

Brad

  • 3 weeks later...

Just to tack on to the end of this thread, does anyone have any experience with the Garrett T04Z with the 0.96 exhaust? I assume power would be very similar to wrxkilla's T04R dyno graph from a few weeks back, and same sort of lag/response?

Talking about a 2.6L too, not a 3L :)

Edited by Amaru
  • 1 year later...

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

    • Very decent bit of kit. Definitely black it out I reckon.  
    • Because people who want that are buying euros. The people with the money to buy the aftermarket heads and blocks aren’t interested in efficiency or making -7 power, they’re making well over 1,000hp and pretty much only drive them at full throttle  best way to way make money is know your customer base and what they want and don’t spend money making things they don’t want. 
    • It's not, but it does feel like a bit of a missed opportunity regardless. For example, what if the cylinder head was redesigned to fit a GDI fuel system? It's worth like two full points of compression ratio when looking at modern GDI turbo vs PFI turbo. I'm pretty reliably surprised at how much less turbo it takes to make similar power out of a modern engine vs something like an RB26. Something with roughly the same dimensions as a -7 on an S55 is making absolutely silly power numbers compared to an RB26. I know there's a ton of power loss from things like high tension rings, high viscosity oil, clutch fan, AWD standby loss, etc but it's something like 700 whp in an F80 M3 vs 400 whp in an R33 GTR. The stock TF035HL4W turbos in an F80 M3 are really rather dinky little things and that's enough to get 400 whp at 18 psi. This just seems unwise no? I thought the general approach is if you aren't knock limited the MFB50 should be held constant through the RPM range. So more timing with RPM, but less timing with more cylinder filling. A VE-based table should accordingly inverse the VE curve of the engine.
    • I've seen tunes from big name workshops with cars making in excess of 700kW and one thing that stood out to me, is that noone is bothering with torque management. Everyone is throwing in as much timing as the motor can take for a pull. Sure that yields pretty numbers on a dyno, but it's not keeping these motors together for more than a few squirts down the straight without blowing coolant or head gaskets. If tuners, paid a bit more attention and took timing out in the mid range, managed boost a bit better, you'll probably see less motors grenading. Not to name names, or anything like that, but I've seen a tune, from a pretty wild GT-R from a big name tuner and I was but perplexed on the amount of timing jammed into it. You would have expected a quite a bit less timing at peak torque versus near the limiter, but there was literally 3 degrees of difference. Sure you want to make as much as possible throughout the RPM range, but why? At the expense of blowing motors? Anyhow I think we've gone off topic enough once again lol.
    • Because that’s not what any of them are building these heads or blocks for. It’s to hold over over 1000hp at the wheels without breaking and none of that stuff is required to make power 
×
×
  • Create New...