GTR Forum banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Im thinking of starting a project skyline but i wont to know which is the best way to go about getting over 1000bhp?
Who in the UK has achieved this and how? Grateful for any help.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,804 Posts
....and a deathly silence follows........
No-one has done it and proved it. Most proved so far is 750 bhp at the flywheel. Good luck:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
well most massive power Skylines i know of are R33's, dont know why but its true from my experience,and i think the basics would be to use just one big turbo, and upgrade the engine around that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
426 Posts
I have been assured that it is most efficient to use 2 turbo's cabable of 500RWHP each instead of 1 REALLY big one.

This is because its easier to overcome the lag of say 3240's than one T-88H...if the car is set up correctly.

But its a much simpler solution to use 1 turbo...pro's and can abound...

Personally to do a 1,000BHP single T conversion...I think I'd wait for Air Baring Turbo's to arrive!!! :D Much less lag.


PS I can't back the above up with documented evidence its just what I've heard. Please feel free to correct me.

Also if the car is for the track only I'd be looking into strange fuel concoctions for it like Methanol etc....

Stick in a couple of T-57's and 1600cc Bosch injectors and you'll be laughing!! :D (ECU with antilag might be needed too!!)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
766 Posts
alex h said:

PS I can't back the above up with documented evidence its just what I've heard. Please feel free to correct me.

same with me, its just seems from what i have seen that it is much simpler to have a single big turbo, as a big twin setup requires alot of work, and this person doesnt say about having any knowledge or experience with Skylines, its a totally new project
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,110 Posts
Getting 1000hp... it all depends on how you want it. If you don't care about drivability or reliability then getting that number is not so difficult (eg. T88H, NOS and supporting mods and you are there). On the other hand, if drivability and reliability are factors, then you're best getting that 1000hp with twins and no NOS. BTW, the single vs twin argument has been bashed around a few times before so just do a search on this topic if you are interested.

Your biggest issue will be finding the right person for the job. At that power level there are a lot of little things that make a difference - finding the right turbo(s) is one of the simpler parts.

Cya O!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,880 Posts
it is much simpler to have a single big turbo, as a big twin setup requires alot of work
I think getting 1000 + bhp out of anything is a lot of work.

Dreamer,

1000 bhp has never been proven in the uk. There has been a lot of pub talk but you never see them on the dyno proving it.

There are a few abroad, in Japan and Australia perhaps other places but this is not a project to take lightly and it will not be cheap. Maybe 30-50k probably more if you don't have the base car to build from., and depending on the reliability you want.

good luck.
Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,090 Posts
are skyline turbos sequential or pararllel?

if parallel, then why would having one bg one be any more laggy than two small ones? since it has twice the gas flow feeding it?

In yuor position personally, I would concentrate on egtting as much torque as you can from your engine, and seeing what that leads you to power wise.

Torque is what will make the car feel quick. Not saying that high power cars are slow though. :D

In imprezas ville, we have conisdered the merits of twin turbos. The main problem that has put us off is the relative diifulty of boost control compared with using a single turbo.

I dont see why this is the case. What would be wrong with using tow turbos, and operating one very large external wastegate, which air injector boost control?


Regardless of this,

big turbo, lots of boost, charge cooling, and a well set up map.

The internals to take all the strain, and if possible substantially higher rev limit will yield lots of power.

You will then need the cams to accomodate.

Personally I am anti no2. I dont like the idea of havign power on tap that comes via refillign a canister.

Arguably water injection gives you the same kind of thing, but I just cant see it that way. Nos to me, is like running race gas. It is non renewable, and so when it runs out, your car is no longer a 1000bhp car.

I like the idea of you put in fuel (and water), and the car can produce X all day long.

trouble is charge cooling properties of NO2 are great for det prevention. but thats another argument.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,880 Posts
Turbos are parallel.

I think the trouble with running a huge single is actually fitting it in.
You need to be a gas flow engineer fully appreciate this one but in my laymans understanding, if you have 2 big turbos, they are producing a nice pressure earlier than a massive turbo of twice the size. A turbo that is 2x the size will not flow 2x the amount of air due to the efficiencies of the moving parts etc..

Boost control is ok you just need some nice anti shuffle pipework in place.

It is expensive to build an RB engine to crazy power, and as it costs so much each tuner/customer has gone their own way to achieve it. When they finally achieve it they don't want to rip it all to pieces to find a better way to achieve the same thing so the route that they took automatically becomes the "best way " to do it.

With this in mind we have people like Mario developing cars to outrageous power levels, I believe he had a single on at one point. then twins. It is this development work that will lead the way but all the time they are using the car competitively don't expect too much info as the people racing against them also have access to the web.


"Personally I am anti no2. I dont like the idea of havign power on tap that comes via refillign a canister. "

it is only another thing to top up. I agree in principal but £for£ you don't get a cheaper power hike.

I would rather concentrate on making a nice reliable daily driver that can go quickly but if you are building a car that will tick over for 10 minutes warming up, be revved to 12,000 for 10 seconds and then tick over for another 10 minutes cooling down then nitrous becomes very viable along with the necessary mods to get enough fuel in and out of the engine.

I think that the idea with NOS on drag cars is to go as far as you can to make the engine strong and powerful and then add nos for the 10 second run.

and a big bottle would go quite a long way.

I'd like to point out that the above is my own opinion and I have nothing against any tuner manufacturer,developer.

suit of armour on

/Steve
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,090 Posts
completely agree,

would definitely use some form of NO2 on a drag car.

But since drag racing is not very big in this country, I just presumed that that was not the intention of the person who started this topic.

Understand on the turbo front what you are saying, not sure quite what you mean by anti shuffle to help boost control.

If anything I would have thought that one big turbo would be better for a given exhaust flow than two smaller turbos as you have immediately twice the friction in the cores alone. the aerodynamic drag is a different story, and since I didnt study much in the way of fluid dynamics, I wont even hazard a guess.

Would presume it was proportional to the square of velocity, so would think that that will be largest contributing factor.

Since smaller turbos spin much faster than bigger ones, again, would think the efficiency advantage would go to the larger turbo for a given boost.

of course, if the problem is simply fitting the damn thing in, then all this is irrelevant anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,880 Posts
As far as I am concerned the only real use for this kind of power is drag racing.

I have seen some really big powered cars on circuits and they don't seem to be able to use the power.

On most circuits they dont get out of 3rd gear. 600 bhp is about as useful as you need.

Obviously some drivers could use silly bhp on a track but it is straight lines where you can run up to really high rpm's as an average driver.

There is a problem with parallel turbos on an RB26 as one comes on song a moment before the other due to the straight 6 firing cycle ? this can cause something known as turbo shuffle where the wastegates come open in a sort of shuffling way I believe.
This can be cured with a custom manifold.

Controlling the boost is then straightforward. Or this is what I have been led to believe.

If this or the shuffle explaination is incorrect then someone please put this right.

Some of the fastest track skylines are "only" running 550 or so bhp. I say only like that as 550 is still a dream to a lot of us !!

have fun
Steve
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top