supradanturbo Posted April 16, 2020 Share Posted April 16, 2020 Injectors. 1100cc plus. One walbro 485 will do it but be on its limit. Fuel pressure regulator. Teflon fuel lines front to back. Billet fuel filter. Flex fuel sensor. Also a decent stand alone ecu to control it all. A manual car will use less fuel to make the same power I did. As my set up has a lot of losses due to trans and torque converter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZtwin Posted April 16, 2020 Author Share Posted April 16, 2020 Injectors. 1100cc plus. One walbro 485 will do it but be on its limit. Fuel pressure regulator. Teflon fuel lines front to back. Billet fuel filter. Flex fuel sensor. Also a decent stand alone ecu to control it all. A manual car will use less fuel to make the same power I did. As my set up has a lot of losses due to trans and torque converter. I have recently purchased the Haltech 2500, guess I now need the complete radium Engineering mkiv supra fuel system.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gpro Posted April 16, 2020 Share Posted April 16, 2020 I have recently purchased the Haltech 2500, guess I now need the complete radium Engineering mkiv supra fuel system.. I recently fitted the complete radium fuel system. Highly recommended! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZtwin Posted April 16, 2020 Author Share Posted April 16, 2020 I recently fitted the complete radium fuel system. Highly recommended! Where's the cheapest place to purchase? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noz Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 What have you been looking at in 10 years of membership? If it didn't need rings fitted I didn't read it for about 8 years lol The other two were spent on battling people bashing NA-tuning Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bignum Posted April 17, 2020 Share Posted April 17, 2020 I use a Borg 366sxe on my track supra, really happy with performance and reliability, not sure if your 272 cams are abit aggressive for your goal though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZtwin Posted April 17, 2020 Author Share Posted April 17, 2020 I use a Borg 366sxe on my track supra, really happy with performance and reliability, not sure if your 272 cams are abit aggressive for your goal though. Can you elaborate "aggressive " ? Doesn't the cam profile simply determine when the power is delivered within the powerband? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bignum Posted April 18, 2020 Share Posted April 18, 2020 Yes exactly that, the 272s along with the turbo you require for your power goal will be coming on strong much higher in the rev range and to get full use of your power band you`ll need to be revving to atleast 8k which you can`t do on a stock bottom end, for circuit work you want a linear power as possible starting from say 3.5k upto 7.5k, this will give the motor more reliability as you`re not kicking its head in all of the time, all imo of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gpro Posted April 19, 2020 Share Posted April 19, 2020 Where's the cheapest place to purchase? I wouldn't say cheap but Real Street Performance gave me a good deal on full Radium fuel system and ID1700X injectors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZtwin Posted April 19, 2020 Author Share Posted April 19, 2020 I wouldn't say cheap but Real Street Performance gave me a good deal on full Radium fuel system and ID1700X injectors. Thanks Man, I have been talking to Russ over there at Real Street. The CAD dollar is crap today so hopefully by Black Friday it will have risen. Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZtwin Posted April 21, 2020 Author Share Posted April 21, 2020 Yes exactly that, the 272s along with the turbo you require for your power goal will be coming on strong much higher in the rev range and to get full use of your power band you`ll need to be revving to atleast 8k which you can`t do on a stock bottom end, for circuit work you want a linear power as possible starting from say 3.5k upto 7.5k, this will give the motor more reliability as you`re not kicking its head in all of the time, all imo of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mo Reviews Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 That graph doesn't look right to me. That turbo shouldn't be running out of puff towards the end of the power band at under 800hp... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Style Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 That graph doesn't look right to me. That turbo shouldn't be running out of puff towards the end of the power band at under 800hp... American dyno so big pinch of salt with those figures Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZtwin Posted April 21, 2020 Author Share Posted April 21, 2020 That graph doesn't look right to me. That turbo shouldn't be running out of puff towards the end of the power band at under 800hp... A/R was .81, could that be why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RajR34 Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 A/R was .81, could that be why? I think I’m being silly, but where is the spec of the car?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike2JZ Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 That graph doesn't look right to me. That turbo shouldn't be running out of puff towards the end of the power band at under 800hp... Hard to say without seeing the boost graph. But he's running that at 30psi (2bar). Most precisions with mid size A/R's start dropping boost on the high end (7.5k+), especially when running into the 2 Bar and beyond region. Would need to know what A/R the housing is, but his graph looks fairly normal to me. Again just assuming, but due to stock bottom end they could be ramping the boost in more progressively to help save rods as well. Here's a comparison between 6466 on two different stock bottom end 2J's. Red Line = Stock Cams, TT6, 2 Bar Boost. FSR Streetfighter Turbo Kit, Shell VPower Blue Line = 264 Cams, Auto, 2 Bar Boost, SRD Tubular manifold kit, Shell Vpower Not an exact apple to apple comparison, but it's still fairly representative of the differences in spool from stock cams & log manifold versus top end power from cams & tubular manifold. As Dan mentioned above, you will struggle on a 6466 to run 650whp whilst beating it around a track whilst using pump fuel. You would be at 1.7 Bar+ boost to make that kind of power, and things will get hot quick, especially on log manifold. If you have E85 readily available, then go for it. 6466 should be more than content to run 500-550whp with track abuse at a lower boost level on pump fuel however. If you really want 650whp for track usage, then using a 6766 or 6870 will be better. Can run less boost for that amount of power on pump fuel, and the spool differences will be marginal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZtwin Posted April 21, 2020 Author Share Posted April 21, 2020 Hard to say without seeing the boost graph. But he's running that at 30psi (2bar). Most precisions with mid size A/R's start dropping boost on the high end (7.5k+), especially when running into the 2 Bar and beyond region. Would need to know what A/R the housing is, but his graph looks fairly normal to me. Again just assuming, but due to stock bottom end they could be ramping the boost in more progressively to help save rods as well. Here's a comparison between 6466 on two different stock bottom end 2J's. http://www.mkivsupra.net/vbb/attachment.php?attachmentid=235446&stc=1&d=1587491844 Red Line = Stock Cams, TT6, 2 Bar Boost. FSR Streetfighter Turbo Kit, Shell VPower Blue Line = 264 Cams, Auto, 2 Bar Boost, SRD Tubular manifold kit, Shell Vpower Not an exact apple to apple comparison, but it's still fairly representative of the differences in spool from stock cams & log manifold versus top end power from cams & tubular manifold. As Dan mentioned above, you will struggle on a 6466 to run 650whp whilst beating it around a track whilst using pump fuel. You would be at 1.7 Bar+ boost to make that kind of power, and things will get hot quick, especially on log manifold. If you have E85 readily available, then go for it. 6466 should be more than content to run 500-550whp with track abuse at a lower boost level on pump fuel however. If you really want 650whp for track usage, then using a 6766 or 6870 will be better. Can run less boost for that amount of power on pump fuel, and the spool differences will be marginal. Thanks Mike2JZ. Awesome comparison!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bignum Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 What boost pressure are you aiming for? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bailey Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Hard to say without seeing the boost graph. But he's running that at 30psi (2bar). Most precisions with mid size A/R's start dropping boost on the high end (7.5k+), especially when running into the 2 Bar and beyond region. Would need to know what A/R the housing is, but his graph looks fairly normal to me. Again just assuming, but due to stock bottom end they could be ramping the boost in more progressively to help save rods as well. Here's a comparison between 6466 on two different stock bottom end 2J's. http://www.mkivsupra.net/vbb/attachment.php?attachmentid=235446&stc=1&d=1587491844 Red Line = Stock Cams, TT6, 2 Bar Boost. FSR Streetfighter Turbo Kit, Shell VPower Blue Line = 264 Cams, Auto, 2 Bar Boost, SRD Tubular manifold kit, Shell Vpower Not an exact apple to apple comparison, but it's still fairly representative of the differences in spool from stock cams & log manifold versus top end power from cams & tubular manifold. As Dan mentioned above, you will struggle on a 6466 to run 650whp whilst beating it around a track whilst using pump fuel. You would be at 1.7 Bar+ boost to make that kind of power, and things will get hot quick, especially on log manifold. If you have E85 readily available, then go for it. 6466 should be more than content to run 500-550whp with track abuse at a lower boost level on pump fuel however. If you really want 650whp for track usage, then using a 6766 or 6870 will be better. Can run less boost for that amount of power on pump fuel, and the spool differences will be marginal. Is that blue line our dyno graph Mike? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mo Reviews Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Hard to say without seeing the boost graph. But he's running that at 30psi (2bar). Most precisions with mid size A/R's start dropping boost on the high end (7.5k+), especially when running into the 2 Bar and beyond region. Would need to know what A/R the housing is, but his graph looks fairly normal to me. Again just assuming, but due to stock bottom end they could be ramping the boost in more progressively to help save rods as well. Here's a comparison between 6466 on two different stock bottom end 2J's. http://www.mkivsupra.net/vbb/attachment.php?attachmentid=235446&stc=1&d=1587491844 Red Line = Stock Cams, TT6, 2 Bar Boost. FSR Streetfighter Turbo Kit, Shell VPower Blue Line = 264 Cams, Auto, 2 Bar Boost, SRD Tubular manifold kit, Shell Vpower Not an exact apple to apple comparison, but it's still fairly representative of the differences in spool from stock cams & log manifold versus top end power from cams & tubular manifold. As Dan mentioned above, you will struggle on a 6466 to run 650whp whilst beating it around a track whilst using pump fuel. You would be at 1.7 Bar+ boost to make that kind of power, and things will get hot quick, especially on log manifold. If you have E85 readily available, then go for it. 6466 should be more than content to run 500-550whp with track abuse at a lower boost level on pump fuel however. If you really want 650whp for track usage, then using a 6766 or 6870 will be better. Can run less boost for that amount of power on pump fuel, and the spool differences will be marginal. Thanks for the clarification Mike. Interesting to note the minimal effect the cams make on the torque... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZtwin Posted April 21, 2020 Author Share Posted April 21, 2020 I guess I'll be going to Upgrading my fuel system to allow E85 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike2JZ Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Is that blue line our dyno graph Mike? Yup Thanks for the clarification Mike. Interesting to note the minimal effect the cams make on the torque... I'd take it with a pinch of salt. The blue graph has progressive boost implemented due to stock bottom end, wheras red graph was asking for boost as hard and as soon as it could be mechanically delivered. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Bailey Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Yup Ahhh cool that’s really interesting to see. Think it was 1.9bar, not that it probably makes much difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bignum Posted April 21, 2020 Share Posted April 21, 2020 Must have me on mute lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZtwin Posted April 21, 2020 Author Share Posted April 21, 2020 What boost pressure are you aiming for? 18-20psi on pump 29max on E85 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.