Posted By Dave Coleman on 11-18-2011 07:18 PM
How the hell did you get an S13 down to 2260 pounds?

   First, proof:

   I weigh 200lbs.

   Second, by removing and replacing many, many things.  I've had seven and a half years to perfect it, and I'm getting close.  My goal is under 2200 by April; this is an extremely doable weight IMO.

   Current weight savings measures:

• No interior panels, including dashboard
• No sound deadening
• Fiberglass Japanese no-name hood that flaps like crazy, pins only
• Seibon cf-wrapped fg trunk lid with a lot of bracing cut out, pinned and latched
• Braille 14115 battery
• Depinned harnesses and most relays and control boxes removed
• Crank windows (was an SE)
• Aluminum moonroof patch panel, guts removed
• Single Pro2000
• S14 manual seat belts
• Silvia front
• All aftermarket multi-link
• No e-brake
• Z32 rear uprights, trimmed of caliper mounting tabs

Posted By Lessendz on 11-19-2011 02:38 PM
yes they had different turbo's (both T28's housings tho)
the 360whp turbo is only slightly smaller tho and has done close to 400whp @ higherboost in other SR clones
to me the size alone shouldn't have accounted for the almost 1500rpm difference in boost response
Both were stock 13 Longblock's using the same eBay manifold

Problem is.. i swapped out that 420whp SR from a 13FMIC to a 14Vmount
the only changes made were...
1. greddy intake manifold
2. slightly bigger blitz IC
3. vastly shortened intake path/pipe/volume
4. external WG
5. custom radiator (holds 3-4x as much water as a stock Koyo

and transient response got slightly worse??
i was kinda pissed cause it was alotta of work & left me unsatisfactorily scratching my head..
my best guess is the greddy manifold??
prolly shoulda stuck to the stock manifold till the RPM's capabilities were increased beyond the stockish 7K..
water temps stayed consistently cool tho! (even in afternoon traffic)

Yea, I'd suspect the GReddy intake manifold as well. Also, a bigger intercooler could have increased your total charge volume even with simplified piping. I'm not sure how much bigger we're talking, so I could be full of it. Anyway, shorter plumbing helps response A LITTLE. It also helps reduce turbo-to-manifold pressure drop A LITTLE. Its a good idea, but don't expect it to change your world.

-Dave

Posted By Lessendz on 11-19-2011 02:38 PM

IMHO
heat isn't generated by the coolant cooling system
thus mods to that, i consider the back end of the equation (who's job it is to DEAL with heat generated by combustion & friction)
HOT intake air temps or even Steadily RISING intake air temps sure are gonna TAX yer cooling system eventually
ecu adjusts tune to deal with hot intake air temp..
less power = drivers gettin on it harder..
sound about right so far on the road to overheating?

people always think to exchange more heat.. and thus bigger intercoolers
they never think to mod their existing intercooler's exchange efficiency & heatsink capability
if Both endtanks are offset towards the bottom... flipping 1side give better flow ACROSS the core
Rarely do i see even a small shroud around the IC core to FORCE air thru
welding small aluminum strips into a shround around the core does 3 things
1.force air thru
2. increase mass (heatsink capabilities)
3. increase torsional rigidity ( helps when the IC takes cracks from speedbumps, aligator backs, etc. )

if u can afford the IC weight..
a BIG chunk of efficiency, flow & safety is right there to be gained

Ok, I get what you're saying, and yea, I generally agree with you. Treat the whole system, don't just try to shed heat faster. Getting cool air into the turbo inlet is also underappreciated, as it can directly improve boost response. 

I disagree with the strategy of increasing intercooler mass and strength, though. Mass gives you heat sink, but it also gives you mass. Why do you want to carry that around the track with you? Design the cooler to shed heat, not absorb it. This isn't drag racing, after all (we're not talking about drag racing are we?) Also, don't design your intercooler to take speedbump hits, position it so it never hits them in the first place. Carrying extra weight around the nose of your car is bad for turning. If you don't care about turning, get a Camaro, they're faster.

I like the flow divider in your intercooler inlet, but the big aluminum box around the core could probably be lighter. If it was Kojima, he's probably make it out of carbon, but I bet I could do just as well with campaign signs and zip ties...

Posted By Steve on 11-20-2011 02:50 PM

Posted By Dave Coleman on 11-18-2011 07:18 PM
How the hell did you get an S13 down to 2260 pounds?

   by removing and replacing many, many things.  I've had seven and a half years to perfect it, and I'm getting close.  My goal is under 2200 by April; this is an extremely doable weight IMO.

   Current weight savings measures:

• No interior panels, including dashboard
• No sound deadening
• Fiberglass Japanese no-name hood that flaps like crazy, pins only
• Seibon cf-wrapped fg trunk lid with a lot of bracing cut out, pinned and latched
• Braille 14115 battery
• Depinned harnesses and most relays and control boxes removed
• Crank windows (was an SE)
• Aluminum moonroof patch panel, guts removed
• Single Pro2000
• S14 manual seat belts
• Silvia front
• All aftermarket multi-link
• No e-brake
• Z32 rear uprights, trimmed of caliper mounting tabs

Very impressive. And that's with a giant cast-iron lump of a truck engine up front!

What do you mean you trimmed the caliper mounting tabs off the rear uprights?  You running drum brakes?

-Dave

Posted By Dave Coleman on 11-20-2011 09:23 PM

Yea, I'd suspect the GReddy intake manifold as well. Also, a bigger intercooler could have increased your total charge volume even with simplified piping. I'm not sure how much bigger we're talking, so I could be full of it. Anyway, shorter plumbing helps response A LITTLE. It also helps reduce turbo-to-manifold pressure drop A LITTLE. Its a good idea, but don't expect it to change your world.

-Dave

 

Both were Blitz cores.. Larger was Twice as Thick but same frontal dimensions..

other than the Greddy manifold the somewhat short hotpipe coulda been a bit bigger than 2.5" i suppose

and every custom setup i did after this one, i tried to use the biggest hot pipe size i could plumb nicely.. (2.75" - 3.125" ?)

Posted By Dave Coleman on 11-20-2011 09:32 PM

Ok, I get what you're saying, and yea, I generally agree with you. Treat the whole system, don't just try to shed heat faster. Getting cool air into the turbo inlet is also underappreciated, as it can directly improve boost response. 

I disagree with the strategy of increasing intercooler mass and strength, though. Mass gives you heat sink, but it also gives you mass. Why do you want to carry that around the track with you? Design the cooler to shed heat, not absorb it. This isn't drag racing, after all (we're not talking about drag racing are we?) Also, don't design your intercooler to take speedbump hits, position it so it never hits them in the first place. Carrying extra weight around the nose of your car is bad for turning. If you don't care about turning, get a Camaro, they're faster.

I like the flow divider in your intercooler inlet, but the big aluminum box around the core could probably be lighter. If it was Kojima, he's probably make it out of carbon, but I bet I could do just as well with campaign signs and zip ties...

i've done this mod multiple times.. some lighter some heavier

generally the heavier variants are so  DryICE holders can be incorporated..

with a FMIC... yes scrafices are made in weight distribution

but sOrry bOss... i don't call ALL the shots, positions,  or the working conditions

just do my best to reinforce & plumb them for friends

i feel Thin Flexing sheetmetal in the front of any stock 240 is Bad for turning as well...

might take some extra "Mass" of 4130 tube to fix that perhaps??

or ya COULD just make yer IC Torsionally strong & use it somehow as a stressed member

thus replacing the stock bumper support everyone ditches or hacks away at??

i've tucked FMIC's in better than instruction locations..

but even then... Minor collisions can easily twist & Destroy a core due to frontal proximity

Posted By Dave Coleman on 11-20-2011 09:35 PM

Very impressive. And that's with a giant cast-iron lump of a truck engine up front!

What do you mean you trimmed the caliper mounting tabs off the rear uprights?  You running drum brakes?

-Dave

 

   Yeah, that lump keeps the weight distribution solidly forward, although not nearly as badly as I initially figured.

   I figured I should've cleared up the whole trimmed tab thing; I'm running AZCar rear brakes which sandwich between the upright and wheel bearing and cannot fit with the stock mounting tabs in place.

Posted By Dave Coleman on 11-04-2011 02:22 AM
Don't worry about clogging this thread as long as we're exchanging useful info. Def, how do you come to this opinion about KW's front travel?

Just now saw this.

The only ones I've seen in person have been the KW v3s, and there is too much damper body above the spindle mounting ears. Maybe the ClubSports are shortened, but the v3s looked like you'd be giving up precious front tire travel in compression in exchange for a ton of front droop travel that you can't really use nor need. I'm sure you know this, but you've got to be able to get the tire to travel all the way to the pinchweld above it to make these cars work well, otherwise you'll be at 4x4 stock height with a 48" tall CG.

Posted By Stephen Ingram on 11-04-2011 09:27 AM

I feel pretty certain you can get just as much wheel travel out of the KW's as the Koni/Ground Control set up. The advantage of the koni is that they have some many off the shelf  inserts you can find something that works just going off length and shock body diamiter requirments.

Def, it sounds like you're having tire clearance problems. If that is the case you may want to try 2.25in perches and springs. I know that's what made the difference on my e36 with 265 street tires on it.

Also, I'm a long time koni fanboi but, the higher end KW are a better damper. The remote reservoir and larger piston diameter give you so much more compression dampening and a more consistent shock as a result. Most koni's (3011/2812 excluded) don't have near the adjustment range or consistency through out the given adjustment range. (Try dynoing a set of Koni yellows or races once for ever click of the adjustment knob and you'll see what I'm talking about.) They also occasionally very from shock to shock Makes quick set-up changes at the track a lot harder when each shock responds differntly to the same input change! The not uber $$$ koni's are also twin tube shocks. Leaving you with very little compression dampening and often a ton of rebound. Not the worse thing ever but not the best. 

I went from pimpy mono tube koni 3011's on my auto-x civic to ultra pimpy Moton Motorsports and the difference is astounding. The ride comfort provided when you hit a pothole and the shock blows off and moves it's fluid to the remote's and the consistent and noticeable changes each adjustment makes has me sold. The increase in pistion diamiter and dampening ability is worth the extra money. 

It's my understanding that the KW V3's (lower end) and the KW CS's (higher end) act very similarly. In short.. I'd make it work with the KW's. The last thing you want to do is spend money on one set-up and then realize you should have spent just a few more bucks the first time and end up buying twice. 

I don't have any spring interference issues. Not sure where you got that. I was talking about needing to let the tire travel all the way to the pinch weld above it, as in maximizing suspension travel up front. You can then run the car at a reasonable height to get the CG down.

OTS Koni Yellows up front on an S13 are horrid for travel, so I'm not sure I'd use those as a benchmark.

 Fair enough... After re-reading I see what you were getting at.