That or smaller cams (more mid less top).

I wish with the location of our turbos we could get QSV's in there....that'd be t!ts...

Tom

 

Why not cut an inch out of the header collector and then use the QSV as a spacer to get the turbo's back to there original postion?

Seams less work and cost than, a stroker/ cams / NO2 etc?

 

If this is possible, it seems to me to be the best option. Based on the dyno plot presented by Sound Performance Racing in another thread, it looks like it will have a bigger impact than going with a stroker motor at a fraction of the cost. Here is the link: https://my350z.com/forum/forced-indu...e-on-gt42.html. The QSV improved spoolup by something like 700-800 rpm. I don't think going from a 3.5L to a with a 3.8L stoker motor will buy you as much.

Also, when you go with a stroker motor, you have greater stress on the engine internals. At a given rpm, the pistons are traveling farther in the same amount of time, and thus will have greater speed and momentum. I went with the billit main caps to add strength, but that is another added expense.

EDIT, here is a dyno plot for a different car from Sound Performance's website. In this instance, the spoolup looks to have improved by about 300 rpm or so.

 

Its not the spacer itself that is the issue, there is a actuator that takes up a fair amount of space (think of a wastegate actuator and rod on a internally gated turbo...same thing).

And there just isn't much room for that piece in there.

Tom

 

plus you have to add in the cost of going to a custom dual scroll turbine housing x2 plus the ceramic coat... Its not cheap to retro fit. You have to build with the QSV in mind from the start.

 

+1

 

the availability of thermal coatings renders squirters obsolete.if you want a huge power suck keep'em.

and yes but no comment on gtm,i'm worn out beating that drum