Hot on the heels of yesterday's HKS Genesis Coupe comes another highly anticipated project by the well known Japanese tuning firm. Referred to as the R35 GT570 Racing Package, the turbo enhancement kit seeks to reducing exhaust resistance via new reinforced wastegate actuators, new boost controller, aluminum intercooler pipe kit and a front exhaust pipe without catalytic converters, which therefore makes it not legal for road use. The result is 570PS or 562hp and 540 lb-ft of torque at the wheels. The sound is amazing.
VIDEO: HKS GT570 Package for Nissan GT-R
Making 562hp
By Brian Potter
September 5, 2008 11:00 PM
Filed Under: Japanese, Nissan, Tuners
Comments
Joe_Limon
September 5, 2008 11:07 PM
"without catalytic converters" the performance gained from not using catalytic converters is so minimal that it does not justify the amount of pollution the car will create without it... for comparison, if you remove the catalytic converter on a street bike, the street bike will produce about as much pollution as a fully loaded Escalade...
BrianWCF
September 5, 2008 11:58 PM
From the point of view of a strict track car like the GT570, the amount of harmful emissions produced over the lifespan of the vehicle is irrelevant, despite how insignificant the hp gains may be. The converters are still a restriction and every tiny bit of released power is paramount.
Joe_Limon
September 6, 2008 12:39 AM
So? If this car is bought by an avid track driver they will probably be on track once a week and burn through a tank of gas every time they go out. Also, we are talking about a maximum of 5hp gain by ditching it, and with that 5hp gain we also happen to increase our emissions over 10x. It is still absolutely ignorant IMO.
radmeister
September 6, 2008 3:24 AM
Removing the cats also greatly reduces spool time on the turbos, which is a major gain. On a car like this it would be much more than a 5hp gain, perhaps 20, and the the difference in spool time would justify it.
Joe_Limon
September 6, 2008 4:29 AM
hahahaha +20 hp from removing the cat, uhm no. Read a book radmeister, if you could get 20hp from removing a cat that would be the number one recommended upgrade on a car. After all its basically free. About the turbos spooling up faster, maybe... but then again it is a twin turbo that already has fast spooling turbos. such a gain would been better seen on a car with a single large turbo.
Joe_Limon
September 6, 2008 4:31 AM
forgot to mention that the speed of your turbo spooling has very little if not any effect on a dyno pull since you are going to be full throttle throughout the whole rev range... also meaning that faster spooling does not equal more power.
pzigly
September 6, 2008 2:32 PM
So bacially the effects on the dyno are not much but when ur on the track, removed cats will help the car breath much better where u need it the most. Also when u get to higher hp levels, removing the cat is much more of an upgrade than doing it on a regular car.
jamaicandude
September 6, 2008 11:19 PM
You're speaking as if removing a cat on a car is an exact science. The power to be gained is in direct relation to how much of a restriction the cats were in the first place. Every engine has different characteristics, and some OEM cats are way more restrictive than others... so yes, it is quite possible to gain 20hp and more on some cars by deleting the cat if it was pretty restrictive before. Especially on a turbocharged vehicle. I own a Lancer Evo IX that currently puts down 507hp to the wheels through a high flow cat, and I'm 100% positive that if I put the stock cat back on it in the current state of tune, it'd rob me of at least 50hp. On a turbocharged car, restrictions in the exhaust can prevent the car from achieving the desired boost levels because of too much back pressure. And engine is basically a big air pump: the more air you can flow, the more power you'll have the potential to make. Restrictive intakes and exhausts can rob an engine of untold amounts of power... all the mods in the world won't help you if you can't get the air in and out. Like I said, it depends on the severity of the restriction.
Joe_Limon
September 7, 2008 7:46 AM
yes it depends on the severity of the restriction, and most modern cat's are not very restrictive. Which I why I am guessing only about a 5hp loss, think about it why would engineers put a overly restrictive cat on a turbo charged car? If you don't turbo charge it and put a less restrictive cat on, you will end up with a car that gets the same power is better on gas and pollutes less. I highly doubt you would lose 50 hp off of your cars present state of tune if you put the stock cat back on.
pzigly
September 7, 2008 11:40 AM
some engines are capable of high hp but they restrict them with the cats because they pollute. This is true with american muscle cars. The integra is a 4 banger but it has 2 cats.
jamaicandude
September 7, 2008 5:20 PM
Joe_limon, you might not think my car would lose 50hp but I'm pretty sure it'd probably lose more. This isn't a guess... I've done several dyno runs that prove it:
Earlier when I was making power in the 320-330whp range (still on the stock turbo), it became apparent that the cat was a weak link. The car had difficulty boosting over 20psi... the air ful ratio had to be set rich at 10.8-to-1 just to stop it knocking. Switching to the high flow cat freed up a peak of 18.2whp with substantial gains throughout the whole rev range. I was able to lean out the air fuel ratio as well, which improved driveability and fuel economy a bunch. We hit another wall after the cat, but the next weak link turned out to be the intercooler... trust me, it's all about airflow. To get that 507whp (well over 550whp on race gas) I'm running 29lbs of boost. This boost level wouldn't even be possible with the stock cat in place, and the restriction would hurt even more now since I'm running a bigger turbo and bigger injectors. All that air has to get out and the stock cat won't cut it.
jamaicandude
September 7, 2008 6:06 PM
Also, you are asking the question as to why manufacturers and engineers would put restrictive cats on turbocharged vehicles, but the answer is very simple:
Manufacturers are bound by several standards, in this case the most notable of which is emissions, and to a lesser extent noise. In order to meet these standards, the sometimes have to put restrictive cats and mufflers on. The aftermarket isn't so bound, so they're free to develop products which allow us to uncork the hidden hp (and inadvertently, pollutants and noise as well).
Also, I have another example of just how damaging exhaust restrictions can be: a friend of mine has an ER34 Skyline sedan with the RB26 from a GT-R in it, but it was unbearably loud on the street at full throttle. The car made 506whp on just 19lbs of boost. He installed a Blitz exhaust with a silencer which was very effective at cutting noise levels, but it drastically cut power as well. The dyno confirmed it: we couldn't get the damn thing to boost past 10lbs with the silencer in place. 301whp was the best it could do. Don't underestimate how much exhaust restrictions hamper power production in a turbocharged car.
Joe_Limon
September 7, 2008 11:03 PM
no that is not what I was asking. I was simply stating the fact that forced induction creates more pollutants per hp then naturally aspirated engines. So to make a turbo charged car, and then stick on a cat that would steal 50hp or more simply doesn't add up. You are getting worse fuel economy then a larger displacement naturally aspirated engine while getting the same power and polluting the same amount. All the while creating a more stressed engine, which in the long run limits the life span of your vehicle. This simply doesn't make sense, from what I have read your car is tuned from stock that your cat will only rob about 5hp. Some cars if you remove the cat will end up producing less hp because it interferes with the resonance in the exhaust pipes. This is what makes turbo'd cars comparable to larger displacement engines they produce just as much power, and are just as if not more efficient depending on the setup.
jamaicandude
September 7, 2008 11:26 PM
I think I understand what you are trying to say, but the point you are missing is that automotive engineers do not build cars to be tuned. Removing just the cat and leaving all else alone won't rob you of that much power because the cars are designed to be efficient around those parameters. However, the moment you start to turn the wick up then the stock systems can become inadequate. Removing the cats on a bone stock GT-R would probably net between 5-10hp, but once you start to up the boost and remap the ecu, then those cats and exhausts designed for the stock car will run out of flow at higher power levels.
You don't have to take my word for it. Cobb Tuning just released their AccessPort for the GT-R. According to them, a Stage 1 tune netted an increase of 63hp and 70lb ft of torque. Stage 2 is good for 70hp and 90lb ft respectively, but they recommend a straight exhaust or a high flow cat to achieve those numbers. This proves what I've been saying all along. The more air you flow, the more restrictive your stock parts are gonna become. Think about it.
pzigly
September 8, 2008 12:42 AM
You guys are hovering around the same point. If you take out the stock cat, it wont make much of a difference. Once you start to put performance parts you cant have the stock cat on unless the mods are minimal. In jamaicandude's case he has put major mods on his car. If he puts the original cat back on his car the programed ecu will not be programmed to use the stock ecu and therefore he would be robbed like 50hp. If he reprogrammed it then he would still be robbed like 20-30hp because the bigger turbos will be forcing huge air in but there will be no free flow exit.
Again taking out the cat makes minimal difference on a stock configuration but not a tuned configuration.
It all depends on the car though because I know that stangs get a lot of freed up hp with exhaust upgrades. Ford really restricted it.
IpsesNipse
September 6, 2008 9:02 AM
I cant imagine anyone buying one of those. Its as stock a brilliant everyday supercar. Then pay for a few extra bhp to destroy the whole deal with the car. I mean you can tune it but why would anyone make it illegal as a streetcar when its THE most practical supercar. There is no other car with 5 seats and a boot that accelerates in 3.3 seconds from 0-100kmh.
kenta
September 6, 2008 11:45 AM
I understand. IMO there is a lot people who wants to go extreme when they are talking about cars. And what they look for is something purpose built. This is what HKS does for those people. They don't use this GT570 every day for sure, but when they do they want it to be exquisite.
JTZ
September 8, 2008 3:08 AM
Its for those people who use it as their Track car?!? Think about it! if you got money to burn would u rather spank around a GTR or 599gtb?? ... besides atlot of people own rather tame cars for daily driving and fuel economy ... and their sunday track car is a GTR or something along those lines .. its common ...and smarter! where else are u going to maximize the performance of the sports car on the street? heck noo ... on the track!
IpsesNipse
September 8, 2008 6:26 PM
Yea but there are more eco friendly ways to tune it and then you could even drive it to the track now you have to take it in a towtruck to the track.
jay173
September 25, 2008 3:54 PM
not enough people will own gt rs for catalytic converter to be a problum dime a dozen car
jay173
September 25, 2008 3:56 PM
by the way it already includes gas guzzler tax so it doesnt matter
Add Comment
[cancel]
Latest F1 News
Schumacher speculation races ahead on Monday
Nov 24, 09 12:57 AM
Mercedes names Nico Rosberg as 2010 driver
Nov 23, 09 5:00 PM
No new F1 career for Schu - Brawn
Nov 23, 09 4:00 PM
Donington administrators welcome Ecclestone comments
Nov 23, 09 3:04 PM
Sauber's Qadbak takeover to collapse - report
Nov 23, 09 3:02 PM
F1 journalist to reprise naked jog
Nov 23, 09 2:59 PM
Le Mans on hold as Klien eyes F1 return
Nov 23, 09 2:53 PM
Merc GP structure not a recipe for tension - Haug
Nov 23, 09 2:49 PM
No Bulgarian GP, FIA's Todt insists
Nov 23, 09 2:45 PM
Argentine signs conditional USF1 race deal
Nov 21, 09 1:33 PM
