Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 220
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The manual and PFC solved some issues then . Did you do any thing with diff ratios or are they ok ?

A/R I wouldn't like to guess because its not my money involved if you don't like the result . Its the same situation with RB25 Hi Flows and RB25 vs VG30 exhaust housings .

Latest info to hand , will use same cartridge as HKS version.

Cheers A .

I managed to find out the final spec of this GT3076R 52 trim turbo . It will use the same cartridge as HKS's 52 trim GT3037 and GT3037S so CHRA number 700177-5006 . It will have a port shrouded TO4E .60 A/R compressor housing and one of Garretts integral (internal) waste gate turbine (exhaust) housings .

The ask is going to be ~ 2G which while not chicken feed is not too bad considering you get the ported shroud comp housing , a propper integral waste gate turbine housing with T3 flange , and the waste gate actuator and mounting bracket . The closest thing would be a HKS GT3037 Pro S which would be considerably more expensive and only available with the 56 trim compressor wheel .

I dug up some power (potential power) figures from HKS and they quote 450PS for the GT3037S 52T . Interestingly the slightly different "S" varaint gains 10PS from its port shrouded compressor housing which is the main difference . So if PS is approximately the same as Hp then Kw potential equates to 337 . I would have thought a bit over 400 and 300 but I'm conservative .

One unknown at this stage is will this unit require a spacer plate between the std RB20/RB25 exhaust manifold so that the compressor housing clears the manifold casting . If anyone has a "real" GT3076R with the Garrett IW exhaust housing on the std exhaust manifold can they let us know if it fits with or without the spacer .

Brett at GCG expects to have these turbos here in March 07 . BTW they have available now an exhaust housing thats dimensionally the same as Nissan RB20/25 in .70 A/R for those that want a bolt on style housing for some of Garretts GT BB turbos .

Cheers all , A

Edited by discopotato03

How much would it be for them to convert one of these turbo's to an external wastegate housing.

Reason I'm asking is I have the HKS cast manifold and my options are to plate over the wastegate mount [block it off] or convert the turbo to external. I reckon the plate over the wastegate mount is cheaper, but then I'm not too sure what this would do to my airflow?

DP3 I'm definitely interested though, could be the exact turbo for the RB25. The numbers and specs place it somewhere between the 2835proS and the GT3076, so good performance right in the sweet spot for a road car, minimal lag, adequate top end.

The go would be to buy the turbo with the external type GT30 exhaust housing if you are already running a manifold mounted ext gate . I did ask Brett about the non gated housing option and I doubt it would be a problem for him to fit one but he's the one to ask . Bolting a plate to the manifold is not difficult to do if you go for an integral waste gate .

Integral gates are never going to be as simple as externals because of all the bits attached to the turbo make things fiddly in crowded places . I just have my doubts about getting away with externals if the cops go looking for non std bits . With a bit of effort the integral can be made to work and not look too life threatening . The trick is to make everything look as OEM as possible .

Size wise yes the GT3076R 52T fits just over half way between the GT2835 Pro S and the GT3076R/GT3037S 56 trim . A bit more turbine flow than the first and a bit less compressor load than the second . It certainly has the makings for a good 2L four or 2.5+ L six , IMO anyway .

Cheers A .

Rather not do that, just a plate and gasket would do. That way I can still use the mount if I ever want to. Weld is a bit like..permanent...lol.

Plus weld on cast would be more prone to cracking with use. You'd have to have the plate made out of similar material otherwise you'd have different expansion/contraction rates between the plate and the manifold. With a plate and gasket there should be sufficient 'slop' to allow for expansion/contraction.

yeah lol there is that. I'm pretty sure if i bought a nice new turbo i wouldn't really want to start welding shit on it straight away!

No, I wouldn't weld/plate the turbo. I intend to plate the manifold!! The turbo will be untouched.

No, I wouldn't weld/plate the turbo. I intend to plate the manifold!! The turbo will be untouched.

yeah i know. I was saying that regarding my suggestion before...

Edit: wait i think u may have mistaken what i was saying, i wasn't saying to weld up the External wastegate port on the manifold, i was talking about welding the internal wastegate on the turbo...

should be easy enough to get and external gate housing but what we really want is someone to buy and internal gate version and give us the good oil on outputs and response....so we can bludge off the knowledge.

One unknown at this stage is will this unit require a spacer plate betwewen the std RB20/RB25 exhaust manifold so that the compressor housing clears the manifold casting . If anyone has a "real" GT3076R with the Garrett IW exhaust housing on the std exhaust manifold can they let us know if it fits with or without the spacer .

I needed one for my real GT3076R with T3/T4 style turbine housing, which I assume the GT30-IW turbine housing would probably be based off the general style of.

I'd be very interested to hear how these go. I find it interesting that Garrett list their 52-trim GT37 as having an 82mm exducer.

That is because a "GT37" turbo is a GT37 turbine based turbo whereas a GT3076R/GT3037 is a GT30 turbine based turbo . Yes the GT37 turbos have either GT37 or GT40 series compressors ie 76.2mm or 82mm .

Try not to confuse turbine and compressor families , a "GT30" turbo does not have a GT30 compressor though a GT37 turbine based turbo can have a GT37 series compressor and is nowdays called a GT3776 . The 82mm compressor version is called a GT3782 .

If a GT30 turbine based turbo has an 82mm compressor its known as a GT3082R or a GT3040R because smaller series GT40 compressors are 82mm OD .

The one I mentioned has a GT30 turbine and the 76.2mm GT37 series compressor , Garrett call it GT3076R and HKS call it GT3037 . If they really wanted to get it right they would say 60mm 84T GT30 UHP turbine/52 trim 76.2mm BCI-18C compressor - bit of a mouthfull .

Cheers A .

That is because a "GT37" turbo is a GT37 turbine based turbo whereas a GT3076R/GT3037 is a GT30 turbine based turbo . Yes the GT37 turbos have either GT37 or GT40 series compressors ie 76.2mm or 82mm .

Try not to confuse turbine and compressor families , a "GT30" turbo does not have a GT30 compressor though a GT37 turbine based turbo can have a GT37 series compressor and is nowdays called a GT3776 . The 82mm compressor version is called a GT3782 .

If a GT30 turbine based turbo has an 82mm compressor its known as a GT3082R or a GT3040R because smaller series GT40 compressors are 82mm OD .

The one I mentioned has a GT30 turbine and the 76.2mm GT37 series compressor , Garrett call it GT3076R and HKS call it GT3037 . If they really wanted to get it right they would say 60mm 84T GT30 UHP turbine/52 trim 76.2mm BCI-18C compressor - bit of a mouthfull .

Ahh ok - I understand the turbine and compressor families, though evidently made an incorrect assumption when I was reading a compressor map that had overlays of different GT37s - I assumed that a compressor map which was titled GT37 would be for the different trim variations of the GT37 compressor wheel.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...