Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi all , many here have been wondering what sort of power characteristics Garretts GT3071R (CHRA 700177-5023) turbo gives on mechanically std RB25DET's . By standard I mean the factory exhaust manifold so that the GT30 IW turbine housings can bolt up . In another thread someone mentioned they're making 270 odd Kw at around a bar of boost with Garretts GT30 IW 0.82 A/R turbine housing . I'd very much like to know where they climb into boost engine speed wise and how it all feels with part throtle driving .

Thanks in advance , cheers Adrian .

  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I made 230rwkw at 15psi with mine. Has internal wastegate and is on the standard exhaust manifold. The only thing I did to the manifold was port it out a bit and remove some casting marks and stuff. Other usual mods - Power FC, front mount cooler. Still on stock AFM and injectors.

I see full boost at 3300rpm and part throttle driving is good too. Pulls really good too even in 5th.

Pretty sure I have the .63 exhaust housing. Got if from GCG cos thats what they recommended.

Edited by SmittyR33

Thanks , I'd really like to hear from people using Garretts GT30 IW turbine housings so we can all get an idea what to expect from using the 0.63 and 0.82 A/R housings .

Recently I thought I'd found a HKS GT3037 Pro S type turbine housing in 0.68 A/R but it turned out to be the 0.87 version , possibly a bit large for 2.5L and the 71mm GT compressor .

Cheers A .

I made 230rwkw at 15psi with mine. Has internal wastegate and is on the standard exhaust manifold. The only thing I did to the manifold was port it out a bit and remove some casting marks and stuff. Other usual mods - Power FC, front mount cooler. Still on stock AFM and injectors.

I see full boost at 3300rpm and part throttle driving is good too. Pulls really good too even in 5th.

Pretty sure I have the .63 exhaust housing. Got if from GCG cos thats what they recommended.

That power doesn't really fall inline with the 'real' GT3071r. My bets are they supplied the cropped version.

OR.. Your dyno is simply very very conservative.

Sorry Disco to spam your thread but just to make it clear those figures the above has seen is not the norm from the real gt3071r.

Yes thats what I thought as well . You could get somewhere near that figure at the bleeding edge on a 2530 I'd think .

A while back ATP was claiming that the real GT3071R pulled up 500-1000 revs sooner than a GT3076R though the feeling overseas is that it doesn't work like that . Most people using the 3071R in the US have them on 2L fours so the results are not the same as you'd get on a 2.5L RB 6 - particularly in a 1370 odd Kg R33 .

Most people for cost reasons don't want to change their exhaust manifolds and until a twin scroll twin integral gate turbine housing becomes available (no time soon) the IW GT30 housings is all we have ATM .

In the other thread someone mentioned 270 Kw at 1 bar and I was hoping they would tell me what A/R turbine housing (assuming its a GT30IW one) and confirm the -23 cartridge number . I would think if it is the real one and the propper housing type it must be a 0.63 A/R turbine housing .

Given Mafias results (300 Kw from a real GT3076R 0.63 A/R) obviously the hot side can pass the gas but the burning question is can the GT30 turb/0.63 housing combination spin the 71mm GT compressor fast enough to make it feel good on a fairly std RB25 powered R33 .

If we can make this work it will bridge the gap between GT28BB turbos and the GT3076R IW . If not then the only answers I know of are not going to be affordable for many people .

Cheers A .

Edited by discopotato03
I made 230rwkw at 15psi with mine. Has internal wastegate and is on the standard exhaust manifold. The only thing I did to the manifold was port it out a bit and remove some casting marks and stuff. Other usual mods - Power FC, front mount cooler. Still on stock AFM and injectors.

I see full boost at 3300rpm and part throttle driving is good too. Pulls really good too even in 5th.

Pretty sure I have the .63 exhaust housing. Got if from GCG cos thats what they recommended.

That power doesn't really fall inline with the 'real' GT3071r. My bets are they supplied the cropped version.

hey guys

I have seen the turbo with my own eyes - Its a ground out RB25 rear housing fitted to the 3071.

If you remember a while back, I had a T04S 3076 with a ground out RB25 housing and water meth, and with 18psi I managed to squeeze out about 245rwkw.

It needs a real garrett housing strapped on.

Edited by The Mafia

Final cost delivered was $1800. Thats with the 14lb actuator and bracket and exhaust flange. After I paid I found a company equally as big that was $150 cheaper. Anyhow, there's a holdup on delivery to make sure it is the right 3071. Will speak to them tomorrow.

  • 2 weeks later...

Unfortunately I have to wait till I can get the time to do it as I work seven days a week. On the up side I have another car to drive around in January so may be ok then. Sorry guys. Parts are coming together slowly. Atp in the states are a big help, but don't talk to the receptionist, NOT helpful at all.

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



  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...