Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Wow, this got confusing. So I searched garrett official website to get the measurements of a GT2860-9 and it turns out the GT2860-7 that GCG apparently have are the same measurements as listed GT2860-9 on the garrett website.. I don't know how that works but numbers shouldn't lie.. Right?

Edit:

The gcg -7 are the following:

Inductor- 47.2

Exductor- 60.1

That sounds like a -9 ?

Edited by hazjaz

Sorry guys, it wont let me edit the above post.

After a few more hours of reading through threads on this forum I have come to the realisation that the -7s are GT2860-7 (707160-7) and the -9s are GT2859R-9 (707160-9). Going off the stats on the Garrett website, the -7 is a bigger turbo? In that case why is the -9 the one with the better performance and able to push more power easier?

GT2860-7 (707160-7)

COMPRESSOR

Ind Whl Dia(mm) - 44.60

Exd Whl Dia(mm) - 60.10

Trim - 55

A/R - 0.42

TURBO

Whl Dia(mm) - 53.90

Trim - 62

A/R - 0.64

GT2859R-9 (707160-9)

COMPRESSOR

Ind Whl Dia(mm) - 44.50

Exd Whl Dia(mm) - 59.40

Trim - 56

A/R - 0.42

TURBO

Whl Dia(mm) -53.90

Trim - 62

A/R - 0.64

If anyone can clear this up for me that would be great, based on the read I have done -9 is the ones I want, but turns out they are actually smaller.. In which case -7 would have more potential?

Edited by hazjaz

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/423175-r34-gtr-turbo-upgrade-needing-advice/#entry6811557

I know this will seem like you are going around in circles but the information has been given to you in a user friendly way.

The flow potential of the -9 is higher than the -7.

It really is this simple;

After 'response' on a 2.6 = -9 (330 rwkw or so or squeeze 350 + on E85 on a 'normal' setup) *350 plus on 98

If you can put up with a lethargic result for more top end (360-380) on a 2.6 = -5's.

Stroker = -5's

3.0 with a bulldog curve = -5's

-10's/RS's = in the bin.

*Well setup cars are the exception.

Thanks for the reply guys. I will be going for the -9s. I'm sure if I quote the model number and ask for the HKS GTSS equivalent I will be getting the right ones.

-7s seem a bit out of a waste of time unless you're chasing a replacement

Edited by hazjaz

Sorry guys, no edit button again for the above post. But after reading about the different sizes listed by garrett I went into the technical drawings and they look identical apart from the turbo outlet. Is the design of this the advantage of the -9s? Picking up the turbos tomorrow so just want to make sure 100% that I am buying the right ones.

-7

http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/sites/default/files/default_images/turbogroup/drawing/Garrett_GT2860R_707160_7_new.pdf

-9

http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarrett/sites/default/files/default_images/turbogroup/drawing/Garrett_GT2859R_707160_9_780371_1_new.pdf

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/topic/423175-r34-gtr-turbo-upgrade-needing-advice/#entry6811557

I know this will seem like you are going around in circles but the information has been given to you in a user friendly way.

The flow potential of the -9 is higher than the -7.

That's right!

-7's and -9's have the same size in specs.

From memory when speaking to Racepace, the reason why the -9's have better top end is due to the configuration of the turbine blades.

Ones longer and the other shorter (the shorter blade allowing more air to flow through).

Also to do with the pitch angle of the turbine blades.

It's at a certain degree to allow more air.

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

    • Well the install is officially done. Filled with fluid and bled it today, but didn't get a chance to take it on a test drive. I'll throw some final pics of the lines and whatnot but you can definitely install a DMAX rack in an R33 with pretty minor mods. I think the only other thing I had to do that isn't documented here is grind a bit of the larger banjo fitting to get it to clear since the banjos are grouped much tighter on the DMAX rack. Also the dust boots from a R33 do not fit either fyi, so if you end up doing this install for whatever reason you'll need to grab those too. One caveat with buying the S15 dust boots however is that the clamps are too small to fit on the R33 inner tie rod since they're much thicker so keep the old clamps around. The boots also twist a bit when adjusting toe but it's not a big deal. No issues or leaks so far, steering feels good and it looks like there's a bit more lock now than I had before. Getting an alignment on Saturday so I'll see how it feels then but seems like it'll be good to go       
    • I don't get in here much anymore but I can help you with this.   The hole is a vent (air relief) for the brake proportioning valve, which is built into the master cylinder.    The bad news is that if brake fluid is leaking from that hole then it's getting past the proportioning valve seals.   The really bad news is that no spare parts are available for the proportioning valve either from Nissan or after market.     It's a bit of a PITA getting the proportioning valve out of the master cylinder body anyway but, fortunately, leaks from that area are rare in my experience. BTW, if those are copper (as such) brake lines you should get rid of them.    Bundy (steel) tube is a far better choice (and legal  in Australia - if that's where you are).
    • EMU Classic. For what I need it to do I see no reason to upgrade. Link and Haltech would both cost an extra chunk of money for a lot of unutilized features
×
×
  • Create New...