Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys,

So has anyone had any experience with the new (I presume) GCG turbo for the RB25?

GCG code = XTR-GTST-GT3071R

specs are based on cropped turbine garret 3071 in a 0.7 rear housing that bolts up to standard dump.

XTRGTST-GT3071R 700177

front = 71.0mm 56 0.50

rear = 56.5mm 84 0.70 Int-Wastegated

My fears that this turbo would boost creep like the 3071 with the 0.64 rear housing?

Purpose would be for a stock RB25 running 0.9 to 1.0bar. Goal is to achieve ~ 230rwkw with wide power band.

Would the 0.7 rear housing be large enough to allow this flow without boost creep or being too sensitive to throttle ?

On another note what is the A/R of the stock R33 rear housing?

post-23086-1240455447_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/266708-new-ish-gcg-3071-based-gtst-turbo/
Share on other sites

i just enquired about this turbo. they dont do it anymore. this is GCG's response.

We don't do that turbocharger anymore as we found the GTS-T style exhaust housing was too restricting when pushing over 15psi of boost. We use a genuine Garrett exhaust housing and supply a dump pipe with the kit.
Edited by Munkyb0y

yes i did lol

Total price on this kit is $3070.00 Inc GST. This uncludes:

-GT3071R Turbocharger (450hp)

-20mm Spacer Plate

-Gaskets

-Studs & Nuts

-Silicon Elbow 2" to 2.5" 90 Degree

-Oil & Water line kit

-Stainless Split Dump Pipe to suit factory or aftermarket front pipe.

The ONLY thing you need to do after fitment of this kit is make an air inlet pipe.

LOL I rang them about the same thing today, 3071 or 3076 for $3070 complete kit(except for intake pipe)

For your aim get hypergear or someone to put a GT2871 52trim CHRA into an r34(OP6) housing! around 1550 bolt on

Edited by Ryan1600
$3070 is a bit rich.

I'd really like a 3071 with 0.82 internal gate rear. I'm thinking that 230rwkw would be really pushing a 2871.

Once you factor in a spacer, dump pipe and so on, its actually pretty decent pricing and a true bolt on.

1500 for a hyper gear (if its bush bearing) vs 2100 (ball bearing) - no braining where to spend the $$$

Once you factor in a spacer, dump pipe and so on, its actually pretty decent pricing and a true bolt on.

1500 for a hyper gear (if its bush bearing) vs 2100 (ball bearing) - no braining where to spend the $$$

1500 for a BB 2871 52 trim AKA GTRS SPEC, not the hypergear core, a garrett core... which should do 230 easy

hypergear spec starts at 800

Edited by Ryan1600

simonr32 ran one with very good results.

There were slight creep issues which were resolved by opening up the port slightly (retaining the same flap from memory) and possibly changing the dump. he made somewhere in the 280rwkw range.

Overall they are a good unit, same cart as the hks 2835 proS.

If you are going the uncropped turbine 3071 and want to retain IW then .82. Don't .63 it.

simonr32 ran one with very good results.

There were slight creep issues which were resolved by opening up the port slightly (retaining the same flap from memory) and possibly changing the dump. he made somewhere in the 280rwkw range.

Overall they are a good unit, same cart as the hks 2835 proS.

If you are going the uncropped turbine 3071 and want to retain IW then .82. Don't .63 it.

yeah when GCG did those they were almost identical to a 2835...

$3070 is a bit rich.

I'd really like a 3071 with 0.82 internal gate rear. I'm thinking that 230rwkw would be really pushing a 2871.

MTQ engine systems can hook ya up and fit a larger gate aswell. i have no boost control issues with a .82

Ive left it in ATS's hands to build my garrett gt30 using a large 6bolt nissan housing (modified op6 I think) and front 45v3 housing, highly modified plus longer snout

they rate it at 270rwkw and stated several times on different days, different employees, that it had FAR less lag than the GCG equivalent highflow turbo.

will post specs and details when I get the GT30 next week with new lines.

Yeah I've pretty much settled on 2871 based highflow in OP6 housing. Now I'm looking around for an OP6 housing - it's taking some looking that's for sure.

A mate had 2 of these about 18months ago....sold both.

i just bought one of these off CRD

* Garrett GT3071R with 70mm inlet and 0.64 A/R turbine housing (genuine Garrett housings)

* T2 to T3 flange adapter flange / turbo spacer

* Gasket kit

* T3 gasket

* Stud kit turbine inlet

* Stud kit turbine outlet

* Oil drain tube and gasket

* Oil drain hose

* Hose clamps

* Oil inlet fitting

* Copper washers

* Actuator bracket

* 12 psi Actuator

* Oil lines

* Water lines

* Water line adapter fitting

* High temp ceramic coated twin outlet dump / engine pipe suit Garrett turbine housing

TOTAL KIT PRICE $2470.00

and the silicone elbow for another $100. its a modified gt3071r with all the genuine garret housings, CRD have tinkered with the housing sizes and they say have found the best combo for an rb25det! lose practically no response and gain a shitload of power! iv ordered one and should be here within the week!

I have the 3071 with .82 housing and have maxed out the compressor at 264rwkw. Sure, there may be a couple of kilo watts in there still but that's pretty much all you'll get. The modified RB25 turbos are vastly overated and I only wish I could have all my money back over the three years I spent trying to get the 250-270 kws everybody said they are good for. They are crap. Not just me either as I have spoken to others that failed to hit more than 220-230.

Daniel I hate to say it but I think your going to be so disappointed in that turbo as it is not much different to the standard turbo. Existance, your on the right track but you will realise that there may be issues with boost control with the .64 housing. If you can get them to open up the wastegate and install a bigger flap. That turbo should be ok for 260 but the turbine housing is the limiting factor. With the bigger wastegate it will flow more exhaust and be fully capable of maximum compressor flow.

really? how can the smaller housing cause boost creep? :blush: i did so much reading before i paid for it and didnt find anyone with this problem.

the guys from crd said they had done alot of testing and fiddling etc. surely they would have noticed something as serious as boost creep?

iv got all the supporting mods to hit 250rwkw, that is my goal for 16psi and ill be happy ;)

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 i found that alot of parts can be wrong or "very" hard to get the real right one. I already bought some brakes years ago on me "old" GT calipers and they were wrong too 😄  I told them too. Even send them pictures...but they said "EBC catalogue has them on my car... So i dont know what their answer will be. I call monday them and let them know that they are really not on my car. If they were they would be already on a car...
    • Welcome to Skyline ownership. Yes, it is entirely possible parts websites get things wrong. There's a whole world of inaccuracies out there when it comes to R34 stuff (and probably 33 and 32). Lots of things that are 'just bolt on, entirely interchangable' aren't. Even between S1 and S2 R34's. Yes they have a GTT item supposedly being 296mm. This is incorrect. I would call whoever you got them from and return them and let them know the GTT actually uses 310mm rotors. Depending on where you got them from your experience and success will obviously vary.
    • Hi...a bit a "development" on the brakes. I spoke to the guys where i get brakes from...and they are saying that 296mm EBC are for R34 GT-T. I then went to their site: https://www.ebcbrakes.com/vehicle/uk-row/NISSAN/Skyline (R34)/ and search for my car(R34 GT 1998 - it has GTT brakes) and it show me this USR1229 number and they are rly 296mm rotors... So now iam rly confused... The rotors i have now on the car are 310mm asi shown... So where is the problem? Does the whole EBC got it wrong or my calipers are just...idk know what?  
    • Oh What the hell, I used to get a "are you sure you want to reply, this thread is XX months old" message. Maybe a software update remove that. My bad.
    • This is a recipe for disaster* Note: Disaster is relative. The thing that often gets lost in threads like this is what is considered acceptable poke and compromise between what one person considers 'good' looks and what someone else does. The quoted specs would sit absurdly outside the guards with the spacers mentioned and need  REALLY thin tyres and a LOT of camber AND rolling the guards to fit. Some people love this. Some people consider this a ruined car. One thing is for certain though, rolling the guards is pretty much mandatory for any 'good' fitment (of either variety). It is often the difference between any fitment remotely close to the guards. "Not to mention the rears were like a mm from hitting the coilovers." I have a question though - This spec is VERY close to what I was planning to buy relative to the inboard suspension - I have an offset measuring tool on the way to confirm it. When you say "like a mm" do you mean literally 1mm? Or 2mm? Cause that's enough clearance for me in the rear :p I actually found the more limiting factor ISNT the coilover but the actual suspension arms. Did you take a look at how close those were?
×
×
  • Create New...