Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I see ATPTurbo now have a 1.06a/r T4 twin scroll turbine housing for the GT3076R.... this has intrigued me quite a bit! I can't help but think that could be very interesting to try.

So what are you thinking Lith, decent twin scroll manifold (i.e. Full-Race or similar) twin wastegates and GT3076R with 1.06a/a T4 divided on a stock stroke RB26 with its six throttle bodies?

So what are you thinking Lith, decent twin scroll manifold (i.e. Full-Race or similar) twin wastegates and GT3076R with 1.06a/a T4 divided on a stock stroke RB26 with its six throttle bodies?

Depends on what you want really - I'd be more inclined to go the above using a GT3582R but for an RB25 a GT3076R with twin wastegates etc on a FullRace type manifold would be pretty fantastic. Hell I am rapt with my .82a/r T3 internally gated GT3076R on my RB25 and I'm not even tapping its flow potential yet. I couldn't imagine the same thing with better spool, less restriction and 22psi pumping through it!

  • 1 year later...

How does everyone think a twin scroll GT3071R would go on an rb25det with the appropriate power, would it come on much sooner than it already does? and if so what about peak power, would it be basically the same?

Would external gate vs internal make much difference? I'm trying to figure out what the ultimate combo for response and around 280kw would be.

Edited by Rolls

Good question! I'm wondering the same thing at the moment. I have a HKS exhaust manifold I could use for a TS setup on an RB25, but i'm wondering if the results would be worth it. I was considering a GT3076R a while back but from memory couldn't find an appropriate housing.

Good question! I'm wondering the same thing at the moment. I have a HKS exhaust manifold I could use for a TS setup on an RB25, but i'm wondering if the results would be worth it. I was considering a GT3076R a while back but from memory couldn't find an appropriate housing.

Why dont you just get a Garrett EVO9 replacement twin scroll GT3071 or 3076 with internal gate.

You will find that the 0.76AR TS GT3071 will spool about the same rate as the 0.63 GT3071 but the power will be more - ie closer to the 0.82. Twin scrolls are about broadening the torque curve.

My pick for 280rwkw with the rb25 would be the TS GTX3071 with the 0.73A/R. I would expect that power at 15psi with full boost around the 3000-3200rpm range.

A twin scroll GT3071R on an RB25 would be pretty mental - I'd personally make the most of the extra transient response and torque boost the twin scroll gives and use a GT3076R, forgot all the ideas you have about the different turbos with the single entry housings and don't get too hung up on boost curves only having a couple hundred rpm difference in spool... the big draw to twin scroll to me is the increase in VE, remember we run more boost to boost torque but thats not the only way to do it.

Here is an overlay of an SR20 going from a .64a/r GT2871R to a twin scroll GT3071R from Full-Race:

sr20dyno1.jpg

I really think a twin scroll GT3076R would be the ideal on an RB25DET, we already know GT3076Rs are barely noticeably laggier than a 71R and with the extra boost in transient response and inherant torque gained with twin scroll - basically a twin scroll GT3076R should out grunt any open housing turbo bigger than a GTRS... at least once it has over 3000rpm on it.

Food for thought?

A twin scroll GT3071R on an RB25 would be pretty mental - I'd personally make the most of the extra transient response and torque boost the twin scroll gives and use a GT3076R, forgot all the ideas you have about the different turbos with the single entry housings and don't get too hung up on boost curves only having a couple hundred rpm difference in spool... the big draw to twin scroll to me is the increase in VE, remember we run more boost to boost torque but thats not the only way to do it.

Here is an overlay of an SR20 going from a .64a/r GT2871R to a twin scroll GT3071R from Full-Race:

sr20dyno1.jpg

I really think a twin scroll GT3076R would be the ideal on an RB25DET, we already know GT3076Rs are barely noticeably laggier than a 71R and with the extra boost in transient response and inherant torque gained with twin scroll - basically a twin scroll GT3076R should out grunt any open housing turbo bigger than a GTRS... at least once it has over 3000rpm on it.

Food for thought?

Jebabs!

Look at that torque curve, it's more of a straight line than a curve now!

I really think a twin scroll GT3076R would be the ideal on an RB25DET, we already know GT3076Rs are barely noticeably laggier than a 71R and with the extra boost in transient response and inherant torque gained with twin scroll - basically a twin scroll GT3076R should out grunt any open housing turbo bigger than a GTRS... at least once it has over 3000rpm on it.

Food for thought?

I guess my thinking was anything much over 280kw on the street isn't really usable so by going the 71 you gain a bit of extra response/midrange and the car will probably end up being faster.

I guess my thinking was anything much over 280kw on the street isn't really usable so by going the 71 you gain a bit of extra response/midrange and the car will probably end up being faster.

WTF? Ok, I know you and some others have seem some grudge against GT3076Rs but seriously - that post is just being silly. You don't have to like them, but don't muddle things up by making comments which are basically saying "A car running an ever so slightly larger turbo is going to be so laggy and have so little midrange torque and so much more power that it will probably be slower". Try and stick to facts for people who don't know better.

My thoughts:

1) The throttle response is going to be so tiny between those two turbos its really not going to make any difference unless you are having rolling races from 2500rpm-3500rpm, and its going to be hard to call the start accurately enough to determine if its a reaction time or a spool thing separating the cars. Once you are actually in the "fun" part of the rev range, the throttle response is going to be so small I'd venture to say it'd be impossible to quantify the difference.

2) Midrange isn't going to be higher on a GT3071R unless you are running more boost in the midrange, which is a tune thing. Both turbos will be at their controlled boost level well before "midrange"

3) Midrange punch is the most likely part of the rev range where traction will be broken - make up your mind, you want to over come the tyres or you don't?

4) Faster = sum of the parts, if a car can handle everything a GT3076R can throw at it (see Tomei STI, one of the fastest time attack cars on the globe) then its going to be faster than a GT3071R equivalent... albeit not much. If its going to be slower because of the power a GT3076R makes over a GT3071R, like the response - there isn't a night and day difference between the GT3071R and 76R power potential, you're probably already having the same issues with the GT3071R.

This has given me an idea....

I'm with Lith, there never seems to be much difference between the 71 and 76mm compressors when it comes to response in Garrett housings.

You have to lean on the 71mm compressor to make the numbers where you can sit the 76mm comp in pretty fat area and still have some headroom if you want.

saying "A car running an ever so slightly larger turbo is going to be so laggy and have so little midrange torque and so much more power that it will probably be slower". Try and stick to facts for people who don't know better.

Uhh I never said that? Don't put words in my mouth.

I said if 280kw is about the limit for the street then what is the point in going the 76? You are just going to make more peak power/torque for a slight loss in spool. Why not keep that increase in spool?

I didn't realise there was that little difference though, what kind of spool differences would be expected between the two? If it really is nothing then I see your point.

Edited by Rolls

Uhh I never said that? Don't put words in my mouth.

Rolls - you said the following: anything much over 280kw on the street isn't really usable so by going the 71 you gain a bit of extra response/midrange and the car will probably end up being faster.

I didn't realise there was that little difference though, what kind of spool differences would be expected between the two? If it really is nothing then I see your point.

Its not nothing obviously, but in the ranges you're likely to be utilising the power the difference in spool will be negligable... especially with a twin scroll housing, which is what this is about.

By setting your power ceiling to the most a GT3071R you do artificially give a GT3071R the advantage, though it'll be such a small one it'd be hard to quantify and that kind of conjecture is totally missing the point of optimising the turbo match to an engine - it makes it seem like you're just making up rules to push your view point. Keep it separate, a car running a stock turbo would be faster than a car runing a GT3071R if they are both running 9psi - but that defeats the purpose if you have a car built to run a GT3071R to its potential.

but that defeats the purpose if you have a car built to run a GT3071R to its potential.

Ok point taken, so the gains from going 71 vs 76 are so negligible its not worth it, and a 76 provides a much higher ceiling for similar response. I'm still curious though, what is the likely change in response/spool time?

I started this thread to see if people were interested in trying to nail that down instead of speculate too far.

The higher the engine speed, the smaller the difference - realistically. The main things that cause lag are the overall rotational inertia (the majority of the inertia comes from the turbine wheel which is made of heavier materials) and the wheel design. Both GT3076R and GT3071R have the same turbine which is the source of most of the inertia, and they are both 56-trim GT-series Garrett compressor wheels... on the same turbine shaft etc.

For the sake of picturing the effects of the differences between the two turbos in an overly simplified way - lets pretend both the compressor and turbine wheels on a GT3071R contribute evenly to inertia and try and work out how much more work is required to pump a certain amount of air.

Even without counting the fact the turbine and bearing resistance contribute way more to the equation that I am giving them credit for, the increase in the moment of inertia going from a 56trim 71mm comp wheel to a 56trim 76mm comp wheel on a GT30 core could result in at tops a 7% gain for 13% more flow potential.

Take into account the GT3076R pumps more air for the same rpm - ie needs ~104000rpm to push 25lb/min at 1.5bar of boost whereas a GT3071R needs ~112000rpm (9% more rpm required than something with 7% more inertia!?!) it stands to reason that in terms of transitional throttle a GT3076R might not be as bad as you'd expect.

That is very overly simplified (the maths and such forth get long winded and I should be working), but thought I'd just give some crackpot theory to the comparison :)

How about a twin scroll T67 on an RB25!!!!!! I think I have a 3/4 chub :)

That SR20 dyno sheet is unreal. From that example (and others) when choosing a twin scroll setup you should choose a slightly larger turbo then what you would choose if it wasnt twin scroll.

How about a twin scroll T67 on an RB25!!!!!! I think I have a 3/4 chub :)

Thats why god made Holset HX35s ;) That was my preferred choice when I got my GT3076R, but I was concerned at the effort to make it work. If I could I'd go back to 2006 and tell myself to go a twin scroll HX35 on a suitable manifold/wastegate setup.

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, after the full circus this week (new gearbag, 14 psi actuator on, injectors and AFM upgraded, and.....turbo repair) the diagnosis on the wastegate is in. It was broken. It was broken in a really strange way. The weld that holds the lever arm onto the wastegate flapper shaft broke. Broke completely, but broke in such a way that it could go back together in the "correct" position, or it could rearrange itself somewhere else along the fracture plane and sit with the flapper not parallel to the lever. So, who knows how and when exactly what happened? No-one will ever know. Was it broken like this the first time it spat the circlip and wedged itself deep into the dump? Or was it only broken when I tried to pry it back into place? (I didn't try that hard, but who knows?). Or did it break first? Or did it break between the first and second event of wierdness? Meh. It doesn't matter now. It is welded back together. And it is now held closed by a 14 psi actuator, so...the car has been tuned with the supporting mods (and the order of operations there is that the supporting mods and dyno needed to be able to be done first before adding boost, because it was pinging on <<14 psi with the new turbo with only a 6 psi actuator). And then tuned up a bit, and with the boost controller turned off throughout that process. So it was only running WG pressure and so only hit about 15-16 psi. The turbo is still ever so slightly lazier than might be preferred - like it is still a bit on the big side for the engine. I haven't tested it on the road properly in any way - just driven it around in traffic for a half hour or so. But it is like chalk and cheese compared to what it was. Between dyno numbers and driving feedback: It makes 100 kW at 3k rpm, which is OK, could be better. That's stock 2JZ territory, or RB20 with G series 550. It actually starts building boost from 2k, which is certainly better than it did recently (with all the WG flapper bullshit). Although it's hard to remember what it was like prior to all that - it certainly seems much, much better. And that makes sense, given the WG was probably starting to blow open at anything above about 3 psi anyway (with the 6 psi actuator). It doesn't really get to "full boost" (say 16 psi) until >>4k rpm. I am hopeful that this is a feature of the lack of boost controller keeping boost pressure off the actuator, because it was turned off for the dyno and off for the drives afterward. There's more to be found here, I'm sure. It made 230 rwkW at not a lot more than 6k and held it to over 7k, so there seems to be plenty of potential to get it up to 250-260rwkW with 18 psi or so, which would be a decent effort, considering the stock sized turbo inlet pipework and AFM, and the return flow cooler. According to Tao, those things should definitely put a bit of a limit on it by that sort of number. I must stress that I have not opened the throttle 100% on the road yet - well, at least not 100% and allowed it to wind all the way up. It'll have to wait until some reasonable opportunity. I'm quite looking forward to that - it feels massively better than it has in a loooong time. It's back to its old self, plus about 20% extra powers over the best it ever did before. I'm going to get the boost controller set up to maximise spool and settle at no more than ~17 psi (for now) and then go back on the dyno to see what we can squeeze out of it. There is other interesting news too. I put together a replacement tube to fit the R35 AFM in the stock location. This is the first time the tuner has worked with one, because anyone else he has tuned for has gone from Z32 territory to aftermarket ECU. No-one has ever wanted to stay Nistuned and do what I've done. Anyway, his feedback is that the R35 AFM is super super super responsive. Tiny little changes in throttle position or load turn up immediately as a cell change on the maps. Way, way more responsive than any of the old skool AFMs. Makes it quite diffifult to tune as you have to stay right on top of that so you don't wander off the cell you wanted to tune. But it certainly seems to help with real world throttle response. That's hard to separate from all the other things that changed, but the "pedal feel" is certainly crisp.
    • I'm a bit confused by this post, so I'll address the bit I understand lol.  Use an air compressor and blow away the guide coat sanding residue. All the better if you have a moisture trap for your compressor. You'd want to do this a few times as you sand the area, you wouldn't for example sand the entire area till you think its perfect and then 'confirm' that is it by blowing away the guide coat residue.  Sand the area, blow away the guide coat residue, inspect the panel, back to sanding... rinse and repeat. 
    • The detail level is about right for the money they charge for the full kit... AU$21.00 each issue, 110 issues for a total of $2,300 (I mentioned $2.2K in the first post when the exchange rate was better). $20/week is doable... 😐
    • If planning on joining us for the day(s) please indicate by filling in this form. https://forms.gle/Ma8Nn4DzYVA8uDHg7
    • You put the driver's seat on the wrong side! Incredible detail on all of this. It looks like you could learn a lot about the car just from assembling the kit.
×
×
  • Create New...