Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have finally managed to track one of these real Gt3076R's down 700382-12 or 700382-5012

For peoples reference

GCG $2195 available around the 9th June

MTQ qld $2066 available around August

Slide $1775 in stock but is not the anti surge compressor inlet. (Not the real gt3076)

Capa $1375 with no rear housing. No stock.

Rear IW .82 housing ATP delivered $620 or Garret Aust for $680-780

Another Brisbane supplier who I have order thru. Getting assemble tomorrow $1800

Once they have supplied me the correct turbo I will let you know who they are.

They have great pricing online compared to others.

All plus actuator and bracket $150-180.

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

How confusing.

Is it worth kicking up a stink for the correct spec 3076 with port shrouded cover? Or not worth my trouble?

Check out ATPturbo.com home page , scroll right down and look at the GT3076R-WG

0.70 comp 52 Trim 0.86 rear

You may have this configuration, sounds like a pretty damn good street turbo. Quick spool 500 hp .

Check out ATPturbo.com home page , scroll right down and look at the GT3076R-WG

0.70 comp 52 Trim 0.86 rear

You may have this configuration, sounds like a pretty damn good street turbo. Quick spool 500 hp .

That one looks like it has the T2 rear.

fkn confusing shit!

That looks like it though, except I don't have that rear housing...

GT3076R-WG_top.jpg

I have this rear housing

internally_wastegated.jpg

It seems to me the only differences are the 7 T04S blades instead of the 6, and no ported front...

Also, ID tag says 700177-5018

And a simple Google search of "Garrett 700177-5018" lead to this link http://www.turbofast.com.au/GTseries.html which indicates it is a GT30 family turbocharger that uses a TO4S compressor (7 blades). That makes it a GT3076R

There's really no science to those searches and you'd have found out long ago what your specs actually are.

All that aside, do you actually have it fitted and running, and if so what do you think about it? Those specs support same/similar flow capacity as the 6 bladed GT3037R so I'm interested to hear how it goes in service.

Hi people. Just a question to all you guys that have done this upgrade. What is generally used on the intake side of things as far as connecting the standard pipe to the turbo. Is some sort of fabrication required or is there an actual correct size intake pipe that can be purchased. Im asking because i've generally not seen it mentioned when people post about these upgrades. All the people i've asked dont know? If there is a correct pipe for this application where should i purchase from and rough estimations on price would be very helpful. Thank's guy's ;)

Regardless of what specs state the T04S 7 blade GT3076r is a crappy thing. The -12 is what you want; if you can't then its either the 3071r or the 3082r.

The GT3071's tend to make power easier than them. :S

Edited by SLAPS
And a simple Google search of "Garrett 700177-5018" lead to this link http://www.turbofast.com.au/GTseries.html which indicates it is a GT30 family turbocharger that uses a TO4S compressor (7 blades). That makes it a GT3076R

There's really no science to those searches and you'd have found out long ago what your specs actually are.

All that aside, do you actually have it fitted and running, and if so what do you think about it? Those specs support same/similar flow capacity as the 6 bladed GT3037R so I'm interested to hear how it goes in service.

Yeah me too Doof..

It seems, within the posts, heaps of blokes didn't and still don't even know if they have the TO4S Comp cover and 7 blade wheel instead of the genuine Garrett GT3076R.

Hey, if it's a good package, then tell us.

Please , post your results ASAP, we gotta keep this thread alive, and kicking.

If you ask me, spending $2K plus on a turbo, and getting something else, it's a blatent rip off.

Imagine if you walked into Hugo Boss for a leather jacket and found out it was made in Bali.

Same thing here man.

  • 1 month later...

This is a good example of why Garrets and HKS's turbo description systems fall down , the figures given are not always exacting probably in the interests of simplicity .

Specific to the GT3037 and GT3076R turbo group .

Firstly to HKS , in long figure form it probably should have been called GT30GT37 because what they mean is a GT30 turbine with a GT37 compressor , the only real differences in the HKS marketed GT3037's is the compressor trim and since they are all GT37 compressors the same handle applies .

The Garrett system is slightly different because their terminology - GT3076R - means GT30 turbine with 76mm OD compressor .

If all they used was "76"mm OD GT37 compressor wheels there wouldn't be a problem but they don't do they ...

For reasons known best to themselves they market "GT3076R's" with an earlier tech T series compressor - the one with the higher blade count ie 7/7 rather than 6/6 . Full height blades/splitter blades .

What it comes down to in the end is the part numbers on the turbos ID tag . Mostly but not always they have a cartridge or CHRA number and for a GT30 turbine based ball bearing one it will be 700177 series . The prefix or dash (- xxxx) after the 700177 tells you precisely the compressor wheel options and any mods to the turbine itself ie cropping or grinding down from 60mm to 56.6 .

700177-7 or -5007 is the CHRA number for the real or all GT wheel spec GT3037/GT3076R in 56 comp trim .

Basically if it doesn't say -5 or -6 or -7 (5005 5006 5007) it hasn't got the GT37 compressor on it .

If you wants what I call the real GT3037 or GT3076R then it has to have a GT series compressor to be a matching set with the GT series turbine .

I look at it like this , GT compressor for GT turbine and T series compressor for T series turbine . Left shoe for left foot and so on .

At the end of the day the only thing that's significantly different between a GT3037S 56T and a real GT3076R is the turbine housing , a HKS one on the 3037 and a Garrett one on the 3076R .

True the HKS has the bell mouthed insert in the comp cover but I think that's of little consequence unless you are running these turbos to the absolute limit and getting every last 1% out of them - with the largest proper respective turbine housing available .

Cheers A .

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...