3037's What Rear Housing Is Everyone Else Using?

[robbo_rb180]

i've got a 3037 on my 25 and it doesn't come on full boost til 4000rpm,i have a internally gated .83 rear housing. i want more response do i get a smaller .74 housing or just get an external gate?

engine mods:

gt3037

greddy plenum with q45 TB

walbro pump

link G4 ecu

is this normal? what are peoples thought's?

Edited July 10, 2009 by robbo_rb180

[R31Nismoid]

external gate wont make boost come any earlier - you have a turbo that will do 300rwkw currently

How much power do you want?

[robbo_rb180]

external gate wont make boost come any earlier - you have a turbo that will do 300rwkw currently

How much power do you want?

i want around 260-280kw, but it would be good to be on full boost around 3200-3500rpm but still have a bit up the top end.

[R31Nismoid]

Well you cant have 3200 and a big top end with 280rwkw dude - you cant break the laws of whats possible and whats not.

You can have 260rwkw and nice and responsive (.63 or whatever), and thats it really. Its likely to be ajorly limited by the rear housing then however so it'll feel choked up high

The .74 will bring it down closer to 3500-3600 at a rough stab based on what you have now at the best and still have top end... that might be what you are after although not exactly...

[discopotato03]

Out of curiosity which 0.83 turbine housing do you have there ?

Garrett do have a 0.83 A/R integral gate turbine housing but AFAIK they don't come on any HKS marketed GT3037's .

HKS have a couple of integral gate "T3" flanged turbine housings for GT3037 Pro S turbos but they are 0.68 or 0.87 A/R sizes . Also those Pro S turbos have port shrouded compressor housings which help a bit .

I agree with Nismoid , a GT3037 or the real Garrett GT3076R equivalent is a bit over the top for 260 odd Kw . HKS's GT2835 Pro S is possibly the more responsive option in that power range .

Exy yes but there are options if you're good at chasing second hand and modded housings to create one .

Cheers A .

Edited July 10, 2009 by discopotato03

[PM-R33]

You finding it a bit laggy on the street Rob?

Edited July 10, 2009 by PM-R33

[limpus]

Are you interested in swapping housings? I've got a 3037 with a 0.68 housing which i fear will be too small for my 2JZ...

Discopotato03...what do you recon? is a 0.68 exhaust housing on a 3037 too small for a 3.0L engine?

[WARLORD]

ive got the hks .68 pro s and ive got response up the wizang at 310 kw atw i would like to try the .87 pro s to see the difference

[WARLORD]

Are you interested in swapping housings? I've got a 3037 with a 0.68 housing which i fear will be too small for my 2JZ...

Discopotato03...what do you recon? is a 0.68 exhaust housing on a 3037 too small for a 3.0L engine?

yes

[discopotato03]

Well the theories suggest that a 0.68 A/R turbine housing would be small for a 3 liter engine . I always reckoned that the 0.68 and 0.87 were developed with the RB20 and RB25 in mind , the only other std T3 flanged engine was the FJ20 and even those were old news by that stage .

Cubes here has (I think) a Garrett 0.82 A/R integral waste gate or IW turbine housing on a GT3076R fitted to an RB25/30 . From memory he said it comes on boost reasonably early .

I wouldn't mind a Pro S housing if anyone has one to sell .

Cheers A .

[WARLORD]

Well the theories suggest that a 0.68 A/R turbine housing would be small for a 3 liter engine . I always reckoned that the 0.68 and 0.87 were developed with the RB20 and RB25 in mind , the only other std T3 flanged engine was the FJ20 and even those were old news by that stage .

Cubes here has (I think) a Garrett 0.82 A/R integral waste gate or IW turbine housing on a GT3076R fitted to an RB25/30 . From memory he said it comes on boost reasonably early .

I wouldn't mind a Pro S housing if anyone has one to sell .

Cheers A .

there about $900 from japan

[robbo_rb180]

You finding it a bit laggy on the street Rob?

yeah, just a bit over it and i want to use the car for the bitumen sprints next year so i need a bit more response.

[Haines]

My cars response isnt the greatest

full Boost by 3600-3800rpm

and Im running the .73 housing

[STYLN]

mate i'd be looking at cams first, then retune up injectors etc. If your struggling with lag then clearly dropping turbo sizes will help response a little but as many have said you get stuff all benefits in swapping turbo gates etc...

The key to thinking about how to reduce lag is to look for ways to either reduce engine load allowing faster build up of revs OR the best one, is build the volume of air it pushes out on the out stroke. Less vac lines/shorter cooler piping/etc could also help.

A cam will make drastic or subtle changes to the engines flow characteristics, port polish and valve train all help the engine breathe better. If you have the coin and if its possible stroke the engine, knife edge the crank etc... Stroke & capacity builds not only torque but spool up times.

Example.

My factory siggy turbo running just 4 cylinders at just under 2.8L with the long stroke and 91mm pistons can spool up a t4 turbo with a 1.15 rear housing and 0.6 a/r comes on at 3200rpm. The same engine with a 0.86 rear and 0.7 a/r will come on boost at 1750rpm.

Now the engine capacity is almost the same, but the strokes and technology are worlds apart.

IMO the key to picking up your boost earlier is cams and other efficiency items. I'm no expert but it's my common sense thoughts here...

[GT-RZ]

If response and low down torque is what you want i wouldn't be worrying about cams too much. unless you want to increase top end power and revability spend it elsewhere for now.

unless you want to rip the motor apart not too much you can do. obviously a smaller rear housing will come on boost faster. depends what your after.

i'm unfamiliar with the ecu... do you have boost control? if your only relying on an actuator you could improve response with a pneumatic valve/ebc.

[R31Nismoid]

^^ agreed.

Cams IMO are not the answer.

[PM-R33]

My dyno graph and car begs to differ. Picked up 30-40kw nearly throughout the rev range up to about 5000rpm with headwork and cams.

Not saying this is the route im recommending, however saying cams and headwork when setup for low down power won't give better response and power is utter bullshit.

Edited July 13, 2009 by PM-R33

[GT-RZ]

My dyno graph and car begs to differ. Picked up 30-40kw nearly throughout the rev range up to about 5000rpm with headwork and cams.

Not saying this is the route im recommending, however saying cams and headwork when setup for low down power won't give better response and power is utter bullshit.

No one said that?

Main reason for cams is to move the torque band to where you want it (big ass turbo that is gonna kick in late will benefit the most from bigger duration cams). Factory cams often have that torque band lower in the revs and as quite obviously power is torque x rpm /**** the higher your max torque up the rev range the higher the final power output. Hence why i don't give a crap about dyno cars, probably utter crap on the track and driving a car on the dyno aint all that fun really.

And given that he only wants 260kw or whatever he said then why worry about cams when he can get a better choice on turbo components that match his target HP better.

What headwork did you have done. What cams? No one said they can't aid response it's just not the best way to do it. Did you go for a bigger exhaust cam? or did you have larger exhaust valves put in? Of course this can help. He is clearly after a simple bolt on jobby.

Almost all the torque you get out of your motor comes from turbo selection. simple as that really. If i wanted 260kw then id go for a turbo that is in it's efficiency range right there and cams to match, for that level i think factory cams will be alright for now.

[R31Nismoid]

My dyno graph and car begs to differ. Picked up 30-40kw nearly throughout the rev range up to about 5000rpm with headwork and cams.

Not saying this is the route im recommending, however saying cams and headwork when setup for low down power won't give better response and power is utter bullshit.

I had as good response with a 600hp turbo (against similar equipped turbo cars) as those had some major head/cams where i had none.

[PM-R33]

No one said that?

Main reason for cams is to move the torque band to where you want it (big ass turbo that is gonna kick in late will benefit the most from bigger duration cams). Factory cams often have that torque band lower in the revs and as quite obviously power is torque x rpm /**** the higher your max torque up the rev range the higher the final power output. Hence why i don't give a crap about dyno cars, probably utter crap on the track and driving a car on the dyno aint all that fun really.

And given that he only wants 260kw or whatever he said then why worry about cams when he can get a better choice on turbo components that match his target HP better.

What headwork did you have done. What cams? No one said they can't aid response it's just not the best way to do it. Did you go for a bigger exhaust cam? or did you have larger exhaust valves put in? Of course this can help. He is clearly after a simple bolt on jobby.

Almost all the torque you get out of your motor comes from turbo selection. simple as that really. If i wanted 260kw then id go for a turbo that is in it's efficiency range right there and cams to match, for that level i think factory cams will be alright for now.

I said that because it's usually a common thing on these forums saying cams and head work do bugger all. Obviously the money can be better spent on a bigger turbo, but at the cost of lag, not something every one is keen to do. Like i said, im not recommending Rob to do this, i just said it does do it's job when done right.

See my sig if you want to know what head work is done, can't be bothered listing it all.

Rob have you got a dyno graph with AFR's and boost? Maybe it just needs more timing put into it down low and a better boost controller.

Edited July 13, 2009 by PM-R33