Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

only the bastardised ones with "bolt on" rear housings have cropped turbines. the proper gt30s with a proper IW housing have the 60mm turbine

All Garrett GT turbos have cropped wheels except the 60mm one. And the 60mm version came out after the rest so it isn't even the 'original' 3071 that everyone claims it to be.

go cut 4mm off your turbine and leave it in the same housing, see how it goes.

find out exactly what cartridge you have then find a housing to suit. you cant use a gt30 housing designed for a gt30 turbine if you have a cropped 56mm turbine.

Where are you getting this information?

4 of the 5 GT3071R's come with cropped turbines. I think you are getting your facts mixed up

yes they do, but they all come with t25 flanged turbine housings too. the only t3 one is the full 60mm version, which is the one everyone on here always talks about and trys to get

Yeah, the one this guy has is the 700382-12 with a VG30 rear housing though. Sonic do a 0.73 rear housing that can be machined to suit everything from a GT2860RS to a GT3076R -12. It's a T3 flange and Skyline dump compatable.

That is the housing he needs to go to.

It flows more than the VG30 housing so it will take care of his power fall-off problem

if i got .82 rear how much response will i lose

If you go to a 0.82 rear housing you will need to use the stupid XR6 dump flange so it will need to be modified.

The typical response lose expected from 0.6 - 0.8 would be somewhere around 400 rpm.

But you also have a smaller, more restrictive housing on at the moment.

Moving to the 0.7 rear will allow more flow all round and will retain the skyline 6 bolt dump pattern.

I would say - expect 1 bar at approx 3800 (as that turbo is known to be particularly laggy)

  • 1 month later...

17.4psi before 3k? That sounds ridiculous, I mean my stock R34 turbo only hits full boost (10.5psi) at about 3200rpm and I thought stock turbos are the some of the most responsive turbos out there... Is my turbo laggy or something?

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...

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

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...