Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi all , someone I know has the 1.06 non gated turbine housing on a VL with an RB26 in it . He'd like to know what difference it would make having the mid sized or 0.82 A/R housing instead .

I believe ATM it makes full boost (~ 22) at a tad over 5000 revs and he would like that to ideally be 1000 lower .

Anyone been there with both these turbine housings on a GT3582R and an RB26 ?

Cheers A .

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/303983-106-vs-082-gt35-on-rb26/
Share on other sites

There is something wrong if he makes only 22psi at just over 5000rpm.

Noel's 33 (RB25DET) makes 26psi at 3800-4000 and 400rpm later on the 1.06.

Tuning, cam timing, the rest of the setup, will all determine how efficiently it will run.

I'm no turbo expert but why the hell ppl go for the largest turbine Garrett has to offer if they dont intend on using the turbo to its absolute limit?!?

The way i see it is that u choose the a/r of the turbine housing in relation to what average power u intend to make so say if the 1.06 puts the turbo in the 600hp range and u only want 550hp then go for the smaller back end with the advantage of improved response

Which brings me to a question....The hp rating garrett state on their site, is this when using the largest 1.06 housing?

So i guess it might be a question of if your mate wouldn't mind loosing some power if any at all to get improved response because i'm sure there will be noticeable difference between the 1.06 and the .82

I'm no turbo expert but why the hell ppl go for the largest turbine Garrett has to offer if they dont intend on using the turbo to its absolute limit?!?

The way i see it is that u choose the a/r of the turbine housing in relation to what average power u intend to make so say if the 1.06 puts the turbo in the 600hp range and u only want 550hp then go for the smaller back end with the advantage of improved response

Which brings me to a question....The hp rating garrett state on their site, is this when using the largest 1.06 housing?

So i guess it might be a question of if your mate wouldn't mind loosing some power if any at all to get improved response because i'm sure there will be noticeable difference between the 1.06 and the .82

You are almost right.

All of the GT3582's are rated to the same hp. The compressor determines air flow = determines hp output.

The turbine's are all the same size and the blade angles are all the same so there is no differences there.

The A/R of the turbine only changes shaft speed vs exhaust flow.

They rate their turbos based on the compressor maps which has nothing to do with turbine size. However, if you pick the smallest ratio, you will have a hard time getting it to flow the numbers later in the rev range because it moves out of its efficiency range.

eg. They will all flow exactly the same air from the compressor at a shaft speed of 120,000 rpm. The A/R or the turbine housing determines when the shaft speed will get to that point.

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

    • Input shaft bearing. They all do it. There is always rollover noise in Nissan boxes - particularly the big box. Don't worry about it unless it gets really growly.
    • 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.
×
×
  • Create New...