Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I think you should spend some time trying to get the most out of what you have. I am pretty sure there is room to make more earlier.

I have an old school GT3040 on my R33 and whilst there are better things out there today it still makes power pretty much everywhere a current GT3076 (due to variance on dynos mine looks better than some and worse than others). It probably has a penalty on transient response. I have no reason to take it off and update at this point. BTW the GT3040 is the turbo that seems to most resemble what you have.

Have you got a plot with boost on it? (I might have missed it)

I would want to be sure there was no leaks, that the boost control was setup the best way possible and that the tune was perfect on the ramp to boost before I would consider removing the turbo. If you need to take it a second tuner to diagnose these things it might be worth the time and effort.

I may have an oppurtimty to swap stuff around. If I'm looking for same power. Less lag. What's the choice. Gt3076. 63? .82? Gt3071.82. Gt3071.63(seems a Tad small)

In my opinion your best bet is working out what is causing the excessive lag and fixing that up, I really don't think thats its due to the type of turbo- that is TOO laggy. I suspect any other equivalent turbo will be similar +/- a bit, and that if you change turbo setup you could end up finding the exact same thing.

I am sure that the GTX3076R may be a bit laggier than a GT3076R, but the amount of lag I see there looks more like what I'd expect from a GT40R or something like that.... there is no way a properly operating GTX3076R would be like that on an RB25.

Mini-meet incheltenham area tonight (if it doesn't rain) for those who want to feel the gtx3076 and offer this member a hand? A real world one. Not a one picture on a forum hand. Not undermining the advice (trust me I value all.thoughts and opinions but I'm hoping there is something more to this Turbo in real life than on paper)

Thoughts?

In my opinion your best bet is working out what is causing the excessive lag and fixing that up, I really don't think thats its due to the type of turbo- that is TOO laggy. I suspect any other equivalent turbo will be similar +/- a bit, and that if you change turbo setup you could end up finding the exact same thing.

I am sure that the GTX3076R may be a bit laggier than a GT3076R, but the amount of lag I see there looks more like what I'd expect from a GT40R or something like that.... there is no way a properly operating GTX3076R would be like that on an RB25.

Hmm interesting. I'm waiting for this bloody boost vs rpm graph to be email to me. Hopefully shed some light.

yet think the 52t 3076 will be better. Ideally I would run the 52t 3076 with the Kando 10cm cock-up housing and a 44mm WG (tial MVR 44 etc), but welcome to 6boob land and lots of cash.

hey stop stealing my ideas :P

wouldnt need a 6boost for this combo..on paper it seems to me to be a perfect combo for a very punchy turbo that should get around 300kw with stock motor and manifold with room to grow.

Of course what seems good on paper isnt always good on the road, and the 52trim 3076 isnt cheap or I would have one by now :(

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=search&do=search&fromMainBar=1

there are gt35s in here that are making boost about the same as your turbo, it is definitely laggier than I would expect. Are you going to a reputable tuner? Or is it just some backyard place?

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=search&do=search&fromMainBar=1

there are gt35s in here that are making boost about the same as your turbo, it is definitely laggier than I would expect. Are you going to a reputable tuner? Or is it just some backyard place?

Avo turboworld.

Can the actuator effect how it comes on boost? They Jed an avo one not a garret one.

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/index.php?app=core&module=search&do=search&fromMainBar=1

there are gt35s in here that are making boost about the same as your turbo, it is definitely laggier than I would expect. Are you going to a reputable tuner? Or is it just some backyard place?

Also link doesn't work.

Also link doesn't work.

Open up the rb25 dyno thread and hit search and put in gt3076 and gt35, gt3582 for some results to compare to

:rofl: Rolls

AVO tuned it and no they are not backyarders ..one of the biggest and most reputable tune shops in Melbourne..though I think their speciality is WRXS they tune can anything

Well in that case I have no idea! heh

is it possibly they don't do many RBs and have gotten it a bit wrong?

Edited by Rolls

Dunno,it is possible its a lazy tune and has more tweaking that could benefit it..

its also possible they dont want to push his engine for fear of liability issues..

maybe the engines f**ked, did you get it checked before you threw a huge turbo on it??

how is your car set up shifty..exhaust ecu injectors etc..have u told us and i missed it??

How is correctly setting up boost control not wanting to push a motor?

AVO realistically have done nothing special in the world of performance for many years. Least of all anything RB related.

It simply comes down to poor boost control. Why a HD Garrett actuator wasn't used just like everyone else uses i don't know, but its the logical place to start.

What do you suggest.

Speak to AVO and ask them what can be done to bring the boost on earlier or speak to a new tuner if you are unhappy with their answers.

It's a boost control issue so actuator + boost controller + tuning on the ramp to boost + boost leaks are places to look.

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...