Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

man I've been eyeing up this turbo for my SR for a few months now. This is the first lot of info I have gotten of people in OZ.

Hope all goes well BOOSTD can't wait to see the results. IMO you should have a look at the GT30R available at ATP mated with the HKS GT30 0.73A/R exh, should be well suited to a 2.5/2.6 like the RB.

Some more info i have found from some forums about this turbo( This is on a evo 2l though):

"Hi guys-- Here's my take on the ATP 3071, fwiw. It does indeed spool up just like the 3037 (also .63)/custom tubular manifold set up I had on our One Lap car. However, it does this with a *stock cat* and not the test pipe that I run. All things equal, I suspect it to have 700-8000rpm spool up advantage to the GT3037 which is really quite good. Also, on our dyno, boost lag tends to be exaggerated due to the way the engine loads up. Well, not really exaggerated... but it comes close to representing the boost lag you feel on the street when you load it up in 3rd gear. If tested with a much slower ramp-up rate (simulating the first 5 or so seconds of a Dynojet pull where the big rollers are slowly getting up to speed), boost response with drop by another 400-600rpm which is where I suspect ATP is getting their sloop up claims. As such, their claim is perfectly valid and the difference in spool up that we are seeing is based mostly on differences in testing methods. Nothing to create a controversy about, IMHO To give you an idea of how different loads and different gears can effect spool up, look at this: In 4th gear, lugging from a low RPM, the big GT35 on my car can reach 20psi by 4500rpm. In 3rd, it takes until just under 5000rpm. In 2nd, it takes until past 5500rpm. So spool up numbers, by themselves, don't explain the whole picture-- especially when dealing with bigger turbos."

some more from ATP... I will not be installing this turbo anymore as my car has been written off.

Hello Matt,

The 3071R without the Exhaust housing is $1075.

We've seen the HKS housings up close and no they are not

better in any way. However, they do make housings that

are with unique A/R's that can fill in the gaps better in

certain applications and they also make T25 flanged

housings with 4 bolt discharge and external wastegate use.

The only other thing to know on the .73 A/R vT25 flanged

HKS housing with a 4 bolt discharge, the extra notch on

the inside has to be machined out in order to clear the

turbine wheel heatshroud on 3071R.

Thanks!

ATP

  • 5 months later...

More info in. 3071R on an Audi 1.8ltr. 426hp at all four wheels!!!! Check out the dyno. spoolup looks sensational. The rumours I have heard are this turbo mirrors the new HKS GT RS at a fraction of the cost

check it out

http://www.atpturbo.com/root/releases/rele...lease050304.htm

11.97 quarter mile and trap speeds of 121mph. backs up the power claims IMHO

That figure of 426hp was with a GT28RS and ATP's own custom exhaust housing . The particular housing is a hybrid , it looks like a 5 bolt Garrett on the outside but internally its more like a GT30 style . It also used an external waste gate , a lot of effort was expended to make the EXHAUST side wok well . I wonder what Enthalpy from Honda-Tech.com thought when he read this ..........................

I think the GT-RS is a bit too small for the CA18, its more suited to a SR20

if your saying GTRS is too small for a 1.8 litre, how is it going to be more suited to 2litre?

GTRS is an awesome turbo even for an RB25, capable of 250rwkw at only 1bar, with loads of average power.

if your saying GTRS is too small for a 1.8 litre, how is it going to be more suited to 2litre?

GTRS is an awesome turbo even for an RB25, capable of 250rwkw at only 1bar, with loads of average power.

What I mean is, the GTRS reaches >1bar at approx 3700rpm on an SR20. So for a CA18, its gonna be a tad over 4000rpm I would say. Thats kinda pushing it for a street car, which would already be gutless off boost with a CA18, wouldnt you say?

The GTRS looks great on a RB25 tho!

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 9 months later...
presa i have been thinking about bolting one onto VG housing but as discopotato suggests get the 60mm turbine not the cropped 56mm.

I was looking at the GCG unit - Click Here

Would anyone know if this could bolt up with little hassles?

Or would additional adaptors and oils lines ect. need to be made?

i was speaking to Tarek at Racepace about the GT3071R with 60mm turbine. he didn't know it existed (best i can figure) till i emailed him the old garrett catalog this turbo comes externally gated (ie same as a GT30R with a 71mm compressor vs 76mm compressor). he was going to get back to me but theoretically it should be no problem to shoehorn it into a VG housing. how well it would work is something i couldn't answer, presumably quite well.

i think the GCG GT3071R is the internally gated version with the smaller turbine (56mm).

discopotato has written a few posts on the cons of the cropped 56mm turbine if you have a look around.

anyway good luck with your choice.

Edited by wolverine

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

    • There's plenty of OEM steering arms that are bolted on. Not in the same fashion/orientation as that one, to be sure, but still. Examples of what I'm thinking of would use holes like the ones that have the downward facing studs on the GTR uprights (down the bottom end, under the driveshaft opening, near the lower balljoint) and bolt a steering arm on using only 2 bolts that would be somewhat similarly in shear as these you're complainig about. I reckon old Holdens did that, and I've never seen a broken one of those.
    • Let's be honest, most of the people designing parts like the above, aren't engineers. Sometimes they come from disciplines that gives them more qualitative feel for design than quantitive, however, plenty of them have just picked up a license to Fusion and started making things. And that's the honest part about the majority of these guys making parts like that, they don't have huge R&D teams and heaps of time or experience working out the numbers on it. Shit, most smaller teams that do have real engineers still roll with "yeah, it should be okay, and does the job, let's make them and just see"...   The smaller guys like KiwiCNC, aren't the likes of Bosch etc with proper engineering procedures, and oversights, and sign off. As such, it's why they can produce a product to market a lot quicker, but it always comes back to, question it all.   I'm still not a fan of that bolt on piece. Why not just machine it all in one go? With the right design it's possible. The only reason I can see is if they want different heights/length for the tie rod to bolt to. And if they have the cncs themselves,they can easily offer that exact feature, and just machine it all in one go. 
    • The roof is wrapped
    • This is how I last did this when I had a master cylinder fail and introduce air. Bleed before first stage, go oh shit through first stage, bleed at end of first stage, go oh shit through second stage, bleed at end of second stage, go oh shit through third stage, bleed at end of third stage, go oh shit through fourth stage, bleed at lunch, go oh shit through fifth stage, bleed at end of fifth stage, go oh shit through sixth stage....you get the idea. It did come good in the end. My Topdon scan tool can bleed the HY51 and V37, but it doesn't have a consult connector and I don't have an R34 to check that on. I think finding a tool in an Australian workshop other than Nissan that can bleed an R34 will be like rocking horse poo. No way will a generic ODB tool do it.
    • Hmm. Perhaps not the same engineers. The OE Nissan engineers did not forsee a future with spacers pushing the tie rod force application further away from the steering arm and creating that torque. The failures are happening since the advent of those things, and some 30 years after they designed the uprights. So latent casting deficiencies, 30+ yrs of wear and tear, + unexpected usage could quite easily = unforeseen failure. Meanwhile, the engineers who are designing the billet CNC or fabricated uprights are also designing, for the same parts makers, the correction tie rod ends. And they are designing and building these with motorsport (or, at the very least, the meth addled antics of drifters) in mind. So I would hope (in fact, I would expect) that their design work included the offset of that steering force. Doesn't mean that it is not totally valid to ask the question of them, before committing $$.
×
×
  • Create New...