Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

All very fuzzy info at the moment on this turbo, some info below.

The GT3071R has the same compressor(71mm) as the GT2835Pro but larger 60mm turbine....wouldn't it spool up later than the HKS item.. In what way is it better... is the 60mm GT35 turbine that much more efficient that it spools earlier than the cut down GT30....

cheers matt

From ATP TURBO

Turbo is the newest addition to the Garrett Ball Bearing Line up. It fills in the requirements for small displacement 4 cyl. engines and has a excellent response characteristics. It spools up 1,000 RPM sooner than the older GT30R. The Dual Ball Bearing GT3071R Turbo comes assembled with T3 style turbine housing with T3 inlet flange. Turbine housing style available in Standard GT or with T3/T4 Ford Style 5 bolt turbine housing. Compressor housing is T04E frame size with 2.00 outlet. Compressor inlet is available with 2.75 or 4.00 inlet.

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/43864-new-garrett-3071r-experiences/
Share on other sites

  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Ok have found some more info.

Has been installed on a Dodge neon 2.4ltr 8.1:1 compression 4cyl

20psi boost max by ~3000rpm resulted in 284rwkw @ ~6000rpm

-tIAL 38mm wastegate, cast manifold, .63 A/R exh(I think)

Very very nice. I have 2.5ltr 6cyl 8.7:1 redline at 8200rpm..... getting a little excited here.

http://www.atpturbo.com/root/releases/rele...lease051404.htm

Sounds pretty good to me. If it's as good as it sounds, then I can't see a reason to pay the HKS prices.

There was a turbo (from AVO from memory - presumably using Garrett parts) in a CA18DET turbo comparison in the latest Zoom mag that also performed better than the equivalent HKS.

Steve, I just found the mag and here's what it had in it generally (I'd rather not type out the whole article).

It was comparing the GT-RS with the AVO 320hp one (and a few other turbos, but these were the ones that stood out to me). The test conditions were pretty good as they tuned the car with a Power FC to a 12.5:1 AFR and advanced the timing as far as they could for each turbo. It was a CA18DET that got 137rwkw peak when fully tuned with the Power FC and stock turbo.

They had some trouble doing an exact comparison as they couldn't set the AVO one above 1.1bar because of a problem with their boost controller, so the HKS is at 1.2 Bar and the AVO is at 1.1 Bar. It's a little hard to explain the dyno charts in words, but here goes - the HKS one got a peak of 189kW with a curve that was under the stock turbo until 104km/h, then it overtook it and maxed out at 189. The AVO turbo followed the stock turbo perfectly all the way until, funnily enough, 104km/h and then continued ramping up all the way to 178kW (but this is at 1.1 Bar, the mag said it should have made around mid 180s at 1.2). To me the AVO turbo was the better buy by far (even though it had a slightly weaker top end curve) as it made similar peak power and a hell of a lot more power down low. The RRP prices on each were $4356 for the GT-RS and $2035 for the AVO.

It was a really good article and I'd recommend picking the issue up.

It's so hard to choose a turbo these days. There are so many different ones that get on boost early yet produce awesome top end power.

BTW if you want to know about the other turbos in the comparison, just ask.

I think the GT-RS is a bit too small for the CA18, its more suited to a SR20 so I would say its a bit biased to compare it to the AVO unit. Also, the AVO turbo it seems is exactly the same as the GT28 320hp units sold by Ray Hall, GCG & Horsepowerinabox. I emailed AVO to ask em what the difference is (because their "AVO" turbo seem to use the same wheel trims and A/Rs as the garrett unit) Ie looks the same as an S15 turbo!

They had some trouble doing an exact comparison as they couldn't set the AVO one above 1.1bar because of a problem with their boost controller, so the HKS is at 1.2 Bar and the AVO is at 1.1 Bar.

Seriously... That is the most retarded turbo comparison I have ever read in my entire life.

The HKS GT-RS is made for 1.6-1.7 bar of boost. It's designed for high boost and high power applications. Limiting it to 1.2 bar is an ABSOLUTE FARCE. How can they even print this complete bullsh1t story? Do they have no credibility at all in what they write?

Ohhhh!!! Look at this comparison boys! We'll compare a stock R33 GTS-t turbo vs. a Trust T88H-34D... But oh dear! We have a boost control problem so we'll limit both turbos to 0.9 bar! OH WOW!!! Look how responsive the stock turbo is, it's making 160rwkw at 5000rpm and the T88 is only making 120rwkw!!! Oh, what a crap turbo the Trust T88 is!!!

:) :) :D :uhh: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Yeah I guess you're right. If one turbo really isn't meant to be at a low boost level, then it's really killing it's potential. I suppose it really isn't fair to compare the turbos this way, but that's the way they did it to try and make it a level playing field. I'm not sure if they would be able to do this, but if they knew what the optimum boost level was for a turbo (maybe from those maps with the surge line on one side - I forget what they're called), then maybe they could do a comparison at each turbos most efficient boost.

With your T88 example though, it still would have killed the stock one at 0.9 Bar in the top end, but yeah, I get your point :)

So an S15 turbo is pretty much as good as a GT-RS then? If so, then that's pretty good news for S13 and S14 drivers.

Nah they are two different turbos indeed. The S15 unit is a very responsive turbo and is limited to about 210rwkw. The GT-RS is a touch laggier (but still very good) and can reach upwards of 260rwkw on an SR20 (using lots of boost as Merli says). Oh, and the GT-RS is almost triple the price aswell :)

What I was trying to say was that you can just buy an S15 Turbo 2nd hand or new from Nissan and its alot cheaper than the AVO turbo. Theres nothing 'unique' about it, but it seems a perfect companion to the CA18.

Yeah I guess you're right. If one turbo really isn't meant to be at a low boost level, then it's really killing it's potential. I suppose it really isn't fair to compare the turbos this way, but that's the way they did it to try and make it a level playing field. I'm not sure if they would be able to do this, but if they knew what the optimum boost level was for a turbo (maybe from those maps with the surge line on one side - I forget what they're called), then maybe they could do a comparison at each turbos most efficient boost.

With your T88 example though, it still would have killed the stock one at 0.9 Bar in the top end, but yeah, I get your point :)

They should run the turbos with as much boost as they can pump out of them until they fall off their efficiency curve and start blowing hot air. It's complete CRAP to set a boost limit like that to "make a level playing field"... All they're doing is giving the smaller turbo a MASSIVE advantage.

As for the T88 making more power top end, you don't know that... You're guessing. But even if that were the case, that's why I chose sample figures at 5000rpm, before the T88 would spool up.

The T88's curve would also be WAY below the stock turbos up until 5000rpm (just like the GT-RS in Zoom's stupid comparison)... Does that make the T88 a crap turbo? NO!!!

Very true. It definitely isn't level at all.

Yeah I am guessing on the T88 - I was just going on what I've read about them and that's that they hit really hard up top. I definitely agree that it isn't a crap turbo by any means - I never thought it was. just like any other turbo, it's got to be well matched to the engine and tuned properly.

The reason I brought it up in the first place was that the article just interested me as I kind of like the idea of a turbo that spools up with a similar to stock curve, yet with a much nicer top end. I didn't really ever question the lowish boost levels on the turbos.

yes but most people dont have the internals to run 1.6bar.. most people run 1.1 or 1.3 bar. even though i got a t88 that could handle 2bar.. doesnt mean im going to run it. most people want their engine to hang together and know they can push it with out worrying.. i know its in the tuning but "most" people only run lowish boost levels.. so i think its a fair comparison.

Well if those people are running such (cough cough) "low" boost then they are obviously using the wrong turbo. I mean if you're only going to put 1.1 to 1.3 bar through your motor then you should be getting a turbo that does that well.

yes but most people dont have the internals to run 1.6bar.. most people run 1.1 or 1.3 bar. even though i got a t88 that could handle 2bar.. doesnt mean im going to run it. most people want their engine to hang together and know they can push it with out worrying.. i know its in the tuning but "most" people only run lowish boost levels.. so i think its a fair comparison.

Exactly put as abobob said.

Further, then that's really a study of what the stock engines can do, and not a comparison of what the turbos are capable of isn't it?

Also, if you buy a T88 and strap it to a stock engine, you'd probably be the kind of person who would believe every word they read in Zoom and take it as gospel :D:)

The GT-RS is a touch laggier (but still very good) and can reach upwards of 260rwkw on an SR20 (using lots of boost as Merli says).

Thats a pretty big number... have you actually seen an SR20 make those numbers with that turbo, if so did it have cams, exhaust manifold or anything else going on?

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

    • As discussed in the previous post, the bushes in the 110 needed replacing. I took this opportunity to replace the castor bushes, the front lower control arm, lower the car and get the alignment dialled in with new tyres. I took it down to Alignment Motorsports on the GC to get this work done and also get more out of the Shockworks as I felt like I wasn't getting the full use out of them.  To cut a very long story short, it ended up being the case the passenger side castor arm wouldn't accept the brand new bush as the sleeve had worn badly enough to the point you could push the new bush in by hand and completely through. Trying a pair of TRD bushes didn't fix the issue either (I had originally gone with Hardrace bushes). We needed to urgently source another castor arm, and thankfully this was sourced and the guys at the shop worked on my car until 7pm on a Saturday to get everything done. The car rides a lot nicer now with the suspension dialled in properly. Lowered the car a little as well to suit the lower profile front tyres, and just bring the car down generally. Eternally thankful for the guys down at the shop to get the car sorted, we both pulled big favours from our contacts to get it done on the Saturday.  Also plugged in the new Stedi foglights into the S15, and even from a quick test in the garage I'm keen to see how they look out on the road. I had some concerns about the length of the LED body and whether it'd fit in the foglight housing but it's fine.  I've got a small window coming up next month where I'll likely get a little paint work done on the 110 to remove the rear wing, add a boot wing and roof wing, get the side skirt fixed up and colour match the little panel on the tail lights so that I can install some badges that I've kept in storage. I'm also tempted to put in a new pair of headlights on the 110.  Until then, here's some more pictures from Easter this year. 
    • I would put a fuel pressure gauge between the filter and the fuel rail, see if it's maintaining good fuel pressure at idle going up to the point when it stalls. Do you see any strange behavior in commanded fuel leading up to the point when it stalls? You might have to start going through the service manual and doing a long list of sensor tests if it's not the fuel system for whatever reason.
    • Hi,  Just joined the forum so I could share my "fix" of this problem. Might be of use to someone. Had the same hunting at idle issue on my V36 with VQ35HR engine after swapping the engine because the original one got overheated.  While changing the engine I made the mistake of cleaning the throttle bodies and tried all the tricks i could find to do a throttle relearn with no luck. Gave in and took it to a shop and they couldn't sort it. Then took it to my local Nissan dealership and they couldn't get it to idle properly. They said I'd need to replace the throttle bodies and the ecu probably costing more than the car is worth. So I had the idea of replacing the carbon I cleaned out with a thin layer of super glue and it's back to normal idle now. Bit rough but saved the car from the wreckers 🤣
    • After my last update, I went ahead with cleaning and restoring the entire fuel system. This included removing the tank and cleaning it with the Beyond Balistics solution, power washing it multiple times, drying it thoroughly, rinsing with IPA, drying again with heat gun and compressed air. Also, cleaning out the lines, fuel rail, and replacing the fuel pump with an OEM-style one. During the cleaning process, I replaced several hoses - including the breather hose on the fuel tank, which turned out to be the cause of the earlier fuel leak. This is what the old fuel filter looked like: Fuel tank before cleaning: Dirty Fuel Tank.mp4   Fuel tank after cleaning (some staining remains): Clean Fuel Tank.mp4 Both the OEM 270cc and new DeatschWerks 550cc injectors were cleaned professionally by a shop. Before reassembling everything, I tested the fuel flow by running the pump output into a container at the fuel filter location - flow looked good. I then fitted the new fuel filter and reassembled the rest of the system. Fuel Flow Test.mp4 Test 1 - 550cc injectors Ran the new fuel pump with its supplied diagonal strainer (different from OEM’s flat strainer) and my 550cc injectors using the same resized-injector map I had successfully used before. At first, it idled roughly and stalled when I applied throttle. Checked the spark plugs and found that they were fouled with carbon (likely from the earlier overly rich running when the injectors were clogged). After cleaning the plugs, the car started fine. However, it would only idle for 30–60 seconds before stalling, and while driving it would feel like a “fuel cut” after a few seconds - though it wouldn’t fully stall. Test 2 – Strainer swap Suspecting the diagonal strainer might not be reaching the tank bottom, I swapped it for the original flat strainer and filled the tank with ~45L of fuel. The issue persisted exactly the same. Test 3 – OEM injectors To eliminate tuning variables, I reinstalled the OEM 270cc injectors and reverted to the original map. Cleaned the spark plugs again just in-case. The stalling and “fuel cut” still remained.   At this stage, I suspect an intermittent power or connection fault at the fuel pump hanger, caused during the cleaning process. This has led me to look into getting Frenchy’s fuel hanger and replacing the unit entirely. TL;DR: Cleaned and restored the fuel system (tank, lines, rail, pump). Tested 550cc injectors with the same resized-injector map as before, but the car stalls at idle and experiences what feels like “fuel cut” after a few seconds of driving. Swapped back to OEM injectors with original map to rule out tuning, but the issue persists. Now suspecting an intermittent power or connection fault at the fuel pump hanger, possibly cause by the cleaning process.  
×
×
  • Create New...