Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hi Guys.

I'm wondering has anybody experimented with GTX cores inside factory turbo housings, it doesn't seem these are widely available but people such as Munro do offer rebuilds
using GTX Cores.

I'm wondering if I could get for example -5 like top end, with -7 or -9 like low and mid range, I'm keen to hear you guys experiences as I can't quite find too much information on
the internet on it.  Cheers.

Yeah. Got it done, didn't end up using them.

Few ways to go about it. The gtx2860 cores are the same rear as -5s, so you need to use -5 rear housings, stock ones won't work. You can make stock front housings work, at least the ones I had did though they had a 60mm wheel in them before I bought then blown. The turbo you get is going to be more of a slightly better -5 though.

 

In theory you could stick a gtx2860 front wheel onto the front of a -9 core and get a -9 with more compressor. This may work well I think, as the compressor on a -7 will max out, however yoi may find the rear chokes to much . (-7/-9 are smaller rears than -5, hence less lag). I heard rumours someone was trying to make a set of these but I don't know how they went.

 

Hks just released some new billet front wheel turbos, no results on them yet.

45 minutes ago, sneakey pete said:

 

Hks just released some new billet front wheel turbos, no results on them yet.

Yeah. If you look carefully they're journal bearing. Really? 

They also produced a dyno graph which I would take with a grain of salt. The overlay between 2530's and RS's is not accurate. We all know how much worse RS's are compared to 2530's.

 

 

I had something similar done with my -5's by Procharge and they turned out pretty well, its a very cost effective path forward if you want to stick with stock looking low mount twins.

They upgraded the compressor housing to a .60 (from .42) and put in GTX2687 wheels, while porting out the turbine housing to get the best possible flow as they are a little small for what a lot of people try to push through them.  I have been very happy with the results so far but due to the displacement bump on my car (2.6 -> 3.4) its not possible to do a fair back to back...

GTX hybrids.jpg

My experience high flowing Twin GTR turbos internally gated is the turbos has issues dumping back pressure through a 3 or 3.5 inches exhaust. -5 on stock cams is very laggy, without been able to dump back pressure, fancy billet wheels can not run into their peek efficiencies. I've personally used -9 specs in my own GTR, pretty happy with that and thats recommended for road and track use.

  • Like 1

Piggaz - Its heading in for the final tune in just over over week but on the run in tune (standard 98, wastegate pressure (~15psi) and zip in terms of timing) it knocks out 342KW at the treads @ 4600rpm. Will post up a full build post when its tuned as my previous build post got rejected / deleted...

 

 

I reckon the best replacements based on standard sized RB26 compressor and turbine housings is the -9 turbos . They may not have fancy CNC'd compressor wheels in them but they appear to work very well in a 2568cc 1500Kg GTR . They are not a ring in but a dialed in unit so a result is not a fingers crossed guess .

Hi Sneaky pete

Why didn't you end up testing them?  Do you still have them?

Yes i had read that whole thread a while ago, and recently re-read it all.

There was one guy who said he had great success, e.g 80hp more than -5's with -5 like response.
But I don't get why others say the GTX will hardly offer any more efficiency when trying to use RB26 style housings,
example how Tao at Hypergear is saying it wont really work out, I'm just trying to see where the confusion ends
as so far only 1 person has sumbitted awesome feedback, but most turbo shops and builders say the GTX just wont give any real benefit.

What's the go with the new HKS units?  
Link?  Are they bolt on to replace factory RB26 units?

Edited by RB335
  • 4 weeks later...

I am very interested in knowing as well.  This past weekend I talked to another guy running -5's with GTX in his R33, and he likes it very much.  But for my own setup I have been looking at standard -9's for a while, and so far I can't find any information/feedback on upgrading standard -9's with GTX. 

What I'm saying is the gtx and -5 rear is a bigger wheel than the -7/-9, so it's going to be laggier but have more power potential. There isno best turbo, all depends on your goals.

Didn't know atp is making kits, go any info/links?

11 hours ago, sneakey pete said:

Didn't know atp is making kits, go any info/links?

ATP probably has one of the worst websites to navigate...  Go to GTX section of the website first, then click on the size of 'GTX w/o turbine' you want and you can find additional options.  Here is the link for -5/-10 housing, you have to scroll all the way to the bottom and the last option available is to add .64 a/r T25 -5/-10 housing for $225.42 USD.

http://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Store_Code=tp&Product_Code=GRT-TBO-188&Category_Code=GTX

 

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...