Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, discopotato03 said:

It occurs to me that Garrett are taking a long time to bring larger versions of this G Series to the market .

Its time they got their finger out in my opinion and had a look at bringing out the next turbine size up in the G series .  

Keep an eye on the end of year trade shows 

  • 1 month later...

Yeah they are clearly an improvement over the GTX series, though if you look at the most recent result added to the EFR thread of the EFR7163 on an SR20 it makes it seem like there is more catching up to do to get to EFR status - granted the 7163 is probably the best performer "per pound" of the EFR range.

52 minutes ago, discopotato03 said:

I reading a few claims at various sites that Garrett may have the G30 on show at SEMA .

Anyone know anything about this ?

A .

Yeah, I've been saying for a while that all the noises I heard suggested that they intended on releasing the rest of the range - and have certainly not heard anything to suggest that doesn't still apply.  There seems to be a fair likelyhood we'll see G-series "up to 1000hp", which presumably will mean up to around 90lb/min turbos.

 

8 minutes ago, Lithium said:

Yeah, I've been saying for a while that all the noises I heard suggested that they intended on releasing the rest of the range - and have certainly not heard anything to suggest that doesn't still apply.  There seems to be a fair likelyhood we'll see G-series "up to 1000hp", which presumably will mean up to around 90lb/min turbos.

 

I'm patiently waiting too, if they are going to take another year I will end up biting the bullet and getting a GTX3582 Gen 2

But from the testing done by Sasha the G-Series turbos look very impressive.

2 hours ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

But from the testing done by Sasha the G-Series turbos look very impressive.

I was conflicted about it tbh, it looked much better than the out-going Garrett turbos however - if you compare his SR20 result with the SR20 result posted for an EFR7163 in the Borg Warner thread recently it leaves things looking like the G25-framed turbos may be overshadowed by an old dog.

1 hour ago, Lithium said:

I was conflicted about it tbh, it looked much better than the out-going Garrett turbos however - if you compare his SR20 result with the SR20 result posted for an EFR7163 in the Borg Warner thread recently it leaves things looking like the G25-framed turbos may be overshadowed by an old dog.

BW EFR hands down are quite the performer - however their resilence to abuse isn't that high as many have experienced. So for me the Garrett brand (as much hate as it gets by certain people in SAU - not you, others) tends to be the best option not to mention I get better pricing for them too :D

In other news, still need to get my car running properly first and give Tao some data I promised him about 2 years ago LOL

 

  • Like 1

I'll reserve judgement until the G30 and 35 are released and the market gets to test them . Garrett is obviously putting them up against the older GT versions and the market will soon know if they aren't much if any better .

I'm most interested in the G30 and how it goes response wise compared to the GT3076R/GTX3071R . I'd like to see a bit less inertia and a bit better wheel efficiencies , in other words same power as a GTX3071R with better spool . 

A .

17 minutes ago, discopotato03 said:

I'll reserve judgement until the G30 and 35 are released and the market gets to test them . Garrett is obviously putting them up against the older GT versions and the market will soon know if they aren't much if any better .

I'm most interested in the G30 and how it goes response wise compared to the GT3076R/GTX3071R . I'd like to see a bit less inertia and a bit better wheel efficiencies , in other words same power as a GTX3071R with better spool . 

A .

I'm going to put my neck out here and say I'd bet a cheeseburger that if there is a "wheel size equivalent" of the GTX3071R that the G30 will not spool as well.  I think with a lot of turbos, ESPECIALLY the G-series you need to pay attention to the flow levels provided and compare response with other turbos which provide that amount of flow.   

I would view it that the flow efficiency "mm^2 for mm^2" is much higher, while the response "mm^2 for mm^2" is a bit worse.  If you want to compare a G-series with an equivalent GTX-series for response, compare the G25-660 with a GTX3076R - it'll be hard to get a much closer comparison between two completely different series of turbos.   If you want to compare the G30 with something to get a gauge of the response improvements, you should be comparing with a GTX35-series turbo.

That's how I view it, anyway.

Edited by Lithium

Day one of SEMA and Garrett have unveiled the new G42 1200 and G42 1450 respectively with new turbine wheel and aero plus stainless steel turbine housing. These will be available in Australia next year, pricing is yet to be confirmed.

https://www.facebook.com/GCGTurbosAust/?__tn__=%2Cd%2CP-R&eid=ARBjacV7wG2nImRs247yR4OIQWNGQzawsgn9Nh5Q0DiNuf8l661e8PnE92xc6mLc6PblK3OBaFHPbTNm

 

45081590_1941165239282163_14082468263388

 

45027288_1941165269282160_38838666071134

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Those look pretty grunty but I'm quite disappointed that they are putting across the impression that the two G42 releases are the only new G-series being released at this time, it's really missing the mark of what people are looking for.

Borg Warner on the other hand have quite possibly nailed it

  • Like 1
  • 4 weeks later...

bit the bullet and went with a g25-660 .92 external gate on the sti. ej25 on e85. will post dyno results when I have it on there. wont be till after xmas.

compared to a similarly rated efr that's in the shop, its nearly half the size. (don't know what efr exactly, but told its only rated to 750hp)

this replaced a twinscroll td05 20g setup. have to say with a very basic road tune to make it driveable and zerod wastegate duty. it starts to make boost earlier than the twinscroll setup. it also made 15psi by 3k rpm. again, zero duty and a very rough tune. to say im excited is an understatement. will report back when link is installed an tuned.

  • Like 2
17 hours ago, discopotato03 said:

Well if the G30 is going to be how some here expect it to be then I can only hope there will be a G28 , or a least a G28 turbine option . Sort of like a 6758 wheel size wise but less bulky .

That's pretty much what the G25-660 is.... except with EFR7670 flow

  • 1 month later...

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

    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
×
×
  • Create New...