HTA3076 VS GTX3076 help
Sep 15, 2012, 09:03 PM
#63
Evolving Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 371
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03 I know exactly where you are coming from with the GT30 UHP turbine . The 53.8mm GT28 NS111 turbine in 76 trim does have larger 60mm brothers known as TR30 turbines used in Garretts TR30R competition turbos . They are made in 73 and 76 trims .
Still don't know why they don't ofer them in aftermarket GT BB turbos but again as was mentioned here recently some think the TR30 design may not be long term reliable in inconel . I think I did read a while back that TR30 turbines were made in another material and that may not be cost effective or long term reliable enough for Garrett to put a warranty on .
I also think the NS111 having fewer more open blades and wide tips makes it a very effective turbine for its size .
With compressors I'm not so sure the mass of the wheel makes a lot of difference to "spool" . I reckon its the mass of any extra air its greater blade area (sail area/diameter) is churning plus any extra wheel mass that makes the innertial lag difference .
Just about everyone knows that adding a 20G compressor to a std TD05HR turbo is like hitching a trailer full of bricks to your Evo . AFAIK its the same compressor wheel family in big trim form and intended to be powered by larger TD06 family turbines . The weight difference in 16 and 20G wheels would be trivial but obviously the turbine doesn't think the drive loads are because if they weren't the lag difference would be zip .
My theory is that turbo manufacturers like big trim wheels because thats the way to support more power while keeping the turbocharger as compact and as cheap to manufacture as possible . Bigish diameter medium trim wheels need big base diameter housings .
There used to be lots of comparisons of the GT3582R/T04Z and GT4088R . The 88R was probably the physically largest heaviest and most expensive of the three and it used the smallest compressor trim at 52T . In truth the T04Zs P trim turbine is 76T where the BB GT40 turbine is 78T but I remember some people being very impressed with GT4088Rs when they were new .
Anyway the 78 trim size did migrate to the GT37BB turbos and I think its about time Garrett got their heads out of their collective ***** and did the same with GT30 and GT35 UHP turbines .
YESS , we know that ultimately they would trade off a small amount of maximum flow potential but they do anyway in anything less than the largest available AR turbine housing . The turbine is the turbochargers engine and turning thermally excited exhaust gas energy in to shaft power to drive a compressor is all that they do .
Garrett needs a cheap easy way to make commonly available GT30 and GT35 turbos more responsive and again we all know twin scrolls with twin internal wastegates Evo style is not for everyone for cost reasons .
If they produced 78T 30 and 35 turbines people could still screw around with AR sizes to get the trade off of exhaust flow vs boost threshold .
20 yr old turbine designs shouldn't last forever .
Have a nice day Lithium , cheers A .
Still don't know why they don't ofer them in aftermarket GT BB turbos but again as was mentioned here recently some think the TR30 design may not be long term reliable in inconel . I think I did read a while back that TR30 turbines were made in another material and that may not be cost effective or long term reliable enough for Garrett to put a warranty on .
I also think the NS111 having fewer more open blades and wide tips makes it a very effective turbine for its size .
With compressors I'm not so sure the mass of the wheel makes a lot of difference to "spool" . I reckon its the mass of any extra air its greater blade area (sail area/diameter) is churning plus any extra wheel mass that makes the innertial lag difference .
Just about everyone knows that adding a 20G compressor to a std TD05HR turbo is like hitching a trailer full of bricks to your Evo . AFAIK its the same compressor wheel family in big trim form and intended to be powered by larger TD06 family turbines . The weight difference in 16 and 20G wheels would be trivial but obviously the turbine doesn't think the drive loads are because if they weren't the lag difference would be zip .
My theory is that turbo manufacturers like big trim wheels because thats the way to support more power while keeping the turbocharger as compact and as cheap to manufacture as possible . Bigish diameter medium trim wheels need big base diameter housings .
There used to be lots of comparisons of the GT3582R/T04Z and GT4088R . The 88R was probably the physically largest heaviest and most expensive of the three and it used the smallest compressor trim at 52T . In truth the T04Zs P trim turbine is 76T where the BB GT40 turbine is 78T but I remember some people being very impressed with GT4088Rs when they were new .
Anyway the 78 trim size did migrate to the GT37BB turbos and I think its about time Garrett got their heads out of their collective ***** and did the same with GT30 and GT35 UHP turbines .
YESS , we know that ultimately they would trade off a small amount of maximum flow potential but they do anyway in anything less than the largest available AR turbine housing . The turbine is the turbochargers engine and turning thermally excited exhaust gas energy in to shaft power to drive a compressor is all that they do .
Garrett needs a cheap easy way to make commonly available GT30 and GT35 turbos more responsive and again we all know twin scrolls with twin internal wastegates Evo style is not for everyone for cost reasons .
If they produced 78T 30 and 35 turbines people could still screw around with AR sizes to get the trade off of exhaust flow vs boost threshold .
20 yr old turbine designs shouldn't last forever .
Have a nice day Lithium , cheers A .
Last edited by discopotato03; Sep 15, 2012 at 09:07 PM.
Oct 1, 2013, 09:50 PM
#64
Bringing this back from the dead for discussion. I'm looking for a good pump gas turbo on a stock 2.0. I was set on a BB Red but the stock frame stuff is rumored to have EGT issues on road courses. I wasn't able to find any good graph's for the GTX/HTA30xxx
Looking for at least 420whp on 93 and 450+ on race gas on a stock 2.0. Few questions
BB Red vs GTX/HTA30xxx pump/race gas comparison, A Real Dyno graph would be great.
What about the spool difference between those and the GTX/HTA 3582R. Is it 500-800rpm and a 80-100hp?
Thanks in advance.
Looking for at least 420whp on 93 and 450+ on race gas on a stock 2.0. Few questions
BB Red vs GTX/HTA30xxx pump/race gas comparison, A Real Dyno graph would be great.
What about the spool difference between those and the GTX/HTA 3582R. Is it 500-800rpm and a 80-100hp?
Thanks in advance.
Oct 3, 2013, 02:06 PM
#65
we've had good luck with the GTX3576- and the CBRD32 (proprietary billet comp 76mm extended tip and 35R turbine)- almost identical setups--
our 2L track car build- with .82 Vband and our LMP setup matches the spoolup of the BBK full that was on the same car before by 4000rpm- and revs to 9000rpm-
500+whp on 93 at barely 25 psi for road racing- pretty awesome
cb
our 2L track car build- with .82 Vband and our LMP setup matches the spoolup of the BBK full that was on the same car before by 4000rpm- and revs to 9000rpm-
500+whp on 93 at barely 25 psi for road racing- pretty awesome
cb
Oct 3, 2013, 04:03 PM
#66
Evolved Member
Oct 14, 2013, 03:27 PM
#67
we've had good luck with the GTX3576- and the CBRD32 (proprietary billet comp 76mm extended tip and 35R turbine)- almost identical setups--
our 2L track car build- with .82 Vband and our LMP setup matches the spoolup of the BBK full that was on the same car before by 4000rpm- and revs to 9000rpm-
500+whp on 93 at barely 25 psi for road racing- pretty awesome
cb
our 2L track car build- with .82 Vband and our LMP setup matches the spoolup of the BBK full that was on the same car before by 4000rpm- and revs to 9000rpm-
500+whp on 93 at barely 25 psi for road racing- pretty awesome
cb
Do you have a dynograph of that car with a boost reference?
Does anyone else have any more data on this 30R topic?
Oct 16, 2013, 08:41 AM
#68
Newbie
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Long Island
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the gtx3576 matchs the powerband of a bbk full before 4000rpm on a 2.0l how is that too laggy for the streets on a 2.0l powerplant. Countless people have stated that the bbk full was the best street car bolt on turbo on the market period. and if the gtx3576 or for that matter the hta3576 matchs the spool up of a bbk full on a 2.0l then i am all for replaceing my laggy hta3586 on my 2.0l with a hta3576 since micheal from FP says he can build me one. Iam going to have to dig deeper but i think CBRD turned me on to something here
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
240Z TwinTurbo
Evo Dyno Tuning / Results
49
Nov 10, 2013 09:55 PM
sonny0186
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain
0
Jul 17, 2013 07:48 PM
