it was 173 kW (235 Ps) ...


.

 

so I looked for that fixed VDI in the past; shows it in the USDM parts diagram, but not in the actual parts price listings. Only the actuated one is priced. It’s so easy to fix in the closed position that it didn’t really matter much.

 

I was disappointed it wasn't a solid core ...still worth putting it in now that I have it.

 

I suppose so

you could always fill it though I doubt it’d really matter much

 

Buoyed by the success of my new manifold I decided to lash out on something pretty special:

With some much appreciated help from Gregs .............. Garrett G30-660-1.01 is on its way !




Should get a major spoolup improvement with maybe a little extra power even.............

 

nice, V-band is definitely the way to go if you have that option

not too much different than an EFR 7163 compressor map within the applicable range
.

 

Same maximum flow ...but way more efficient In the PR ranges It'll be operating in. The 7163 map suits higher boost (smaller engine).

 

yeah, those are really nice efficiencies, it will suit the APV valves better for sure

 

I would have preferred to run the G30-770 TBH . But unfortunately that also jumps up in compressor housing size and I believe I'll be struggling even with the smaller 660 housing.

 

 

so I see they have a G25-660 with a 0.92 open T3 housing that has about the same compressor map that’s only good for about 24 lb/min exhaust flow though, be limited to maybe low to mid 7xxx rpm or so, would probably give the little EFR that could a run for it’s money down low though

same is available as an open T4 for the G30-660.

supposed to eventually be a 1.06 divided T4 for the G30-660, but as best I can tell they haven’t released it yet. I’d like to see that. The only thing that bother’s me on the v-band housing is they call it a 3” size, but that’s the OD of the flange. The ID of the opening is actually less than 2.5” (around 2.45” or so). That’s kind of small for a 13B, smaller than an open T3. Above 7k it might effectively create more of a restriction than you might otherwise expect for a 1.01 housing.

 

Where did you see those housings ? Would def. have preferred a T3 as it's way easier to make the manifold for.
The ID for the Vband hsg is 56mm
T3 area approx : 2500mm2
Vband area : 2460mm2
So not much difference there. Would be a problem if It were internally wastegated but being external means it doesn't need to be any bigger.

 

sorry, that was me being an idiot recollecting incorrectly; my memory is getting worse by the day. Thank you for correcting me, was thinking the dimension shown was 50mm, but it’s 60mm with the throat ID being the dimension you stated





they weren’t loose housings, but the turbo could be ordered that way. So they’re out there somewhere despite not being listed on the Garrett site. I saw an article on Garrett for a 30-660 build and noticed the turbo had a bolt-on flange, then scoured the web until I found a site that had a bunch of different turbine housing configurations listed.

The new manifold design I came up with would work best for fitment with a T4 flange. I can make a v-band work with an adapter, but that requires space I’d rather not give up. It’d also transition sharply, which is not good for flow/response.

Let me go find that info again ...

 

here it is, you have to scour down through the list carefully:

https://www.turbokits.com/Turbo_Chargers/Garrett/G_Series/

.

 

Thanks to everyone for sharing the information on the website, I have learned a lot from reading here which only makes me realize how much there is to consider when a person designs a system. Brett's the endless adjustments for small improvements have created a remarkable turbo system, when are you going to sell it as a kit?

 

Cheers NZ , It's highly unlikely I'll ever do a complete system , however I will make a few extra manifolds (+ engine mount) soon for anyone prepared to do the rest.

 

That's strange that they don't sell loose housings . Also interesting how much more expensive the v band hsgs are than the T3 and T4.

 

Add me to the list of interested in the manifold+mount. I'm Seth Bibler on Facebook. Happy to do all the rest.

 

Lol Brett, a suggested items list would be awesome but I can figure out everything else required (back scrolling through this thread) and am really hoping the manifold price doesn't include all the development/experimental costs. Several engines and turbos would bump up the prices beyond my affordable level.

 

You might have been comparing them to the IWG housings, which cost more. The std. v-band turbos are about the same price.
.

 

so the one thing that sticks out to me, having run a bunch of Matchbot comparisons on BW turbos, the Garrett turbine flow rates for an equal size turbine wheel are much higher on the turbine map that Matchbot indicates as the max turbine flow for a BW turbine.

as an example, Matchbot indicates that the BW 7064 1.05 A/R divided turbine housing maxes out at 21 lb/min.

but on the Garrett G25-660 turbine map it indicates that the 0.94 A/R housing maxes out at a higher 24 lb/min turbine flow.

the thing is, the Garrett turbine wheel (54mm-i/49mm-e) is way smaller than the BW turbine wheel (64mm-i/56mm-e). In order for that to be true, the Garrett turbine flow efficiency would have to be substantially higher the the BW turbine wheel flow efficiency. It almost seems impossible, which brings me back around to the BW Matchbot software output being questionable.
.

 

Well that is what Garrett is saying makes these new turbos better than their old ones. More efficient turbines and more efficient compressor wheels allowing the G series to make more power for a given size range .It's Garrett's answer to the EFR series but approaching it in a different way.
Here is my old GT35 1.01 vs a G30 1.01 . Note the housings are identical in size apart from the hole for the turbine .... yet these two housings are shown as flowing identical amounts of air.

 

I may have to take another look at the G25-660 then

 

I went for the G30 1.01 because I want to try max out the 660 compressor but the 25 will surely spool better.

 

I was looking at a dyno comparison on a Subaru 2.0L between a G25-660 0.92 A/R and the prior GTX3076 0.64 A/R that it replaced, and the G25 killed it across the entire graph; low - high rpm. That’s pretty impressive.

It seems like nobody is doing much with these on a rotary, or at least not down in the lower power range. Hats off to you for bringing this up.
.