Brettus Turbo IV Garrett G30-660
 

I figured now that I have the actual turbo in my possession it's a good time to start a new thread. There has already been some discussion on this over in my turbo III thread (discussion starts here : https://www.rx8club.com/series-i-maj...2/ ) .
Reasons for choosing the Garrett 30-660 : finally there is a no compromise, high flow, quick spool, compact turbo that will actually fit nicely on the Renesis in a low mount position.
Goals:
1/420-430whp
2/Widest power band ever seen on a Renesis
The setup :
Garrett G30-660 1.01AR
Manifold : self built log style (see Turbo III thread)
Wastegate : 38mm Tial
Intercooler : Custom vibrant vertical tube
BOV : Synapse DV
Fuel : modified stock pump basket with 340l/hr AEM pump
Injectors: OEM brown P1 , uncapped yellows P2 and sec
Tuning : Bretttus self tuned with Mazdaedit





Huge thanks to Gregs for hooking me up with this little beauty!

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...b3df6031c5.jpg
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...416ab82d41.jpg
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...2cc171bf0d.jpg
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...7bb8d454a2.jpg
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...69b231ce71.jpg

Compressor flow diagram . Should provide just enough to get into the low 400s.

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...b0b93273bc.jpg

I'll be making another version of my log manifold first seen in my turboIII thread . I really love how that turned out so time to turn it up a notch !

https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...b4983a38ea.jpg

Brett, your never ending quest for small improvements is a great story to follow. Having learned a ton of things about turbos and related items from your previous thread I will be following to see how this turns out.

Maybe make a few extra manifolds to sell in the RX8 market, I'm certainly not the only one interested in purchasing it.

First one will be installed in a country near you ....soon :)

nice, looking forward to it

Why do I feel punished for living in a place with 6 months of winter? :banghead: on the plus side being patient I can just copy an already proven system complete with tuning.

Brett, maybe need a memory refresher, but at 18psi are you using water/meth injection or just relying on ethanol mixed fuel?

I haven't been running at 18 ,16 has been my limit on the 3582 and running E40- E60 when I do. The chart just demonstrates that this little pea shooter turbo will actually go there reasonably efficiently. Whether I go that high or not :dunno: :suspect:

Mock up showing engine mount setup.
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...b9482a648f.png

you’re not far off from my OE-type engine mount/bracket eliminator mod, dang kid at work supposedly doing the drawings for me keeps stringing it out though. I had intended to send one to you for testing. It will free up a bunch of space.

I agree that eliminating the mount is a biggie .
The design above only works with my manifold but together they work really well and there really aren't any compromises any more.
,

sure there are, but we can save that for my thread

on 2nd thought, it may not work out on RHD. So for your situation that may be correct. Keep forgetting that the toilet bowl swirls in the opposite direction down there than up here.
.

Nice! Considerable more space for the comp intake. Hopefully not too many gymnastics required to maneuver the steering column.

If by 'toilet bowl' you mean 'steering column' then yeah ..that's still there.

no, I just forgot it’s on the opposite side down there, the same way a whirlpool spins the “opposite” direction in the southern hemisphere than in the north

so you have more constraints with that there than we do here, my apology for overlooking it

G30-660 vs GTX35 (To4b) They look very similar . G30 comp hsg is slightly bigger than the TO4B , GT 35 is slightly longer (center of turbine to center of comp outlet). The 30 has a 0.7AR vs 0.6 for the TO4B ..... Garrett did a lot of work to get a larger AR within the same dimensions.
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...8b6288095.jpeg
The GT35 turbine (top) supposedly flows the same as the G30 (bottom) . We will see................
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...ea078031b9.jpg
Took a couple of attempts to get compressor lining up just right . 1.01 Turbine housing is very tight fit but at least it does fit. Barely enough room for my heat shield.
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...ed99f71f4b.jpg

[QUOTE=Brettus;4934702]G30-660 vs GTX35 (To4b) They look very similar . G30 comp hsg is slightly bigger than the TO4B , GT 35 is slightly longer (center of turbine to center of comp outlet). The 30 has a 0.7AR vs 0.6 for the TO4B ..... Garrett did a lot of work to get a larger AR within the same dimensions.
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...8b6288095.jpeg

I'm curious to see what type of response you see from switching from the T04B hosting to the new one. I was running a GT3076R with a T04E compressor housing and I switched to GTX3076R with a T04B and there was a noticeable difference in torque below 5K. The GT30 felt like it had more power down low but it fell on it's face up top. The GTX has more airflow based on the MAF readings and doesn't fall in it's face up top. I think I'm going to switch back to a T04E in the future.

Yes , I think there is something to that. I would def. go for the larger hsg if it fits . I have long held a suspicion that the smaller hsg was an issue (especially with the 82mm comp.) and that was part of the decision to take the leap into this new turbo, knowing that the published map was created with the hsg I'd be using.

any pics from above?

.

*following with interest*

Brettus, your never ending pursuit of knowledge / results is quite commendable my friend.

Cheers Jedi.
These last few days I've been trying to get this thing together and it's going really badly. I think I need to go away ........... and come back.

sometimes that's a good approach, just walk away for a bit and come back with a fresh perspective.
you'll figure it out, just a matter of time.

sorry for your troubles and also sounding like a broken record by asking again, but will a T3 turbine housing help?

Was also curious to confirm the ID of the turbine inlet manifold adapter flange; thinking it should be approx. 60.xmm ID?
.

Team , it's nothing to do with that. The turbo fits fine .
It's just me atm.

Re the adaptor..... Don't have access to it any more but we discusssed it in the other thread and I gave you a dimn. (measured with vernier calipers).

thats the ID of the turbine housing

what I was asking for is what pipe or tube size is the flange that attaches to it machined for. I’m pretty sure it’s sized for 2” Sch. 10 or 5 pipe, which has a 2.375” OD (60.3mm).


https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...f704c09c9.jpeg


well I hope things get better regardless.

.

Brettus, for your custom intercooler are you modifying the vertical one you had before or creating a completely new one?

While it's all assembled and can't measure it ..... I just remembered that I actually got some pipe thinking I'd need it. The flange is machined to fit 21/2" OD pipe.

No the custom IC is the one I made up a year or so ago. Details are in the turbo 111 thread.

First test drive yesterday.
This turbo is acting way different to the other one ..... I'm having trouble controlling the boost. I suspect it's because backpressure is way less but will confirm that today. I have a few things I can do to try and rectify this.
As far as spoolup goes ............. it's nothing spectacular so far. I need to check a few things there as well before I do a direct comparison with the old turbo.

hmm, I know the v-band flange is 3.0” OD for the flange itself and 2-1/2” pipe is 2.875” OD, doesn’t seem quite right 🤔

2” Sch. 10 pipe is 2.375” OD, unless you meant 2.5” OD tube, then that seems like a better fit to the ID you previously mentioned. The reason I’m asking is because I’ve yet to find it stated somewhere and it will probably be Monday before my supplier can verify.


https://cimg7.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...8c90f2a69.jpeg
.
https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...12c841d7d.jpeg
.
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...a17bcc210.jpeg
.

I was asking for pictures from the top to help give me a feel for where mine will be positioned, because for the same reason; there are still a number of dimensions not listed anywhere yet either. Mine will sit quite a bit further forward than where yours is located. I’m just about to mock up some housings in my engine bay though and it should help me some.
.

Sorry I can't be more certain . As far as the pic from the top goes ............you can't even see the turbo from the top so that wont help you either.

ok, it seemed at that stage nothing else was installed and it may have been more visible, but thanks just the same :)

More testing today .
Results so far:
G30 1.01AR vs GTX3582 0.82AR twin scroll

EMAP/IMAP is reduced by a fair bit 1.46 vs 1.9 . Aside from the bigger AR ..........I think this comes down mainly to the better compressor housing as mentioned above, as according to Garrett turbine flow maps there shouldn't be that much difference. This bodes well for a really good peak WHP result though.

Spoolup is almost identical . So this aint no EFR substitute as hoped. All the same .... it's still very good considering the improvement in backpressure.

Boost control : this has gone AWOL . Basically I can't get below 11psi and it spikes early on. Gunna try a smaller spring on the WG (it's 7psi ATM) . Failing that , I may end up pulling the manifold for some 'tweaks' .

well some things I could say but wont except you’re not maybe assessing the EFR comment properly

you have same spool and better emap, which says plenty. Which again you may want to review my own comments in various recent threads about the G-series relative to BW turbine size/flow. Essentially imho you have a 7670 compressor with a 8374 turbine housing. This is not meant as a criticism, but rather I’m only trying to help point you in what I believe is the correct direction.

I strongly believe that with the G-series turbos; the old things have passed away, and a new path is before us. Which is why I was pushing the 0.83 housing some. That’s not all imo, but going to leave it at that rather than chance being taken the wrong way. Otherwise maybe my assessment is possibly incorrect, but regardless am only intending & wishing for you to have the best possible outcome. :)
.

Coming from where I was at with the old turbo emap , is why I went for the 1.01. Now that I have some results ...yeah ...I'd go for the 0.82 in hindsight because this car will likely spend more time in the lower rpms than at peak power/rpm. This 1.01 housing will suit a more track oriented car.

Boost control ...sorted! Found the hose going to the solenoid was pinched.
Now that is fixed ...starting to see some good results. This 2nd gear log is at only 10psi tapering to 12 :

https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...7ee75f3de6.png

Still creeping at top end a bit more than I'd like. Will work on that next time manifold is out.

Brett, Looking good...top end @ 10 psi ...very nice!

But the spool doesn't appear as good as with your previous set-up, i.e. 250 ftlbs @ 3750, and 290-ish ftlbs @ 4500.

What do you think ... more dialing in... or boost required; or hardware related?

looking good for what it is. :icon_tup:

it’s justing starting out at only 10 - 12 psig, next thing you know somebody will be chiding him to turn up teh boostz :suspect:
.

It's just as good .... most of my old runs were in 3rd gear which makes a big difference in spoolup. Also: this was only 10psi down low.
Unfortunately the piece of road I was using that was perfect for safe 3rd gear logs is now a through road and speed limit reduced. So third gear logs are a problem.
Top end was 12psi BTW.

MOA BEWST BABY !

As you can see below on this 3rd gear log , boost is gradually rising on this run 11.5 to 13.5 at peak. . The opposite to what most setups do but something to work on . Have tried adjusting gain but that's not helping it. Hits 11.5psi at exactly 3500rpm which is slightly better than the GTX35 twin scroll

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...662122f798.png
Log below shows EMAP at same boost level as above. Blue line is at 3500 above and below.
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...49dafbfbb3.png


Power from same run . Keep in mind also that it's a hot day (25C) before being too critical.
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...ce72b2a423.png

:squint: that’s like a spring day here :rollingla

.

Only said it to wind you up ... LOL

just to confirm, the Garrett male v-band manifold flange (shown above) that mates to the turbine inlet female V-band flange is machined with a 2.375” ID to mate up with 2” pipe (2.375” OD) and the Sch. 10 wall thickness (2.157” ID) is the closest match to the turbine housing inlet ID.

There’s also 2.375” OD tubing out there, but it’s likely to only have 0.065” wall thickness (2.245” ID) or less. So being thinner it might be best to use T321 Stainless or 625 Inconel to handle the weight/heat load. Either can be welded to T304 stainless but require the correct filler wire material for a successful weld joint.
.

Added EMAP to post above .

Agree re the compressor size but don't see it that way re the turbine .... I see the turbine in the g30 as the same 'size' flow wise as the GT35 turbine which I would have thought was equivalent to the 7670 turbine. How did you arrive at 8374 conclusion?

by comparing maximum turbine mass flow rate capacity; again with the new G-series, IMO can’t just judge by physical size or A/R number because the turbine is setting a new standard on flow vs size. That was something that was already occurring some before the G-series. I realize now that the EFR turbines don’t really flow as well as might be suggested.

Stated this before, but let me try again

the G25-660 0.92 turbine maxes out roughly equal to 1.03 A/R on a EFR7670 wrt mass flow; kind of guessing some, because the EFR turbine choices are 0.92 and 1.05. So it’s a bit between them towards the larger one. Most of the EFR7670 results on RX7Club are with the 0.92 IWG housing. So you can see right there that the G25-660 0.92 turbine flows more than the EFR7670 0.92 turbine despite having a much smaller turbine wheel. Which is exactly what Garrett is advertising; ultra-high flow turbine design.

in turn, the G25-660 0.92 turbine combo is equal in max flow to the G30-660 0.83 A/R combo. With the 1.01 housing the G30 turbine flows about where the 8374 0.92 IWG flows. That’s making 500+hp on an REW.

I think some of this goes back into the history of your setups over the years. Way back when I was recommending the 0.83 for your GT35, but the data and results were pushing you to the 1.01 A/R. Then with the most recent manifold you finally came back to the 0.83. Honestly, I was a bit surprised that you chose the 1.01 with the G30. Now you see that emap is down.

So if I had to sum it all up, imho the various manifold configuration(s) you’ve been experimenting with are what have been driving the emap results more than the engine and that was being reacted to with A/R choice. It would seem now with the G30 that the 0.83 housing might be what you’d want to have with the latest turbo manifold to provide the best spool without the emap becoming too high. Garrett not offering any divided turbine housings for G30 yet and it being an open scroll would also suggest using a lower A/R in general as well.
.

Where is that information? I'm not sure how to do the calculation they show on matchbot or how that relates back to the flow charts Garrett post.
FYI ............................. the EMAP I'm now seeing with the G30 1.01 correlates very well with the 7670 turbine with similar sized AR.

As far as your suggestion that the manifold was driving backpressure up ... I don't agree. Firstly remember we are measuring at the turbo so we don't even know what effect the manifold is having on backpressure.
Secondly , I always felt that I was seeing 2-3psi of backpressure that went unexplained and I spent a lot of time effort and money trying to eliminate it. Part of the reason for getting the G30 turbo (as I explained earlier) was a suspicion that the compressor housing was choking flow and creating that backpressure .When I picked the comp. housing for my old setup, I was taking Garretts own advice that compressor housing size has a minimal effect but given the results I'm now seeing , I'm convinced that the smaller housing was the issue.

As far as AR choice now that I have all the information ..... as I said before .......I agree.

Again, as I told you before, the numbers come from Matchbot and I was assuming the values it displays are correct. The turbine maps there are no different than the Garrett turbine maps. How do you know where max flow occurs on a Garrett turbine map?


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...96a60ce1c.jpeg
.
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...5a16fdfc8.jpeg
.

https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...d3477132b.jpeg
.

Thanks for that , I had been thinking that the numbers in the table didn't directly correlate with the Garrett numbers as they didn't seem to be lining up as expected.