When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
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).
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).
.
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.
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.
. .
.
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.
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 :
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?
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.
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
Log below shows EMAP at same boost level as above. Blue line is at 3500 above and below.
Power from same run . Keep in mind also that it's a hot day (25C) before being too critical.
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).
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.
.
Essentially imho you have a 7670 compressor with a 8374 turbine housing.
.
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.
.
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.
.
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?
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.
01-01-2021, 09:08 PM
that’s like a spring day here 
