Garrett GTX Turbos
02-08-2011, 07:04 AM
#1
Garrett GTX Turbos
The Garret GTX3071R, GTX3076R and GTX3582R turbos are fairly new, released around the end of 2010.
These turbos have a forged compressor wheel that seems to provide higher air flow (looks like they took a few tips from Precision). Below is the comparison of the GT3071R vs. GTX3071R. The GTX3071R flows about 20% more air than its GT counterpart.
The GTX3071R should get a properly built twin turbo setup to 1000 whp. Since it has a higher trim value than the GT3071R, it might be a bit laggier, but this is mere speculation on my part.
It looks like the GTX3071R would be a good alternative to the GT3582R for those seeking to get to 1000 whp on a twin turbo setup - since the GTX3071R is smaller, there should be fewer issues with fitment. Also, I would expect the GTX3071R to spoolup faster than the GT3582R.
I would love to see someone give the GTX turbos a try. I would, but I already have two brand new GT3071R turbos waiting to be installed.
These turbos have a forged compressor wheel that seems to provide higher air flow (looks like they took a few tips from Precision). Below is the comparison of the GT3071R vs. GTX3071R. The GTX3071R flows about 20% more air than its GT counterpart.
The GTX3071R should get a properly built twin turbo setup to 1000 whp. Since it has a higher trim value than the GT3071R, it might be a bit laggier, but this is mere speculation on my part.
It looks like the GTX3071R would be a good alternative to the GT3582R for those seeking to get to 1000 whp on a twin turbo setup - since the GTX3071R is smaller, there should be fewer issues with fitment. Also, I would expect the GTX3071R to spoolup faster than the GT3582R.
I would love to see someone give the GTX turbos a try. I would, but I already have two brand new GT3071R turbos waiting to be installed.
02-08-2011, 07:29 AM
#2
These are the largest turbos I was hoping to use with my TT build. They are available with the smaller compressor housing, so it would work out well. I just need to find some time to get back on that project.
You are right about Garrett taking a page out of Precisions practises with the billet wheel. It seems that guys switching from the old cast wheel to the new PTE billets are making about 10% more power, and quicker spool do to the lighter wheels.
You are right about Garrett taking a page out of Precisions practises with the billet wheel. It seems that guys switching from the old cast wheel to the new PTE billets are making about 10% more power, and quicker spool do to the lighter wheels.
02-08-2011, 07:46 AM
#3
^^^
Looking again at the compressor map, it looks like the higher trim value means a bit of sacrifice on spoolup. The trim on the GTX30R is 58 whereas the GT30R is 56.
The GTX35R and the GT35R both have a 56 trim, so the spoolup looks to be about the same, while the GTX35R provides quite a bit more air flow.
Looking again at the compressor map, it looks like the higher trim value means a bit of sacrifice on spoolup. The trim on the GTX30R is 58 whereas the GT30R is 56.
The GTX35R and the GT35R both have a 56 trim, so the spoolup looks to be about the same, while the GTX35R provides quite a bit more air flow.
02-08-2011, 08:59 AM
#4
at ~1500 per turbo for the gtx3071 or almost 2000$ for the gtx3582, a tt kit would easily be in the 7000$-8000 range.
http://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchant...egory_Code=GTX
http://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchant...egory_Code=GTX
Last edited by str8dum1; 02-08-2011 at 09:01 AM.
02-08-2011, 10:25 AM
#5
at ~1500 per turbo for the gtx3071 or almost 2000$ for the gtx3582, a tt kit would easily be in the 7000$-8000 range.
http://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchant...egory_Code=GTX
http://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchant...egory_Code=GTX
The smallest turbine I see is 65/54 mm. The GT3071 is 56.5/51.8 mm.
The smalles compressor I see is 53.9/76.2 mm. The GT3071 is 53.1/71.0 mm.
Last edited by ttg35fort; 02-08-2011 at 10:32 AM.
02-08-2011, 10:32 AM
#6
Yes, they are not cheap. Does Precision make a turbo equivalent to the GT3071R. I looked out of curiosity, but on their website even their "small frame turbos" looked to be larger. Maybe I was reading it wrong or they don't have all of their turbos listed.
The smallest turbine I see is 65/54 mm. The GT3071 is 56.5/51.8 mm.
The smalles compressor I see is 53.9/76.2 mm. The GT3071 is 53.1/71 mm.
The smallest turbine I see is 65/54 mm. The GT3071 is 56.5/51.8 mm.
The smalles compressor I see is 53.9/76.2 mm. The GT3071 is 53.1/71 mm.
http://www.treadstoneperformance.com...install-33.pdf
02-08-2011, 10:48 AM
#7
Last edited by ttg35fort; 02-08-2011 at 12:48 PM.
Trending Topics
02-08-2011, 08:30 PM
#9
anywhoo, anybody contemplate the new borg warner efr turbos?? built in bov, boost controller, ti wheels, and adjustable wastegate
heres the link, halfway down
http://www.full-race.com/articles/bo...fr-turbos.html
02-09-2011, 03:27 PM
#12
Registered User
From my experience with the GTX lineup, they make excellent power for their size, much like the Precision CEA Billet lineup but are much lazier. I can't speak directly with the smaller frames like these as my experience is with GT42 frames and up.
Here's my theory: In the car world, you ALWAYS sacrifice something to gain something elsewhere. For example, larger cams generally relate to slight bottom end power/torque loss but result in a higher peak power number and raised effective RPM limit. This inversely proportioned relationship is true amongst many things car related (ignition timing, exhaust diameter, manifold design, etc). It is my theory that Garrett was so focused on improving the peak flow numbers (aka: power potential) for the GTX lineup, which was likely due to their attempt to be on par with the Precision CEA Billet lineup, that they disregarded the other areas of the flow chart. Compressor wheel aerodynamics speaks wonders about how the turbo will perform across the powerband and this seems to be evident with Garrett GTX turbos.
Reid
Here's my theory: In the car world, you ALWAYS sacrifice something to gain something elsewhere. For example, larger cams generally relate to slight bottom end power/torque loss but result in a higher peak power number and raised effective RPM limit. This inversely proportioned relationship is true amongst many things car related (ignition timing, exhaust diameter, manifold design, etc). It is my theory that Garrett was so focused on improving the peak flow numbers (aka: power potential) for the GTX lineup, which was likely due to their attempt to be on par with the Precision CEA Billet lineup, that they disregarded the other areas of the flow chart. Compressor wheel aerodynamics speaks wonders about how the turbo will perform across the powerband and this seems to be evident with Garrett GTX turbos.
Reid
02-09-2011, 03:51 PM
#13
^^^
With the GTX3071R vs GT3071R that appears to be true. The GTX3071R has greater compressor trim, and the compressor map seems to indicate a more lag in airflow at initial spoolup.
With the GTX3582R vs GT3582R, the same compressor trim is used. Based on the compressor map, there does not appear to be a lot of a sacrifice in air flow at spoolup, though there is a bit.
The question then is whether the new blades slow the onset of spoolup. That I don't know, but Sasha indicated that the lighter billit wheels allowed for faster spoolup.
With the GTX3071R vs GT3071R that appears to be true. The GTX3071R has greater compressor trim, and the compressor map seems to indicate a more lag in airflow at initial spoolup.
With the GTX3582R vs GT3582R, the same compressor trim is used. Based on the compressor map, there does not appear to be a lot of a sacrifice in air flow at spoolup, though there is a bit.
The question then is whether the new blades slow the onset of spoolup. That I don't know, but Sasha indicated that the lighter billit wheels allowed for faster spoolup.
Last edited by ttg35fort; 02-09-2011 at 04:14 PM.
02-09-2011, 04:02 PM
#14
From my experience with the GTX lineup, they make excellent power for their size, much like the Precision CEA Billet lineup but are much lazier. I can't speak directly with the smaller frames like these as my experience is with GT42 frames and up.
Here's my theory: In the car world, you ALWAYS sacrifice something to gain something elsewhere. For example, larger cams generally relate to slight bottom end power/torque loss but result in a higher peak power number and raised effective RPM limit. This inversely proportioned relationship is true amongst many things car related (ignition timing, exhaust diameter, manifold design, etc). It is my theory that Garrett was so focused on improving the peak flow numbers (aka: power potential) for the GTX lineup, which was likely due to their attempt to be on par with the Precision CEA Billet lineup, that they disregarded the other areas of the flow chart. Compressor wheel aerodynamics speaks wonders about how the turbo will perform across the powerband and this seems to be evident with Garrett GTX turbos.
Reid
Here's my theory: In the car world, you ALWAYS sacrifice something to gain something elsewhere. For example, larger cams generally relate to slight bottom end power/torque loss but result in a higher peak power number and raised effective RPM limit. This inversely proportioned relationship is true amongst many things car related (ignition timing, exhaust diameter, manifold design, etc). It is my theory that Garrett was so focused on improving the peak flow numbers (aka: power potential) for the GTX lineup, which was likely due to their attempt to be on par with the Precision CEA Billet lineup, that they disregarded the other areas of the flow chart. Compressor wheel aerodynamics speaks wonders about how the turbo will perform across the powerband and this seems to be evident with Garrett GTX turbos.
Reid
You bring up a good point, but from an engineering standpoint these gtx series are actually a good piece of kit. They noticeably enlarged the total area of the efficiency island, with a relatively minor tweak. Which makes this a successful improvement IMO.
Otherwise I totally agree. "People" (from what I have seen) are more impressed by a turbo's ability to create higher levels of hp when the boost is cranked up than actual response, IE "yeah my pte billet makes like 400hp on low pumpgas boost, but when I crank it up to 40psi its making around 650!!!". That's the latest fad/trend, and I too like it. Being able to run low power numbers and high ones on the same street-able turbo is a great deal.
When BB was the new hot trend, it was all about, look how fast I spool! But, the industry didn't get rid of Journal bearings... because they worked, and for some applications worked better. Its good for the consumer that Garrett got on the bandwagon; more competition, better prices, and more competitive development. The old compressor wheels will stick around until prices either go down, or the benefit blows the old wheels out of the water. Neither of which I see happening soon.
Last edited by Resmarted; 02-09-2011 at 04:03 PM.
02-09-2011, 05:04 PM
#15
One more note:
I'm playing around with the boost/airflow numbers for my build. I already have the GT3071R turbos, so those are what I am using. Anyway, my goal is to reach 750 whp on a 4.0L motor. I'm calculating that I'll need about 40 lb/min of air flow out of each turbo at about 18 psi (Appx. 1.25 bar) of boost at 7500 rpm, which is a 2.25 pressure ratio.
With my GT3071R turbos, that places me at about 72% efficiency based on the Garret compressor map. This is not bad.
With the GTX3071 turbos, I would be close to maximum efficiency, which is something greater than 77%. That would mean a noticable reduction in AIT.
Meth injection will lower my AIT, and I need meth injection to stand any chance of getting to 750 whp using 93 octane (I may need to go to 100 octane, we'll see), so perhaps it is not a major issue. If I did not already have the GT3071R turbos, however, I would lean toward the GTX3071Rs for my particular goals.
I'm playing around with the boost/airflow numbers for my build. I already have the GT3071R turbos, so those are what I am using. Anyway, my goal is to reach 750 whp on a 4.0L motor. I'm calculating that I'll need about 40 lb/min of air flow out of each turbo at about 18 psi (Appx. 1.25 bar) of boost at 7500 rpm, which is a 2.25 pressure ratio.
With my GT3071R turbos, that places me at about 72% efficiency based on the Garret compressor map. This is not bad.
With the GTX3071 turbos, I would be close to maximum efficiency, which is something greater than 77%. That would mean a noticable reduction in AIT.
Meth injection will lower my AIT, and I need meth injection to stand any chance of getting to 750 whp using 93 octane (I may need to go to 100 octane, we'll see), so perhaps it is not a major issue. If I did not already have the GT3071R turbos, however, I would lean toward the GTX3071Rs for my particular goals.
Last edited by ttg35fort; 02-09-2011 at 05:12 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
bcoffee20
Zs & Gs For Sale
5
11-19-2015 06:39 PM
