discopotato03

Yes but when you don't have the RB26's inner manifold section and six port log where do the vacuum signals come from ? A .

To the OP a cople of issues that you could look at but first . From what I can gather there is no such thing as a purpose built T3 flanged single scroll turbine for the GT35 turbine - meaning a GT3582R BB turbocharger . They all appear to be re profiled (bored out) GT30 turbine housings so arguably not ideal for a 35 turbine . I have seen GT3582R's have issues with these T3 flanged GT30 housings and 3 inch dump pipes , I'm told the tubes ID is actually a little smaller than the conical outlet on the housing . IMO with a 3 litre engine you want absolute minimum avoidable restriction so the front section of the exhaust off the turbo possibly needs to be 3 1/4 or 3 1/2 inch tube . With turbine housings and a given turbine wheel you get mass gas flow to a point and then the pressure rises uncontrollably because the volume exceeds the housings and waste gates ability to transfer the gas without restriction . People tell me that a 1.06 A/R GT3582R on an RB30 twin cam engine wants to "spool up" somewhere in the 3200-3400 engine rev area . I would not expect the same from a GT3076R in the same circumstances ie same A/R turbine housing . GT35 turbines measure ~ 68 by 61mm where a GT30 one is ~ 60 by 55mm so you'd think the GT30 would have slightly higher trapping efficiency and turn this into rotational energy at slightly lower gas speeds . If you look at the turbine maps for these two turbos at turbobygarrett site you can see that a 1.06 T housing with a GT30 turbine gives similar flow numbers to the 82 housing and the GT35 turbine . The GT30 map looks more even than the GT35 one which is usually the case when wheels are not used in housings designed for them . I can think of a few low key examples of what the factories do when a turbo engine is enlarged . In the case of the Z32 four cam single BB turbo VG30 Nissan used the larger than RB25 sized OP6 Hitachi turbine housing . This engine in low boost form cranked out a few more Kw than a 33 25DET and with higher torque . Really in effect going to a larger volume turbine housing lowers the turbine inlet pressure because for the same volume flow the gas speed is lower . If you didn't want to excite the turbine and drive the compressor up to boosting revs then this is the easiest way to go about it . I'd have though that a 3 liter engine would made more off boost torque than a 2.5 and boost possibly wouldn't be needed at this point . Ford went through all this with the XR6T engine and wound up with a GT3582R cartridge in the 1.06 T housing and if anything an undersized compressor housing . I haven't see one but I was told that the later Typhoon version actually has a hybrid turbo using the GT35 turbine with the 76.2mm compressor from the GT3076R . Assuming this is the case then this compressor in whatever that turbos comp housing is obviously makes enough power/torque to keep Fords marketing team crowing . Had Ford been turbocharging a 3 rather than a 4 litre six pot then they very likely would have used a GT3076R and experimented with 0.82 and 1.06 A/R turbine housings . I reckon if they wanted a reasonably free revving engine and not tonnes of boost the 1.06 would have been a real good try . Any turbo engine where manifold pressure is forcing the gate open is trying to tell that the turbine inlet pressure is too high . Also a waste gate is not intended to be a pressure relief valve even though they can be forced to act a bit like one . Its primary function is to control the gas speed through the turbine housing so the speed of the turbine and therefore the compressor wheel can be set to achieve the desired boost pressure . Obviously the higher the engine revs the more the waste gate has to open to keep the boost pressure constant . When the waste gate is opened fully by its actuator or excessive manifold pressure it can't bypass any more than its maximum and if the engines exhaust gas flow continues to climb so will boost pressure to a point . When no more exhaust gas can be forced through the system generally its pressure and temperature go through the roof and terminal detonation sets in . Anyway I'd measure the hot side manifold pressure and if its considerably higher than boost air pressure consider going up in turbine housing size . A .

No , a HKS GT2835 Pros is HKSish for a cropped turbine GT3071R 56T - and in HKS's custom single turbo RB type GT30 IW housings . A .

Thanks for the heads up Lithium , I've always wanted to see the results of the larger 1.06 A/R turbine housing on a real GT3076R and trials on a 3 litre engine should make it pretty obvious . Watching this one , cheers A .

I'm curious to know how you got the IAC/AAC system to work considering the log sits on top of the RB26's inner manifold section and has two steel tubes decending between two of the runners and connectiong up to the AAC/IAC chamber . How ever you got it to work - well done . A .

Mods first then comparison . 96 S2 GTS25T with R34 SMIC/PFC/Z32/740 Nismos/ported head/Poncams/os exhaust valves/9.2-3 CR . Nismo catback . I need a direct comparison of the larger OP6/VG30 turbine housing sized GCG BB Hi Flow vs HKS's GTRS kit turbo for R33 . I have searched and my ask is this . Dyno numbers don't keep me awake at night and the butt dyno/smile generator when no one else's around ometer is king . Basically which will give best all round street performance meaning easy to drive sedately and angry when the metal meets the pedal . Probably a hard question to answer but maybe someone here has tried both and can pass on the real world differences - in an R33 coupe . I am taking into account how the Hi Flow looks factory and need to know if the RB GTRS is better enough to look almost factory . Has anyone been bitten for having A GTRS ? I've never ever been pulled over or asked for a look at anything though my Skyline doesn't do many miles . So help this middle aged old fella choose , cheers A .

If will if you have a Datalogit but thats the only way I know of with a Power FC . Tech Edge units output a simulated narrow band signal even though they use a proper wide band pump cell type probe . A .

GT3582R's seem to do the job ok on RB26's and as has been mentioned no one wants to try a GT3076R in the largest 1.06 A/R turbine housing size . On paper a GT3076R is good for around 540 hp and I reckon the big turbine housing is what it takes to make the horsepower no ones ever seen from them . I won't guess what the boost threshold a 1.06 GT3076R would be , but since 3076R's and 3582R's use the same turbine housing castings you'd think the 3076R would be a bit more responsive given that you're pushing the same volume of gas through a smaller diameter turbine wheel . I'm sure I've mentioned it before but there is a sort of in between turbo and naturally its a HKS spec Garrett unit . Been around for ages and is called GT3240 . It consists of a GT35 turbine cropped back to a GT32 sized major diameter and in 84 trim . The compressor is the 54 trim version of the GT3582R's 56 trim 82mm GT40 wheel . I reckon that if I got GCG to order me a 52 trim GT3076R'/GT3037 from Japan theres a good chance they could get you the GT3240R's cartridge and compressor housing . HKS only ever used turbine housings supplied by their own people but there is an easy way to get around this problem . Remember how GT3582R's use essentially bored out GT30 turbine housings ? Well I figure if the 30 housing can be machined to suit a 35 turbine it can be machined to suit the "GT32" sized cropped 35 turbine . I have seen graphs of GT3240's on 4G63T engines and the peak power was in the 540 ish Hp range . They were also used on maximum effort drag RB26's twinned and I believe well set up engines were claimed to crank out over 1000 Hp . For something off the shelf on a T3 mounting flange a std GT3582R is straightforward and the 0.82 and 1.06 turbine housings seem to work well . The question is how important is the turbine response and if it worries you opt for the 0.82 . I know someone that who has an RB26 in a VLT ad it runs a steam pipe manifold and ext gate with a 1.06 GT3582R . Around town its smooth and tractable and needs to be reved to get it going but its all over the place when it comes on boost . A GTR is a bit heavier than a VLT so maybe the 82 housing would help get the beef moving a little sooner . Just on that above example it originally had a very lack luster 3" exhaust and a smallish gate and went much better with a larger pipe off the turbo and a larger gate . Your call , A .

These are a few things I found concerning TD06 family turbines . The thing that I haven't been able to nut out yet is how to distinguish the 11 from the 12 bladed turbines and where each is available ie from TD06 Std/S/H/SH etc . Mark at GT Pumps should know for sure . A .

I don't think too many people worry about acoustic tuning with turbos in exhaust systems , the drama is the turbine housing nozzle and turbine blades just about nullify and reverse pressure waves . For a twin scroll system to give its very best you need two waste gates because its the only way to keep both halves of the system truly isolated . I think part of the issue is that you need a fair bit of waste gate area to get good boost control because you're trying to vent gas that's generally at a lower pressure than in a single scroll system . Expensive to do and well worth comparing the costs to a larger engine with a simpler single scroll system . A .

The usual idea is to go larger in A/R when converting a given turbocharger to twin scroll , the reason is that you give the cylinders a larger volume and therefore area of lower pressure to blow down into/through . The whole idea is to increase low and mid range torque by reducing the overlapping exhaust events in a common scroll or volute . Why big TS housings work is that you reduce the turbine inlet pressure in the two scrolls so you need larger paths to easily vent the gas at the lower pressure . Its a win win for the engine and turbo in all respects except cost and waste gate convenience . A .

It wouldn't work because the inducer diameter of the 82mm GT40 56T compressor wheel is larger than the 76.2mm GT37 56T wheel . From memory the GT40's inducer is ~ 61mm where the GT37's is ~ 57mm . The compressor housing on a real GT3076R is port shrouded and the radial surge slot is positioned to match the height of the GT37 wheels lower or splitter blades . It wouldn't be right for the GT40 wheel and I'm not sure if there is enough material in the inner shroud to take a GT40 compressor . The early XR6 turbos used a 0.50 A/R plain snouted T04E compressor housing and I can't see why you couldn't fit the plain snouted 0.60 A/R version of that housing if it was profile machined to suit the compressor wheel . To me it sounded like Ford only wanted to run low boost on the early XR6's and having a GT3582R with the largest turbine housing and the small ratio T04E comp housing would have given them low hot side pressure and reasonable gas speed on the cold side with low boost pressure . It really shouldn't be too hard to get good torque out of a twin cam 24v 4L turbo engine but as usual you can't choke it up on the hot side if you want a reasonable rev range - and reliability . Personally I think a GT35 based turbo is a bit marginal on a four litre engine and a T04Z or GT4088R would have been better , trouble is they don't have a "T3" mounting flange or an integral waste gate . Garrett do make a port shrouded version of the 0.70 A/R T04S compressor housing , the generic GT3582R usually gets the plain snouted bell mouthed version of it . http://www.turbobygarrett.com/turbobygarre...R_714568_10.htm A .

The SK R33 cranked out 266Kw with a GCG Hi flow but it also had the larger Z32 300ZX OP6 type turbine housing , also found on some R34 GTt OE turbos . I don't remember the exact figure but the 0P6 turbine housing is supposed to have something like + 20Kw when machined to suit the GCG BB Hi Flows turbine wheel . That car had porting/cams/better inlet/better IC/fuel system/management . The big draw with these Hi Flows is that they look absolutely std in situ because externally they ARE std , all the factory heat shields obviously go back in as does all the original oil/water/exhaust/air plumbing bits . I understand that the "Batamble ?" front exhaust pipe actually bolts up much more easily that the std and aftermarket "dump pipes" because it comes straight out behind the turbo before it ducks down and under . Tight bends straight off the dump flange are a PITA because the lower fasteners are a bitch to get at . I need an easy solution for my R33 and I have an 0P6 housing so may be a good thing with that front pipe . A .

The interesting one Garrett does is the 0.94 A/R one for the Evo X specific GT3076R , twin scroll twin integral wastegate but with the mirror imaged Evo X mount flange . If you were going to ave a manifold made it could be worth a look . I though I mentioned it before but GCG reckon Garrett make a GT ball bearing GT3576R turbo for the later XR6 engines , that would get you a larger turbine compared to a GT3076R and possibly do the trick for a torquey street RB30 . IMO the issue with both GT30 and GT35 UHP turbines is the trim size - 84 trim . I think its too big and Garrett should do what they did to their GT37 and GT40 ball bearing turbines , bring the trim back to 78T to gain better response on petrol engines .

I don't know about the flatulence fours but I do know that 20G compressors on TS Evo turbos are not exactly the ducks guts . It is an easy "upgrade" to do to them because the 20G compressor is essentially a bigger trim version of the "big" or 68mm OD 16G wheel they have standard . Swap the wheels and machine the comp housing . You could possibly liken 16/18/20G wheels to 48/52/56t 71mm compressors in Garrett GT2871R turbos , the largest or 56 compressor trim version of the 2871R is laggy for the same reasons . Occasionally someone has an 18G compressor put in a Evo turbocharger and its probably going to have half the extra lag that the 20G wheel would . The issue as Roy said is extra workload on the turbine and it can only hope to develop shaft power at higher engine speeds and exhaust flow rates . I'm not that knowledgeable on various Mitsy OE turbos but I tend to think that the 20G compressor is more likely to be teamed with a TD06 family turbine starting with that TD06SL-2 one . As I mentioned previously in the States mobs like CBRD (BBK turbos) and FP made up 5/5 bladed compressors . I'd say the reasoning is that 5/5 bladed wheels don't pump as much at a given speed as the 6/6 bladed ones do nor do they place as much load on the turbine wheel/shaft so it can accelerate them up to speed more easily . The result is good turbo response and good mid range power . Actually FP is using a range of their own billet compressors that from memory have 7 full height blades so even less than the 5/5 (10) or 6/6 (12) . I think they call them HTA which is said to stand for Hydraulic turbine assist . Its three way juggle of less lag/least compressor surge/good power range . The Evo turbos don't have a port shrouded compressor housing so the aftermarket has been trying to find ways to eliminate compressor surge with these lower blade count wheels . FP eventually bit the bullet and had a port shrouded comp housing made up , I'm not sure how well the 18 and 20G compressors work with these housings or even if they offer them for those wheels . I think whats happening is that these two firms are opting for custom compressor wheels that no one has access to so their units can't be copied and their pricing undercut . Captive market so to speak . Anyway enough rambling , the same principles apply no matter who's turbos are used . The turbine and its housing are generally the hardest things to get right and once you do the rest comes together reasonably easily . A .

I'm filling in the gaps by using "the force" but id does make sense . What Garrett call the GT3076R , the real one anyway , was a turbo developed by Garret for HKS and it was called GT3037 . The GT3037"S" came with a port shrouded version of Garrett's 0.60 A/R T04E family of compressor housing . Now HKS always used their own non Garrett turbine housings on 3037's and they tend to be more compact that the ones made by Garret later on . Also virtually all HKS GT30 turbine housings use the smaller more compact T25/T28 flange size , the exceptions were the GT Pro S turbine housings in IW form for RB20/RB25 and they had the "T3" flange . Anyhow what happens when you build a turbo with a healthy sized compressor and a compact responsive sized turbine housing is compressor surge . By fitting the surge slotted/port shrouded compressor housing you can make an "all rounder" turbo meaning it doesn't matter if you use small turbine housings because the comp housing resists the compressor surge . HKS made GT30 turbine housings from I think 1.12 A/R right down to 0.61 A/R which is quite a variation in sizes . Believe it or not people used to use 0.61 housings and GT3037's on CA18's and SR20's to make a 300 Kw turbo spool up reasonably early . HKS also had a range of compressor trim sizes in GT3037s , 48/52/56 trims but Garrett usually only brings in the 56T ones . The other year I did some research into the 52T ones and now they are available here as well . HKS did offer non port shrouded comp housings on 3037's but I think they were aimed at 2L four cylinder apps ie SR20's . I think the only version that didn't have a port shrouded comp housing option was the smallest 48 comp trim version but AFAIK they are out of production now . Anyway your call , Garrett make T3 flanged GT30 IW turbine housings in 0.63/0.82 and 1.06 A/R sizes . If you were going to use the 0.63 one then I think you'd need the port shrouded comp housing to avoid compressor surge where you could possibly get away with the normal one using the 0.82 turbine housing . I'd always grab the port shrouded one where possible because I think it has some performance enhancements , also if you hate lag and opt later for a smaller turbine housing you've got the surge issue covered . As others have said you can fit a reducer from 4 to 3 inch right at the turbo and probably not lose anything in an 80mm MAF system . If you are not chasing every last kw with big turbine housings you can opt for a 52 comp trim GT3076R , it has a slightly better map than the 56T version and is supposed to be a bit more responsive all else being equal . You call , A .

Looking into the Bits o fishi turbo range . Ok , Mitsubishi or MHI (Heavy Industries) call their turbo sizes firstly by the turbine family ie TD04/TD05/TD06 etc . There are different turbines in each group and from memory there are four or five in the TD06 range . They are usually (from memory) 11 or 12 bladed and one that gets mentioned a lot is the Trust spec TD06SL-2 one . Its easy to pick because its a bit smaller than most other TD06 turbines on the OD and the faces of the blades have a pronounced rake opposite to the direction of rotation . I think 11 bladed and a fair bit of cropping on them compared to many MHI turbines . You could be forgiven for thinking that Trust wanted them slightly lighter and smaller because they are dimensionally an in between TD05/TD06 families . They are favourite when high flowing the reverse rotation twin scroll Evo 4-9 TD05 turbos because the fit easily inside their re machined turbine housings . MHI have quite a range of compressor wheels and common ones are the 16/18/20G wheels of which the 16G is std on Evos 4-9 and the handle is TD05HR-16G6 . It breaks down into TD05H turbine/R- reverse rotation/16G compressor/6 bladed , actually 6/6 meaning 6 full height and 6 splitter or lower height blades . From memory if their is a HR"A" it means it has a Titanium Aluminide or TiAL TD05 turbine . The 18 and 20G compressors are just larger trim versions of that 68mm OD compressor group . I'll get shot but anyway the Americans don't like the 20G compressor and TD06SL-2 combination in Evo turbos because they reckon it makes the turbo laggy initially . An American mob called Forced Performance (FP) made up their own 5/5 bladed compressor wheel to roughly the same dimensions as the Mitsy 20G and found it worked better , it was the now superseded FP "Evo Green" turbo . I think you probably need to think Trust to get a Mitsubishi based turbo on an RB because I'm not sure if MHI made TD06 turbine housings with a T3 mounting flange and integral wastegate . From what I've seen trust use a 3 bolt mounting so I guess you need their manifold to make it happen . I tend to think that the 20G compressor would work quite well on a 2.5L six provided you could get a TD06 based turbine housing and wastegate system happening . My gut feeling is that a 2.5L six should make reasonable torque right down low and one of the TD06 turbines would make a good match . I wouldn't cry if such a turbo didn't have the Trust TD06SL-2 turbine because they are possibly a smidge small IMO , more of a 2L four or six sized turbo IMO . I don't know a real lot about Trust T67s other than they are supposed to be a combination of TD06 turbine and TD07 compressor ? I don't know anything about TD07's because they are beyond the Evo crowds sphere of interest . I have read a few posts about 25G compressors being a bit how ya going but why that is I don't know . Anyway Trust kits appear to be the ones used on RB sixes so if interested search them . As mentioned Mark at GT Pumps has the drop on MHI turbos in Sydney and would probably be the one to talk to . Cheers A .

Well if its a true ball bearing center section the bearings take care of the thrust loadings . I didn't have time to read the thread but I have vague recollections of it . Really today I wouldn't bother with 8/8 bladed T04B wheels because they were designed to work in diesel turbos with big heavy T04 turbines . There's too many better compressor wheels like some of the GT ones or even the later smaller 76mm E or similar ones . Not sure about 16/18/20G Mitsy wheels but they could be worth a look . I reckon the TB31/TA34 turbines don't really fit in with power and response , too low in the blade height and a fair bit of cropping std - poor trapping efficiency IMO . One of the last Hi Flows I had made used a HT18S turbine and it probably would have been alright except for the -24 8/8 bladed T04B compressor . I had not learnt at that stage that larger than std compressors with a lower blade count is a good way to get the pumping capacity up and get the thing spooling ok as well . Sadly not too many turbos use 5/5 bladed compressor wheels and the only ones that spring to mind are the IHI ones from early Subaru turbos ie VF8s and VF12s . I'd say this is why OS mobs like Forced Performance in the US had to make their own up for Hi Flowed Evo TD05 based turbos , these days they make up their billet "HTA" compressors and from memory some of those have seven full height blade wheels . I reckon if you could get them the turbines and compressors from Garrett's TR30R would be nice , hell even a smaller trim GT30 turbine could work . What really kills is the lack on a bolt on twin scroll twin integral gate turbine housing . They would be the way to get around the "lag" and high pressure wastegating issues associated with hi flow turbochargers . Until then I dunno , maybe some of the TD06 bits could work . As for that RB20 expensive but if keen extrude honing could probably help an RB20 or 25 Hitachis T housing . A .

If it were me I'd think about getting an RB25's turbine housing machined to suit the GCG Hi Flow because they are not too much larger than the RB20 one and I reckon taking a bit more of the restriction out of the hot side would pay off . If you remember that RB20's were rated at about 160 Kw and R33 RB25's about 184 there isn't a whole lot of difference to raw power numbers . From a turbine housing perspective the exhaust can only escape via the turbine outlet and the waste gates port , its not that easy to enlarge the gates hole significantly and even if you could the exhaust gas pressure and velocity works bloody hard to force the flap open . Anyway as I said compare a 20 with a 25 (R33 spec) turbine housing because at a glance they look very similar size wise . The only reason I know they're different is because I stuck something down the throats of the two representing a go/no go gauge and proved the R33 25's one is slightly larger , slightly being the operative word because the difference is not huge v. You also have the opportunity to play with compressor housings if doing just the turbine housing isn't enough . The RB25 and single BB turbo VG30 used a larger compressor housing and it bolts straight on once its machined to suit the compressor wheel . These housings have a smoother cast finish and have "Nissan" on them in bold block lettering . Aside from the BB VG30 turbo using a slightly smaller compressor wheel the only difference housing wise is that the RB25 ones have an anti reversion grove machined into the snout of them , same casting I reckon . Anyway the RB20 compressor housing should give the best response because the smaller passage means higher velocity for a given wheel speed . My 2c spent , cheers A .

I'm not really sure what the situation is here with the turbine housing , personally I would be very reluctant to profile machine an RB25 Hitachi turbine housing for anything except maybe an RB20 . They are not much bigger internally than the RB20 BB Hitachi's turbine housing and I really think the Z32 BB units OP6 turbine housing would be the minimum I'd use in this situation . If I'm reading that graph correctly I'm assuming that by trying to hold the wastegate shut chasing high boost numbers the (I assume small RB25 T hsg) is probably strangling the thing and forcing retarded timing to hold off detonation . You could try running the thing at 12-14 pounds and letting the gate vent some exhaust gas and if possible advance the timing up a bit for more efficient combustion . Cheers A .

I always wondered if anyone would try a GT2860RS turbo on an RB25DET . The specs are very similar to a GT2530 and the main difference cartridge wise is the compressor wheel , which is supposedly a slightly more modern design than the 2530 . I am curious as to how you got the GT2860RS with a 0.86 A/R turbine housing on your RB25 since the turbine housing has the T25/28 mounting flange and the RB25's exhaust manifold is to suit a variation of the T3 pattern . Actually its really more of a Euro T4 pattern for the manifolds twin outlets but the bolt pattern is same as T3 . There is a bit of history in the RS turbo because it was originally something brewed up by a production engineer at Garrett in the US and used on his Miata/MX5 . They are probably a better 1800 - 2000cc four cylinder turbo - fewer larger cylinders and the need to breathe and make torque early . They are really better at dealing with high gas flow rates and not super high boost pressures which is why they use biggish housings both sides for at GT2860 sized turbocharger . It means you can pull reasonably big rev on an 1800 and screw a fair bit of timing in to make a broad flat torque line . The turbine housing ratio is 0.86 A/R and the compressor side usually a T04B in 0.60 A/R . Now because the RB25 is 25% larger than a 2L four its usually better at making very low rev torque and the 9 CR helps out here too because many turbo fours have their static CR pegged at 8-8.75:1 . Unless on a very std engine with a std exhaust you possibly need a bit more turbo to make the 25 shine , its just a pity that going up the next increment turbine wise means a KHS turbine housing - GT 2835 Pro S type one . Anyhow all that aside do you have some sort of adapter to get the turbo on the manifold ? The only other way I can think of is to use a modified VG30 OP6 turbine housing on that turbo . Cheers A .

It may be an idea to find out exactly what the changes were to the tune . It's interesting that people think these turbos are prone to over boost , not one I'm familiar with though I haven't inquired much about them either . To the OP , being on an SR20 you would be using a T25 flanged turbine housing and from HKS it would be a 0.64 A/R one . Garrett do an optional larger 0.86 A/R one as well as a similar 0.64 one . The larger housing is reasonably large for that GT28 turbine but not what you'd call huge in the scheme of things . What it would do is slow the turbine slightly and ultimately you would make more power with it . The secret to picking up the bottom end is to get it tuned with generally more advance timing in the off boost and transition stages , I found with the 0.86 housing I was able to to increase the timing 4-6 degrees when I changed from a ceramic RB20 BB turbo to a GT2860RS one . There is a big difference in the turbine housings (RB20 to 0.86 GT28) and the timing wasn't so much advanced up as being less retarded for the exhaust restriction if you know what I mean . Cheers A .

FJ20's use a very common basic T3 cartrudge between housings Nissan organised . Really any decent turbo shop should be able to rebuild it or supply a new cartridge which is the prefered option - all new guts . Actually can probably option a water cooled bearing housing which is no issue if you opt not to run the water lines . Cheers A .

I think provided you supported the turbocharger/dump pipe/exhaust system with factory style bracing a cleaned up std exhaust manifold would work fine . You have one already and it will look more factory obviously because it is , if you can use some of the std heat shielding more of the above . Exotic manifolds are nice but the exercise can be involved and expensive for a road car , plenty of people here have simply bolted those turbos with a spacer on the std manifold and got more than adequate squirt from the retuned engine . Real good bang for buck and if for any reason you had to return the car to std its a lot less work to do so . A .

If I had to use one of those GT3082R turbos I'd look at buying a port shrouded compressor housing for it , Garrett make them now . Alternatively he could just buy a GT3076R minus the turbine housing and slot it into the one his current turbo now has - same . Broken record I know but I'd buy the real 52T GT3076R because its map is better and should have slight spool and transient performance vs the 56T GT3076R . Either would be better IMO than a GT3082R on an SR20 Your calls . A .