discopotato03

Generally these GT3071R's with T25/28 flanged turbine housings are not using the full sized GT30 turbine , they use the cropped ones . If you go to the turbobygarrett web site and look at their turbine maps their efficiency percentages are lower than you get with a GT30 turbine in a GT30 turbine housing . Croped or full sized GT30 turbines are a bad match for a GT28 turbine housing , more heat more restriction and lackluster performance . They would be better off using a GT2871R 52T/GTRS and experimenting with the Garrett 0.86 A/R turbine housing , its only available in T25/28 flange which is what SRs have std . Maybe you should ask around and find out what results people have got from the RB specific GTRS turbo or even the GCG Hi Flow with the larger VG30 OP6 type turbine housing . 250 260 at the treads is a comom occurance . A friendly drop in cam for the RB25DET is Tomei's Poncams , lots of peoople have used them and I haven't seen too much negative feedback . PM Woolverine , he's had the Hi Flow and the RB type GTRS . A .

Firstly only HKS made a proper GT28 turbine housing in T3 flange , the Garrett ones have the smaller T25/28 mounting flange . A real T3 flanged 0.86 A/R turbine housing would be a godsend because with much over 2 liters you need it to get the exhaust out . I don't give a rats what anyone else thinks , I proved that the 0.86 sized T28 flanged turbine housing can and has been used with good results even on a 2L four provided the head is good - FJ20's are . Mine made positive pressure with one on a GT2860RS turbo at 15-1600 revs so an RB25 would do it easier with 25% greater capacity . The GT2530 and GT2860RS are very nearly the same thing , only the minor differences in the compressor wheel make them different . Same turbine and can use the same housings though again that minor difference in compressor wheel profile . One of the past Turbo Production Engineers at Garrett in the US , RC , once said that he could not understand why HKS didn't do a 0.86 housing for the 2530 because that size works really well on the GT2860RS . A .

I just found something interesting whilst looking into something else . If you look at the turbine map for the GT2860RS 0.86 A/R its not that different to the real GT3076R's one in 0.63 A/R . This doesn't necessarily mean that the turbine response would be the same with both turbos but it does give an idea of what sort of exhaust gas flow potential that GT28 76 trim turbine has in the larger 0.86 A/R T2/25/28 flanged turbine housing . Since you can buy the GTRS (GT2871R 52T) through Garrett with the correct compressor housing for an SR20 , the one HKS uses , and very likely option the 0.86 turbine housing which bolts to your exhaust manifold at the same time ..... Cheers A .

T2/T25/T28 mount flanges are the same size , the generic rectangular Garrett one I mean . Do you have a power number you are chasing ie 260 Kw ? From what I read GT3037's can be responsive on SRs but the manifold has to be a good one and the turbine housing size right , they like the 0.73 A/R one in the States . I reckon the earlier non VCT head and the GTiR's quad throttle inlet manifold is the go , similar situation with RB25 and RB26 with the 26 being better . Expensive but goes bolt . I must have more faith in GT28 based turbos with the larger 0.86 A/R turbine housing than you do , I really liked my GT2860RS 0.86 on the FJ20 I had years ago . Not what you want to hear but better cams and the 48 or 52T GT2871R would be much simpler to set up . Your call but but I think it wouldn't be too difficult to end up with a GT30 based turbo and a laggy engine , the right bits are expensive and you don't have too many areas to go back to if the lag was unacceptable . The smallest GT30 turbine housing I know of is the 0.61 A/R HKS T25 (22/25/28) flanged non waste gated one . If you were going to go that small its hard to see the point of the largest compressor trim GT3037/GT3076R . Only you can know what power level you're chasing and how much cash your prepared to burn getting there . I find that if you don't aim too high you tend to end up with a good all round result . IMO a strong mid range is where its at in a road car at least . Individual throttles make for really good throttles response and better cylinder filling off boost . Most SR people won't do this because they baulk at the cost and prefer to sink money into big laggy turbos on fabbed manifolds with external gates . The GTiR made significantly more power than the "ordinary" SR20 DET's and all it lacked was a more modern turbocharger . They had an orphan T300 bush bearing sort of thing with a turbine that was 10 bladed in from memory 79 trim and I cant remember what sized GT28 style turbine housing . I really can't remember but didn't they make 187 odd Kw std ? IMO make it breathe , remove the flow restrictions and you may not need as big a turbocharger as you think . Same old same old , budget - how much power and starting where and how is it driven most of the time . A .

Here it is , quite an old article now . http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticles/tab...rbo-SER-II.aspx A .

If you can't bear GT28 based turbos you'll have to toss the OE exhaust manifold anyway if you want it to work properly . HKS have T25 flanged GT30 turbine housings available but not in wastegated form , the 0.73 A/R one seems to be the pick on SR's . Actually thinking about it in the States people used to get std SR exhaust manifolds and weld on mounts for external gates , could be the cheapest way to get a GT30 based turbo onto an SR20 . They sometimes picked on the GTiR std manifold because it was supposed to be the best of the factory ones - slightly larger internal passages . I know it was a transverse engine manifold but maybe it can be made to work . I'll see if I can find the link to the 52T GT3037 fitted to an early Sentra SE/R in the US , it has pics of it and the 0.73 A/R T housing . The fabbed manifold is something else on whats mechanically a FrWD Pulsar . A .

I don't want to go further off this track than is necessary people , ..... but . No , don't like EJ's . Had I known what I know now it would have been an EJ20 or 22 . The Subaru experience has been ... different ... and I know why some are Rex proof . Less corners to paint yourself into but they're still there . EJ/EZ , more flat engines and trust me after inline fours and sixes you don't want to go there . Don't believe the marketing BS people , two heads a wacky firing order crap manifolding glass gearboxes and on it goes . The L series is light (1070 Kg) and has an AWD gearbox which was optional on OS RX models , no it isn't the viscous center diff EJ box either . RX ones have a dog clutch diff lock and are a bolt in conversion . Also trying to work more modern modern turbos into older smaller engines helps keep the feet on the ground with boost and torque needed lower down because they don't make much by themselves . Just to be 1% on topic I laught loud at those trying to put GT3076R's on EJ20's , really laggy and brave with an aluminium split cased open deck "block" and fragile driveline . EJ is more modern and better breathing than EA but the cork heads join the two adjacent sets of exhaust ports together in their header manifolds and screw it up AGAIN . OS there is a twin scroll header (OE) available and twin scroll/twin gate turbos to go on them , can't for the life of me work out why the Rexers don't all use them , or fab their own headers and hang a pair of externals off them . TS EJ is far easier than TS RB . Lastly , EJ25 is famous for head gasket issues . The rod is too short for the stroke so you don't get proper use of all 25 beans anyway . EZ's are not really a performance engine IMO , I doubt you'd get DOHC RB30 performance out of them . Just an excuse for the 3.0L sticker on the porkier ritzier Zoobs . Anyhow a GTR intercooler is on the cards and will have to look into pipe kits to make that happen in the near future . Next after that should be the turbo and a trip to the dyno to dial it all in . A .

Dale I agree with much of what you say but I still think the jury is out on compressor and turbine trim sizes . When I speak of compressor wheels from a trim point of I view I don't look at the wheels mass or innertia aspects so much , more the mass of the air they are trying to pump . Air has mass and the more a rotary compressor wheel can screw its way through the greater the work load the compressors power source has to shoulder . The difference between inducer and exducer must have compressor performance variables . Firstly the inducer because thats what the atmosphere has exposed to it , realworld air pumps do NOT suck - they create an area of lower pressure and then atmospheric pressure pushes air in . I am not a fluid engineer so I can't quote facts on inducer/exducer centrifugal rates but I do know that the larger a wheels diameter is the higher its tip speed is for a given wheel speed . We don't have a lot of choice with turbine trims because its not very likely anyone has the equipment to change what the turbo manufacturers supply . I can go back into what I think about Garretts generally large trim GT turbines but I done that here too many times already . Also mentioned that they have woken up to the fact with some non OE performance turbos reducing the trim size from 84 to 78 (GT37R's and GT40088R's) . They could do it with GT30 and GT35 turbines as well but I reckon they won't because if power potential fell for increased response reasons people wouldn't buy them . Mores law and maximums numbers sell . I also want to see how the 52T GT3037/GT3076R performs but my engine has a few top end mods so it should respond differently to a factory std one . Fingers crossed , for a long time now , that the porting larger exhaust valves Poncams and slightly higher CR will help it breathe better and make a bit more torque on and off boost . This next bit goes completly off this topic but is still turbo engine related , if it bores you don't read it . The daily hack is an old 86 Subaru L Series RX Turbo , flat 1800 2 valve SOHC per bank thing with really agricultural porting and factory manifolds (both) . The Wedge or Vortex had available a better inlet manifold for these EA82T engines so I got one of these fitted . The heads have siamesed exhaust ports , one ea , and unfortunately flat fours fire the adjacent cylinders in each bank so with siamesed exhaust ports the exhaust pulsing into the exhaust manifold is all screwed up - too much damping . I had a stainless header made up for it because the std thing is a horror - very restrictive and not much room to grow flow or turbo wise . Anyhow the staino header is much les restrictive and I decided to have a Garrett GT2554R fitted except I got GCG to supply that turbo with the larger 76T NS111 GT28 turbine - in an S15 Ni Resist 0.64 A/R turbine housing . The theory was that removing the restrictions from the hot side of this engine would let it breathe and rev . Also the turbo cams were exchanged for the NA ones because they are slightly longer period and a tad more overlap . Static CR was raised from a pathetic 7.7 to 8.1 , most we could get for the budget . The engine makes more torque because it does breathe better but boost response is woefull . I got too hungry with turbine flow and the engine can't spin the turbo fast enough to make boost where its needed . I put this down to prehistoric heads and not as much exhaust energy as I'd hoped it to have . Plan B is to go back to the smallest or GT25 turbine to make the limited exhaust energy transform itself into turbine speed . The point of this spiel is that you walk a fine line between driving a turbine and not having an unacceptable restriction when the engine is running at full revs and boost . I suspect that this may be part of the problem though to a lesser degree than the full turbine sized GT3071R . Now an RB25 is a far cry from the lawnmower tech EA82T and will make more power for its capacity everywhere . They don't have infinite exhaust energy and the juggle is getting a turbo on them to boost early enough to make them feel good and not fall over up heigh . Sorry folks you can't have the moon and especially with a single scroll single wastegate turbine housing manifold combination . I think RB25DETs are good engines and these GT3037/GT3076Rs sound like a real good combination/compromise . When I get the daily to a state acceptable to me the R33 will get some resources thrown at it . In time , A .

I'd say the manufacturers are getting a lot out of EGR and ironically it must be a good way to suppress detonation by controlling heat and pressure . I'm wondering if some enterprising tuner can come up with an engine management system that can toss in varied amounts of exhaust gas before the turbo/s rather that pulling timing or drowning the thing with fuel . The engine would have to run very clean because carboned up intercoolers don't help much . It appears to be the way to run lean and not get bitten by combustion/exhaust gas temperatures , the only EG cooler I've seen is on a diesel ute at work . A .

I'd like to have seen a pic of the back of that turbo . It sounds like your original turbo had one of those aftermarket turbine housings on it that suited the RB's original dump pipe flange . Do you have the ID tag details of the new or old turbo ? Good result , cheers A .

Anyone can read the specs at turbobygarrett but this may make it easier to see the differences . The 2530 specs are not there but thrown in anyway . Turbo ...... CHRA ............. Turbine size/Trim .... Turbine housing A/R .......... Compressor size/inducer size/trim ......Compressor housing size A/R . -9 ........ 446179-5065 ..... 53.8mm/62 Trim ...... GT25 0.64 A/R .................. 59.4 mm/44.5mm/56 Trim ................ T3 0.42 A/R . -7 ........ 446179-5054 ..... 53.8mm/62 Trim ...... GT25 0.64 A/R .................. 60.0 mm/44.5mm/55 Trim ................ T3 0.42 A/R . -5 ........ 446179-5051 ..... 53.8mm/76 Trim ...... GT25 0.64 A/R .................. 60.0 mm/47.2mm /62Trim ................ T4 0.60 A/R . 2530 ... 446179-5021 ..... 53.8mm/76 Trim ...... GT25 0.64 A/R .................. 60.0 mm/47.5mm/63 Trim ................ T4 0.60 A/R . If you look at the dimensions the -7 and -9 are very similar as is the -5 and the GT2530 . What you can't see from these specs is the profile and tip hight of the compressor wheels , the major diameter and trim sizes don't tell you the whole story . Also , ALL these 53.8mm GT turbines are know known as GT28 turbines and its the 53".0" mm ones that are the "GT25" ones . The GT28 turbines are nine bladed although I'm not certain I think they are both NS111 series ones , definitely the 76T one is . Also note the compressor housing family and size . The -5 and GT2530 are T4 sized and in 0.60 A/R . The -7 and -9 are down a series from T4 to T3 and the A/R ratio drops from 0.60 to 0.42 . From memory the std GTR GT28's used 0.42 A/R compressor housings didn't they ? So IMO for the more responsive turbo I would choose -9's over -7's . The differences are probably less between a -5 and a GT2530 though there's a greater chance of the pricing being very different . That would depend on the cartridge and compressor housing for the 2530 being available through Garrett . If good all round street car boost response means something to you don't treat the larger 76 trim turbines and T4 compressor housings lightly in the -5 and GT2530 turbos . The larger trims and C hsgs are whats needed to get 600 odd horsepowers worth of air in and exhaust out of your RB26 . Its almost 235 hp/liter so you would not expect to be sunk into the seat a 2500 engine revs . Now not everyone has a use for 600+ ponies or has the resources/will to fork out for the mods to suport it , this is where the -7 or preferably -9 turbos come in because they look to be a straight swap for the T28's and can probably be made to work on a bog std car if the user is not too greedy boost/rev wise . I think you have to ask yourself seriously what you want from an RB26/GTR , personally I'd want the boost happening something up to 1000 revs sooner because if you really must have dices with others its that all import leap out of the blocks that gets you ahead . They may flatten out sooner but that's what 2nd/3rd/4th and 5th gears are for . Less extreme driving and a longer life out of an expensive car . Your calls , cheers A .

Cartridge (inc wheels) wise the -21's are all supposed to be the same and locically the part number would differ if they weren't . Really the differences in "GT2530's" is in the housings to suit different applications . T3 flanges for RB20/25 and T25 for SR/CA . The RB26 specific ones are supposed to have more compact turbine housings so they fit up the same as the OE twin T28's . Compressor housings were/are also made to suit the different engines packaging requirements , the RB26 ones are essential to suit that engines unique air plumbing and have eyes to hang the fluid fittings off . The "KAI" bit is supposed to mean having a port shrouded compressor housing which that one has and would make it more suitable for an engine with small capacity pots to prevent compressor surge . Note the RB20/25 GTRS turbo has it as well . A .

I don't do RB26 but this is about as basic as it gets . GT2530's are supposed to have about the same response as the OE R32 turbos but obviously greater capacity . The HKS spec Garrett 707160-9 , using all Garrett guts and housings , gets going earlier so you don't have to drive around in a lower gear than everyone else to have some squirt if you need it . Personally I think these two GT2860R based turbos cover the std to mild to slightly wild scope for RB26's . To go larger than 2530's is a bit extreme in some peoples opinion on the street . If you don't lose sight of the weight you have to drag around with a low CR 2.56L six a GTR shouldn't be too lazy . My opinions only , cheers A .

Well like I've said in the recent past I can't say how one of these GT3037/GT3076R turbos in 52 compressor trim will perform because I don't know of anyone who has one up and running yet . The theory is that it should be a bit more responsive that the 56T one all else being equal . I can't put boost threshold numbers to it because that could be misleading to others . What I can say is that in the past people who were concerned with getting boost a bit sooner , and had access to them , chose the 3037 in 52 trim because it suited their needs . Ditto with 3037's twinned on RB26's , HKS usually shipped 52T ones because any response improvement is gold on an engine like that . The jury is still out on turbine housing sizes , with garrett the choice is 0.63 or 0.82 though the 0.73 size would have been a better all rounder on a street RB25 IMO . Trouble is no one makes a T3 flanged GT30 IW housing in that size . I dunno with the 71mm compressor , the best maps I've seen are of the 52T one in the 0.60 A/R T04B comp housing . If you look closely at pics of the RB variant of the HKS GTRS's (GT2871R52T) comp housing it looks like a custom port shrouded T04B 0.60 A/R styled thing . They obviously thought that running the GT28 turbine/housing combination would lead to compressor surge with these or why would they have gone to the effort and expense to produce that PS housing . The SR type GTRS just uses the Nissan/Garrett type T04B comp housing . Again as I said recently the turbo engineers in the US used to reckon that in a compressor wheel family the middle trim size usually gave the best all round results though there are other minor alterations that can be made to compressor wheels to achieve things sometimes asked for by large manufacturers like tip height . My personal , and unconfirmed , view is that big trim compressors and turbines are not optimal things and more some sort of compromise for cost or packaging reaons . A port shrouded compressor housing costs more to make than a plain one so this alone would make a GT3037/GT3076R a more expensive turbo to market than the "real" GT3071R . People probably think I sing a lot of praise for expensive HKS spec Garrett turbos . I do because they went to some effort to develop turbo options to suit specific engines/cars plus they aim for "Power and Response" . I draw the line at paying elevated prices which is why I'm always exploring options to emulate what they've done with more affordable components . Probably being a cheapscate but if someone elses done the hard yards proving what does and doesn't work why not try to benefit from it . Really Garrett are the ones not making the full range of PS comp housings or coming forward with as many turbine housing options as HKS have . Lastly with the full turbine sized GT3071R , I think we be sure that whoever did the turbo type testing would have tried a unit in this form and decided that it didn't suit their requirements . They did make them in croped turbine form and AFAIK this is where that croped GT30 turbine idea came from . Again I don't think they would have gone to the trouble to do this without a good reason . Admittedly it's no biggie to machine a different profile on an existing turbine and the housing has to be machined anyway so this is what they've obviously done . Garrett could machine their GT30 IW turbine housings to suit the croped turbine wheel which they produce anyway , I'd say it either hasn't occured to them or they haven't seen a market for it - yet . Just on this if it ever eventuated it'd give you the option to remachine it for the full sized GT30 turbine later if you decided to . Room to grow without forking out for another expensive turbine housing , I like that idea . Always good to have options . Lastly the T3 flange footprint is getting on nowdays and I can't think of too many OE things still using it . I believe turbocharger development is leaning towards smaller engines running in higher states of tune and many of them diesels . Sort of a tug a war between engines running lean enough to meet noise and exhaust emissions , fuel consumption , and as much cooled EGR as they can make fire . This is an interesting article by JE at Auto Speed about late developments with EGR , most interesting but still a bureaucratic band aid being forced upon the manufacturers by the leaches in this world . http://autospeed.com/A_110577/cms/article.html LOL bored yet ? Cheers A .

Ahh yess , bit of a diesel bore stroke ratio . The balance shaft doubled as a second flywheel reminding the pistons to go back down again . Agricultural head but at least Magna EFI manifolds were available . Sigma , don't know what you can say about those ... A .

You would expect a 650cc per cylinder four banger to get one of these turbos going reasonably early , Stateside they find the Nissan KA24DE (DOHC 16v) four makes good torqe and boost in the mid range . To put this into perspective if an RB could have 650cc pots it would be 3.9 liters . Cheers A .

If better means easier to fit with no non std parts then I guess so . You could shop around for a 2nd hand GTRS , cartridges for them shouldn't be hard to get . The HKS housings are the important parts . A .

Probably take a little while but someone may sell you a GT2835 Pro S turbine housing if you search around . At times people have bought them and then opted for the larger 0.87 A/R turbine housing , if they don't want to keep their original 0.68 Pro s housing you may be able to buy it from them . It's probably not a bad idea to use a port shrouded compressor housing and I reckon it'd be possible to mill the big boss version of the T04E housing to achieve it . A bit of milling can make the jelly bean shaped grooves and the slot turned in afterwards . Make sure that slot is positioned properly near the splitter blades or it won't work . A .

I'm not sure with these aftermarket turbine housings , I think its a big call to say they can work well with GT28 or GT30 sized turbines and just machine to suit . GCG decided to stop putting GT30 turbines in them because too many people had boost creep issues . I think you have a bit of room to manoeuver machining Hitachi housings for GT28 turbines but GT30 based turbines need GT30 based turbine housings . If you look at A GT30 housing you can see that they are not only larger in diameter than a GT28 but wider through the volute as well . I dunno but it possibly has something to do with the wider tips on a GT30 turbine and that the wheel itself is physically deeper than a GT28 turbine . For whatever reason the GT28 turbine 56 trim 71.1mm compressor is not a good combination response wise . I think the mass off the air that compressor can pump is too great a workload for this turbine and they tend to be laggy on most things . HKS stayed with the 52 compressor trim cartridge in their GTRS and only went with the 56T wheel in their "GT2835" which we know uses the slightly larger cropped GT30 turbine . Note they didn't use the full sized GT30 turbine here like Garrett did in the GT3071R (700177-23 CHRA) so maybe they though it wouldn't spin the 71.1mm compressor fast enough to be "responsive" . For RB's HKS seemed to nail it with the GTRS and 2835 Pro S but they did use non garrett hosings both sides in both cases . Maybe someone needs to ring the machine shop in China and ask them to reset their machines so we can have some T3 flanged GT30 IW turbine housings for the cropped GT30 turbine . Then we can use these cropped GT3071R AKA 2835 cartridges on RB's to plug the gap between GT2871R turbos and GT3076R's , and not have to pay a HKS GT Pro S price for it . A .

In the past I have seen HKS turbine housings at GCG but don't know about the T3 flanged GT28 one . It goes against the grain but you can possibly achieve much of the same thing with the Hitachi OP6 type housing and a bit of machining . The 76T GT28 turbine is a little larger than the Hitachi ceramic one and people have used this housing on Garrett BB cartridges at times . Maybe even the RB25 Hitachis turbine housing could be used at a pinch , would keep the mounting and dump flanges in the RB family . RB25 BB Hi Flows make if anything a little more power than a HKS bolt on GT2530 so the flow through them can't be too sad . Plus there like ars* holes , every 25T has one ... Someone here had a Hi Flow made up out of an RB25 Hitachis housings and a GT2871R 48T cartridge . Real good mild dryer from memory . A .

No , Garrett ball bearing turbos for HKS Japan are made by Garrett Japan . Garrett is not one company at one plant in the US . You have Garrett in Europe Japan and a lot of other places . I'm told some housings are even made here in Australia but no idea where abouts . Anyway HKS gets say a GT3076R/GT3037 from Garrett Japan and adds their own turbine housing/Tag/Inlet bell mouth . Don't think for a minute that they buy turbochargers and modify them , they use as much Garrett content as they can and only change what the application demands . Some like the RB26 GTSS turbos are ALL Garrett content bar the actuator . A .

Really for a single turbo Skyline the important part of those HKS bolt on turbos is the turbine housing . I think the 0.64 A/R T3 flanged HKS housing is common to the 2510/2530/2535/2540/GTRS turbochargers - the RB20/25 spec ones . Note you would have to have one off a 2510 re profiled to suit the larger turbine used in the other four turbos . Also note HKS replaced the old 2510 with the non GTR spec GTSS . It has the larger GT28 turbine with the same diameter compressor wheel as a 2510 or 2530 but in 60 rather than 63 trim . Cartridge number 446179-53 . Theres nothing to stop you using that housing on any of the Garrett GT28 BB based turbos using that same larger GT28 turbine ie a GT2860RS . A .

To give some idea on potential I think Joey here was making something like 270 Kw with one of those 2835 cartridges , admittedly in HKS's Pro S housings , on an RB25 . Even If you could coax 250 odd out of each one in RB26 housing form thats a lot of turbocharger for 2.6 liters . You really need to look at these "GT2835's" more as a small GT30 rather than a big GT28 . I know it starts the war but a big twin scroll single with two gates winds up being simpler IMO on an RB26 . Actually someone I know hasn't found the limits of his 1.06 A/R single scroll GT3582R on a 26 yet , so far 370 kw and climbing as flow restrictions are removed from that car . If he gets towards the flow limits of its compressor thats 470 kw though I think he's chasing 400 at the treads . A .

Hi Joey , can you tell us a bit more about this part - in post 298 . "after speaking to geoff, he informed me that getting the fuel from csr was impossible as the big fuel companies have signed contracts for the next 6 months preventing anyone else purchasing e85, however they are not using it themselves... and the contracts are probably going to get renewed." Are you saying that the large fuel companies are buying but not selling ? If that's the case wouldn't there be legal issues here ? I'd reckon if not enlightening the greens movement might make things awkward for the pollies . Also thanks for the link , was always interested to see a Material Safety Data Sheet or MSDS for E85 . Lastly interesting that they claim to have additives to reduce corrosion which is always a worry with alcohol based fuels . I will always think twice about anything I use that touches fuel in a car and avoid aluminium wherever possible . A .

Your call but some kind of stainless steel I reckon would be better because it won't corrode and fall to bits . A .