discopotato03

It looks like it has a V band flange welded on the back as well as having four dump flange bolt holes as well . Note the compressor backplate is iron instead of aluminium so it could be from the T04S 60-1 family and modded . Not a 60-1 compressor (409535-1) because they are 7/14 bladed , maybe T04R or TA 45 compressor on big shaft T04 turbine shaft . Caliper measurements needed , A .

Have a look at the turbobygarrett site and note the turbine dimensions where their list changes from GT25xxR to GT28xxR . Treat the HKS turbos ie GT2510/2530/2535/2540/GTRS as GT28xxR turbos , aside from the 2510 these all use the same NS111 turbine anyway . GTR spec GTSS or GT2859R I think uses the same turbine as GT2510 . A .

I did once see a diagram of something along those lines but I smell marketing rather than function driving this idea . Firstly to have it work properly you'd need an open collector manifold with that thing between the manifolds mounting flange and the twin scroll turbine housing . What it does is feed all the engines exhaust gas through one side of the divided turbine housing until the plates throttle opens up . I image once the boost , or preferably the exhaust manifold , pressure reaches a set point the actuator opens the throttle valve . The downside is that the throttled side won't flow as well as the open side and the open collector manifold won't work like a true twin scroll system . I think a 3.4L 2JZ type thing should not have dramas making torque off boost or kicking a big turbo into life if the manifold/gates and the overall state of tune is on the money . Gimmick I think , cheers A .

Very interesting people to be around to be sure . No time just ATM but things like that firey crash that nearly kill Nicky Lauda (sp ?) would be no doubt be in the FIA's mind . I'm also very cynical about Oil Co's and their control of pump fuels retail pricing . Imagine them scrabbling to control a market with 85% content that they don't supply , I don't believe for one minute that Australia can't produce lots more ethanol but the taxing and political correctness has to suit political aspirations at the right time . As for the F1 cars , not sure how they'd go trying to run the distance with limited fuel tank capacity and pit stops and a fuel with less heat potential like E85 . Probly need a "20 20" laps BS thing like cricket degraded into . Shells caustically , cheers A .

Quite some years back the feller that ran Pulse Racing/Pulse turbocharging was making them out of steam pipe and TIG welding them nicely . His collectors looked good to . I didn't see it myself but stories of making 700+ CHP from a 2L FJ , with 30 lbs boost and 30 deg of full load timing and god knows what witches brew fuel . And a big series TA45 I think . A little birdie tells me that he's been with Plasmaman since but I haven't seen him for years . Also don't bother trying to make the mythical equal length equal diameter 3-1 plus 3-1 spaghetti manifold . The critical thing is having the PRESSURE DROPS equal because thats whats important not the runner length . Playing with drop tests to equalise the pulse energy takes time and money and again trying to justify the development costs to prospective customers for small volume sales is difficult . A .

They are not out of the box stock so even if you knew what they started as it's highly doubtful you could recreate them economically . And then theres the bearings etc . A lot of work goes into those critters which is why they are not dirt cheap . OP6 merely means the turbine housing is the larger 3L VG30 size rather than the 2.5 or 2L ones off Skylines in the BB Hitachi family . A .

As I said it's the cost of the manifold and wastegating thats the problem . This is why I think the TS TIWG GT3071R/GT3076R has so much promise , granted it doesn't have the twin outlet mount flange that an RB20/25 exhaust manifold has but it would be a bonus if it did or could be adapted . If you had to have a divided manifold made whats to stop you asking for one with the Mitsy Evo 10's mount flange in the appropriate place to plonk a GT3071R/GT3076R in ? Won't need the two divorced external gates or mounts because the Garrett GT30 TS TIWG turbine housing does it all for you . Granted still not ultra cheap , good performance often isn't . A .

That the results speak for themselves is something . My bottom line is that turbocharging is generally cheaper and easier that fitting an engine of something up to double the originals capacity . The thing that has to be remembered is that when you increase an engines power output you increase its exhaust gas output but if you have an exhaust tract that can handle the extra volume or it'll choke . To make high power with a turbocharger means also having to increse the the exhaust throughput starting with the exhaust manifold and turbine housing . The stumbling block is having a turbine housing that accelerates the exhaust gasses into the turbine blades without forming a restriction or pressure rise . When you have all of the engines cylinders pulsing into a common collecter and turbine nossle you WILL get a pressure rise unless the housing A/R is quite large . This in itself is not an issue unless you want turbine response in the low or middle of an engines useful rev range . There is no black art in any of this , no ASIO spec turbine or housing at all . There is no other method that gives all the advantages of a properly set up and functioning TS system . If you truely understand how the four stroke cycle works it becomes very clear that this is the only way to have good turbine response while keeping the engine happy exhaust flow wise . All I can say is research the results and go figure . A .

From where I sit the process goes like this . Someone sits down and works out how to construct turbo manifolds and alls well . Then one day someone asks for a pulse divided version and the fabricator pretty soon works out that a lot more time is needed to stitch it all together . On top of that to do it properly the external gates feed pipe has to be divided all the way to the valve , or two divorced gate mounts made . Of course when the masterpiece is complete the customer often doesn't appreciate how much extra time went into making the thing and won't hear of paying what its worth . I'd say its easier to sell a large number of single collector manifolds and thats probably the limit of what many people will pay for . Do some homework , places like freshalloy.com are good to troll around in if your Nissan minded . When you get used to seeing hard core results at places like Hondatech.com/Freshalloy/Evolutionm.net/NASIOC/Supraforums etc etc a certain manifold producers name keeps showing up . In the US they don't like paying serious money for "a bunch of bends and plates welded together" any more than we do , but if they could have anything lots would have A FullRace one . Same here , if I was serious about it I wouldn't have anything else . When divided turbine housings grow divided wastegates it will get cheaper and easier because the awkward bits been taken care of further down the line . Point . Twin scroll systems really do work , if they didn't high performance diesels wouldn't have them and neither would the higher tech Evos and Subarus etc . The other way to attack the problem with an RB is to make two isolated exhaust manifolds and bolt up parallel twin IW turbos . The same kind of gains for the same reasons , divide the cylinders into 2 groups of three all the way to the turbine/s and use two divorced waste gates RB26 style . Your call .

Sadly we need a few pathfinders here in Australia to demonstrate that big A/R housings (twin scroll ones) don't cause the same turbine lag as they would with with a single scroll and single collector exhaust manifold . E85 doesn't really achieve the same thing as a twin scroll turbo system , you do get enhanced performance through better charge cooling (more fluid being squirted in and the evaporative cooling effect) and more efficient burning through timing the spark so that the cylinders pressure rise occurs when it will produce the most torque . So a higher detonation threshold and charge cooling is where apple juice is at . Propper twin scrolling and E85 together should be very good . I didn't chase those links far enough to see but another advantage of twin scrolling is the ability to run big cam profiles if need be . A . Twin scroll TIWG , your wanting ...

Yes , they appear to be reprofiled (bored out) GT32 turbine housings at least thats what most mobs use . Yes waiting to see how the TS TIW housings go . Cheers A .

Shameless plug for twin scroll systems because done properly they really do work . They stand a far better chance of making a wider overall spread of torque and it makes all the difference usually in the mid range . Feels more more like a larger capacity NA engine , yep thats what everyone says that goes down this road . I'm going to wait and see how the Evo 10 TS TIW GT3071R's and GT3076R's go because twin integral waste gates make life so much cheaper and simpler . Being Garrett GT30 TS TIW turbine housings you can be pretty sure the turbine/housing combo actually works . Theres going to be a choice of (from memnory) 0.73 and 0.94 A/R sizes and once you get around the model specific Mitsy flange patterns (6 Boost ?) you've got it made . We had to wait ages to get real Garrett IW GT30 turbine housings , the TS TIW ones should be the icing on the cake . Congrats on a great result , cheers A .

I don't have an RB26 or twin turbos but I'd opt for the twins because it suits the configuration of the engine/car . The second critical part is that most of you won't counter the coin to do a properly designed twin scroll system to make the big single work properly . People here are finally noticing that parallel twins tend to give more linear power delivery - than a single scroll single turbo . Done properly a single twin scroll turbo can do this as well but you have to recreate what Nissan did with two three branch manifolds , two turbine housings , two waste gates . I feel like a broken record but the rush you people seek is a TORQUE rush not a boost rush or a Kw rush . I see big turbos like big camshafts , a way to make upper end power and sluggedly performance in the sort of engine rev range you would expect to use on a daily basis . By the sounds of things you seek good drivability (ie torque where its actually usefull) so it's reasonably obvious to me that a laggy gutless pig would send you crackers at the first turn of the key . If you liked SS's on your RB26 you could look into GT2530's or GT2860RS's (x2) because they are more likely to put the shove in the back where you want it engine speed wise . Just in case your not sure both of those can use the same hot side as an RB26 specific GTRS but with big trim 60mm compressors rather than mid trim 71mm compressors . Cars that make good torque without turning "reach for the sky" revs are the ones that leap out of the blocks without this brain dead hold er at 6000 and dump the clutch lark . A torquey responsive engine has this thing called a gearbox attached to it so when the pace backs off pull the next gear , not hard . The rev it to 9 and nothing under 5 bloke is behind the 8 ball convincing his production box/flywheel to change at these sorts of revs and if he misses a gear or it bogs down he's nowhere . He also has to outlay a LOT more for multi plate clutches , exotic gearboxes , diffs etc etc to handle that sort of deliberate abuse . And the day that dickless Tracy wants to see under the lid at an RBT ... Anyway your call .

Just in case anyone is chasing the above mentioned turbo famy its full name is TD06-SL2 20G . TD06SL2 is the turbine itself and is a Trust spec one so not really in the same vein as the garden variety TD05 or TD06 offerings . 20G is the compressor wheel in one of that families bigger trims . Off the top of my head the GT Pumps site has pics of these turbines and compressors . They are available in normal and reverse rotation , Evo's 4-9 use RR Mitsy turbos . http://www.gtpumps.com.au/ A .

Be that as it may but think carefully about turbo torque because that and the shock loads of high rev and dump abuse is what will potentially kill it . As for the sort of airflow the GT40 will be producing at that pressure ratio I think its too much compressor . Boost is not a good indicator of power IMO and I think either a GT3071R or GT3076R would give a better overall result . A .

Always with Subaru there are a couple of issues that become the great eveners . Firstly they use split aluminium cases so will not really be on the same page as an RB anything block . Secondly , lots of Subie cases don't have closed decks so super powering an engine that is firstly cast in aluminium and also limited upper cylinder support can be iffy . Then theres those sometimes adequate aluminium split cased gearboxs , they do you twice , and the all paw traction to think about . Usually Zoob use clutches designed to slip rather than overload their AWD gearboxes , the AWD also means no front or rear only wheelspin which while not desirable can limit the torque loads thrown at the gearbox . I don't know where you go with the trans other than possibly an auto one . Some won't agree but I stand with the feller above on the GT3040/GT3082R being a stop gap until Garrett marketed their GT3076R/GT3037S . With whats available ATM I reckon the GT3076R is a better thing and I'd say even it on a H6 with 5MT could easily break things . The wait is long but I think the Evo 10 twin scroll twin integral wastegate turbine housing GT3076R would be worth it . Lastly the impression I have of the Sube flat 6's is that they are not a real high performance 3-3.3L engine , just more capacity and torque than the 2-2.5L flat 4's . I do realise that later Zoobs have a six spd trans but while being beefier than the five speeders are a longer still split cased ally box so not as bullet proof as some . I'm pretty sure Tojo went away from split cased boxes (4AC/4AGE) to a center plate design (like Nissan uses) for their 3L engines like 7M and 2JZ in heavier cars . This sounds very much like a thread at the "Au" site .

Not in love with any mechanical devise , they are all flawed . Just lost another long post to cyber space via another flawed system ... Long/short , I would not be trying to make super power from a mechanically std production engine mainly because what the manufacturer had in the way of heads/cams/manifolds is not up to the task . There is no such thing as a mystical black art turbocharger that spells out instant gratification and solves the meaning of life (42) . If you can modify the sections of an engine that can make it breathe really well and in the right cold/hot proportions often elevated boost pressure is not needed so putting together a turbocharger system that functions efficiently high pressure ratios is not necessarily the answer . Its been said here before that boost pressure is a measure of resistance to flow through the inlet system so if you can reduce the level of restriction you can have same airflow at lower manifold pressure of more from the same pressure . Often people don't initially look into what is going on in the hot side of the turbocharger to allow it to generate high boost pressures . The air pump is a centrifugal type and the way make higher gas flow (boost) is to spin it faster , actually to spin the turbine faster because logically they are fixed and turn at the same speed . If you have a big piston pump (engine) getting lots of exhaust gas energy (thermally excited gas velocity) is not a problem , if you don't then you have to make a deliberate effort to speed up the available exhaust gasses to really give it to the turbine blades . To speed up these gasses means effectively making a restriction and thats the last thing to want to do because it chokes the engines ability to make power (and rev) and the exhause temps go supernova and fry everything they touch . I cannot get it through to some that small turbine housings are a poor solution to what is often too big a turbocharger , your calls but its not a path I'd tread . So to the "T04Z" and GT4088R specifically . The bottom line is that a GT4088R is larger than any T04 based turbo like a T04Z , the wheel major diameters are 77 and 88mm where the Z's are 74.4 and 84mm . The 88R's housings are GT40 family where the Z's are T04 and T04S . Specifically the 88R's turbine housings are really only available in the large twin entry T04 international flange size where the generic (not HKS) Garrett T04 housings are available in T4 "Euro" (v similar to "T3") single and twin entry or the above mentioned T4 international size in single and twin entry . C'mon they ask , what is the point of this mush ? The point is that many "T04Z's" I've seen have the smaller mount flange T4 turbine housings on them . IMO to get anywhere near the REAL potential of these turbos it would HAVE to have the large flange series T4 international turbine housings and be be twin scroll . A 1.00 A/R international T4 housing normally has much larger ports than the 1.00 A/R T4 Euro version and its not just because different manufacturers have different flanges on their exhaust manifolds . I'm going to keep hauling you back to the HKS variant of the T04Z because although it has the same exact cartridge and wheels as the Garrett marketed versions the non Garrett components (both housings) make all the difference . I can't tell you what the compressor housings A/R is but some have suggested 0.80 instead of 0.70 on the Garrett . I've seen pics inside the HKS comp housing and the diffuser diameter looks larger than a Garrett T04S's one , I'm not even sure if all the HKS housings are like this because some say that they have this larger diffuser and others say they don't . Their turbine housing is another case in point . Only available in the larger T4 international flange but while the flange is divided the divider does not go in very far so you could say its not a true twin scroll housing . The volute section is also different to Garretts T4 housings . Now you really have to ask yourselves why HKS went to the extra effort to alter the characteristics of a generic Garrett turbo if it was so good to start with . So make your turbo choice and lets hope it does what you expext of it . Also as I've mentioned before I probably won't build an RB30 DET , if I was the most it would ever have is a GT3582R though more likely a twin scroll GT3076R intended for the Lancer Evo 10 in the 0.94 A/R turbine housing - if it ever reaches the market . I don't seek Hp or Kw , they are stupid unrealistic rev based numbers . Ft/lbs or Nm are what moves mountains . Your calls .

Well my opinions differ but I'm not interested in starting WW4 . Firstly the cartridge assembly , forget the wheels for a sec . If you take a close look at the center housing or bearing housing it looks very like a Garrett GT bush bearing one basically because it is . If you look at how the turbine housing and compressor backplate mount/ bolt to the bearing housing they are same . There is a minor difference in the oil inlet drilling in the BB version but drilling and tapping a different hole is no drama . Now to what is called the T51R or T04Z variation of the above center section . Take one large frame BB bearing housing and machine what would be the the turbine housing mounting ears off and form a register like a bush bearing T04 center housing has . Bingo , now we can fit older tech T04 style turbine housings to the larger frame BB cartridge assembly . Look very closely at the compressor backplate on a "T04Z" , looks very like an old heavy iron T04 60-1 backplate because it is . Now lets just wind the clock back a little to the pre BB turbo days and remember the sorts of things that people made good power with , the old T04 60-1 springs to mind . Applied well they worked well but people could not keep the thrust bearings together in high boost apps . IMO Garretts marketing eagles asked themselves how good sales would be if they could take this turbo and give it a vastly superior bearing system and reliability . So , the wheels they have and the housings and the backplate so whats left ? Machine up a large frame GT bush bearing core to take the ball race assembly and the oil restrictor (which locates it) and bobs yer uncle . They can now offer a direct replacement cartridge for anyone using an old school 60-1 that fits between their existing housings . Change the oil inlet fitting and in she goes . This possibly didn't set the world on fire bling wise and I imagine the marketers though what can we do to freshen up the scene . They would have known that HKS have the zoomy image and whats in the old T04R cartridges because they made them . So if you can make a T04R its very simple to machine the compressor side of a backplate to 84 odd mm rather than approx 76 . Its also nothing new to take a 0.70 A/R T04S compressor housing and profile machine it to suit their 84.4mm BCI-8D compressor wheel . Really all they've done is rejig the compressor/backplate/housing like they did earlier with the P/60-1 to make a T04R . Now to wheels and trims . Put simply that T04R compressor is hardly a modern design by todays standards . I can see where its possible to think that a large trim compressor like the R will be good - purely because the inducer size is big . In fact much of the American turbo brigade are so in love with inducer size that they have their own unique turbo description system based around it . You could be excused for thinking that the major diameter of the wheel is unimportant which it most certainly is not but you cant see it with the turbo assembled . My guess is they think big hole hole up front so has to be a world beater , put your own judgement on that theory . Now they do have some very switched on people in the US and some are even more interested in finding things that work rather than just things that sell easily in a mass market . One of them I know of can't sing enough praise for the GT4088R and if you asked him to back to back one with a T04Z I'm sure he could quote a telephone book full of numbers from personal experience . He may not ever be rich but the measure of success is not always lots of money . I'm also not going to flog the twin scroll system to death again , you either know or you don't and understandably the cost rules against it for most . Turbines , the old T04P trim is not such a bad thing and has a useful trim size at 76 . It is thick in the blades an heavy compared to later developments so it is hardy but innertia is the enemy of spool - takes more exhaust energy to get it moving . Off the top of my head they are ~ 74.4mm major diameter wher I thing GT40 turbines are 77mm . The turbine in the GT4088R is different to most of Garretts GT40 turbines in that firstly its made of high temp material and its designed to be a petrol engine turbo - not a lower EGT diesel one . They already have diesel spec ones in 84 and 73 trim sizes for the bush bearing diesel spec GT4088 and GT4082 turbochargers . Compressors , The 88mm C117 was unique to Garrett when it first saw the light of day . GT stlyle blade form and back to 7/14 blades rather than the usual 6/12 that most GT compressors have . So for its major diameter its inducer size is not huge , what is different (compared to a T04S combination ie 60-1 or T04R) is the larger GT40 backplate and compressor cover . The combination work really well in apps where the exhaust manifold pressure is low and the putts if you like are sharp - unrestricted . These turbos really like mid to large A/R turbine housings and using small ones to lower the boost threshold really knocks them around . Again it comes back to peoples acceptance of exhaust energy and how to get the most from it with the least restriction losses . One thing does stand out on a GT4088R and thats the combination of not huge trims on either side , the T04P turbine based turbos have it on the turbine side (76T) but not really on the compressor side ie ~ 60T for the 60-1 (Pn 409535-1) or 63T for the T04R wheel . The C117 is 52T . Trim sizes are important to any turbo wheel , its what tailors the gas flow potential for a given major diameter . Garretts position is that middle size trims tend to give the best efficiencies but for economic reasond its easier to adjust the trim size up or down rather than make a huge range of wheels with mid sized trims . In the case of the 60-1 the 60T is the largest of its family from memory , I'm not sure about their T04R's but I can't imagine needing larger than 63T . Many of the GT range of compressors are up in trim size but when 56T is as large as they usually go it has to say something . Compressor covers . Often when you get high speed wheels mobs like Garrett go up on comp housing family , examples of this are GT2510/GT2530/GT2860R/GT2860RS/GT3071R . The GT25/28's I mentioned have ~ 60mm dia compressors which is the basic T3 dia but they don't use T3 sized comp housings , they are T04B family . This gets them a larger diameter diffuser and the housing better suits the air flow capacity of the higher speed wheel of approx T3 dimensions . The GT3071R has a 71mm compressor which is approx basic T04B size but gains a step up to the T04E family of backplate and housing . People who're read my ramblings for years would remember my dislike of T04S sized compressor wheels (generally 76mm dia) but they use a compressor housing thats larger than say a 76mm T04E or 76.2mm GT37 (from GT3076R/GT3037) wheel normally does . I'd say the reason that they do is that they have 7/14 blades rather than 6/12 so for a given wheel speed they would try to move more air . So to have a wheel with more blades in a larger series housing is what Garrett did in that era . I believe the move to a larger diameter and larger trim (from 60-1 to T04R) in the same sized compressor housing was a backwards step , HKS obviously had issues with it and had an alternative housing made , actually both housing . I don't know Garretts position on all this , possibly they stayed with the S housing because in the pre BB days going larger in housing with such a large trim wheel caused too high a boost threshold . Anyway out of time , cheers A .

I don't think theres a lot thats good to say about HKSs 2540s , except the turbine housings are good and fit 2871Rs and any GT28BB turbo with the NS111 turbine . 2540s are laggy because 1) the compressor is an out dated 76mm T04E I think 46 trim , 2) any 76mm compressor is too big for a 53.84mm turbine . GT4088Rs are a reasonably serious turbocharger and even with a properly set up pulse divided manifold and twin gates I don't think would be real responsive on a mainly street driven car . For pure street in twin layout a better choice IMO would be between GTSSs (which you can buy through Garrett at a Garrett price) and a GT2530 or Garrett marketed version . My thoughts only , cheers A .

A while back I asked around and no one (engine builders/machinists) could quote exact differences between R33 and R34 RB25DET heads - from a valve size/compression ratio/porting perspective . I wouldn't have thought that Nissan would've spent the money on an engine family that was not going to last more than a few years . Anyway the general feeling is that the larger OP6 sized turbine housing will help make similar power R33 vs R34 but there would be a slight turbine lag penalty . When I first read about the R34GTts std power output (~ 206Kw) I thought thats what R32 GTRs made and went looking for the torque numbers to compare . I can't remember the figures but am sure the GTRs was higher . Cheers A .

GT3240s are a interesting version of the GT3540R/GT3582R . They have a 54 trim version of the 3582R's 56T compressor . The turbine is a cropped GT35 one and gets called GT32xx because its ground down to roughly GT32 turbine dimensions . You have to be a little careful because they were only ever sold by HKS with a T25/28 flanged non gated turbine housing in 0.87 A/R ratio . Probably better suited to a smaller engine with fewer larger cylinders ie 2L four . I think they were at times used on drag RB26s in pairs but that would be in a "high" state of tune . Cheers A .

Hi all , from another recent thread it was said that R33 RB25DETs do two cam switch points at ~ 1500 and 4000 . I gather by switching on the solenoid the R33 cams close up as in the inlet cam retards x degrees and this increases the valve overlap period . It sounds like the R34GTt version has the ability to make small changes rather than one large one at set points . Does anyone know if it's possible to fit the R34s inlet cam phasing device to an R33 or are the R33/34 heads different in that area ? I know it would mean having some type of control unit to run it but its food for thought . Cheers A .

Yes the price overall looks considerably better than you'd pay for a HKS GT ProS kit . I'd like to see pics of that dump pipe as from the turbo flange side and where the gates pipe enters the dump pipe tube . From that earlier pic it looks like it goes through a 90 bend and back into the gas flow path ? Again not willing to rag but wouldn't that to a degree do what many IW turbine housings do when the flat valve opens - aim the wasted gas at a right angle back into the main exhaust stream only a bit further south ? I'll have to rat up some pics of the Pro S dump , from memory they have a sectioned tube welded along the side of the main one and merge it back in at a lesser angle to the main tube . Cheers A .

The turbine housing A/R number is just that - a number . The important thing is the application of the largest of the three housings (OP6 one) - which was a four cam single turbo VG30DET . I think the best way to look at them is 2L size , 2.5L size and 3L size . I'd say if you fitted the OP6 housing to an otherwise std R33 GTS25T you would get a noticable lag penalty because the housings passage is larger and gas speed will be slower through the turbine blades . If you did things to pull the bottom end torque up like increased CR or better cams or porting etc the loss of low end starts to disapear . Nissan got around it in one case by using a larger 3L engine and another by having variable cam timing on the R34GTt . The ability to vary cam timing makes a huge difference because you can alter the valve overlap period throughout the engines rev range . With less overlap at low engine speeds you can drag the dynamic or effective compression ratio up and not have the lack of low speed torque that say the R33 version would have with the larger OP6 turbine housing . I noticed that people are quoting differences in power output ie the std vs OP6 housing on R33s . There would be other influences such as more sophisticated engine mamagement and cam profiles etc but from memory an R33 made 184 Kw out of the box where an R34 did 206 Kw ? I suppose the ~ 20Kw gives a rough idea of what the potential difference would be minus the electronics and cam profile differences . Thoughts ? Cheers A .

Have to search under GT3071R IW or GT3076R IW , I'm told the propper GT30 integral wastegate turbine housings were developed here in Australia and look very similar to the turbine housing on Fords XR6 turbo cars . In that case they're used on a GT3582R , personally I think they are intended to be GT30 turbine housings but some are machined out to fit GT35BB turbines/turbos . People here like Mafia/Cubes are using them and I posted pics of the bare housings when they became available in Sydney a couple of years ago - don't have the link sorry . I would always use a genuine turbine housing given a choice because the manufacturer designs the housing to work with their turbine - they are a matching set say like a 16" wheel with a 16" tyre . I'm not going to rag anyone but it's easy to see where producing a generic turbine housing and machining it to suit various diameter turbines will cause problems , because like the 16" rim example you may guts a 15" tyre onto it but its not the way the engineers intended it to work . The usual problems with generic turbine housings is elevated exhaust manifold pressure (TIP or turbine inlet pressure) which shows up as what people call "boost creep" - the wastegates inability to bypass sufficient volume of exhaust gas to "throttle" or control turbine speed (compressor as well) and therefore boost pressure . The best gas flow situation is to use the turbine/turbo manufacturers matching family of turbine housing but even then the housings A/R ratio has to be right as in not too small . Search here under GT3071R and GT3076R because there are some long strings and lots of peoples R and D you can benefit from . Beyond the scope of this thread but Garrett is tooling up to make a bolt on version of the GT3071R and GT3076R for the the Evolutuion 10 Lancer . The big news is that their turbine housings will be twin integral (internal) wastegate and twin scroll available in 0.73 and 0.9x A/R ratios . Sadly the mount flange style is not split "T3" but if adapters or a custom manifold were on the cards it'd be real hard to beat on a road car . Hope this helps , cheers A .