Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

hey guys

was wondering if the GT30R internal gated will fit in the stock low mount position of the factory turbo

if so is it an easy fit or a tight fit and are the water and oil lines easy to setup for this

cheers guys

andrew

well there are no int gated housings at this stage in that line... still not out from garrett...

So what housing have you had machined up?

What A/R is it?

Is it a R33 rear housing? VG30?

garrett has a line of them in internal gate, its on horsepowerinabox site and racespec site

A/R they have are 0.63, 0.82 and 1.06 i want the 0.63 for quicker spool

and im not to sure what housing it is but mounts onto my t3 manifold

That is a custom made jobby from hpiab. They are a VG30 second hand rear housing from memory.

Garrett is just about to release the intrnal gated GT30R this month. I should find out this week.

In answer to your question though...the turbo will need to be spaced away as the comp housing is rather large. The oil and water lines will need to be made up. I suggest braided. These can be made for around the $250 mark. The inlet will also have to be changed due to the large turbo mouth.The dump pipe angle will also change so you might have to cut it under the car and rotate then re-attach.

As 3lit said, they are not on the market yet.

So you've got the VG rear... alhough im now worried about what comp wheel it has in in...

But on the matter at hand, as 3lit also said, youll have to change all the stuff around it

havent they been out at gcg and unique autosports for ages..... we are talking bout the gt3040 arent we???? if so someone else on here has done it in the stock position i remember lookin at it has the whole install process on photos, i think its in the forced section

Edited by sinistagtst

i havent got it yet aye im just hell interested in buying one when they come out or if they are available atm

for around the 2k mark there the only turbo from garrett that are rated for more than 400hp

well they are a hybrid, not an "offering" from Garrett at all

What about...

http://www.gcg.com.au/Catalogue_Menus/Upgr...pgrade_gtst.htm

Another hybrid, well tested, well proven

well im tossing up between that gcg highflow or a gt30r but gt30r more work to be applied to make it all fit in and running where as the gcg is all staight in straight out

my aim for the car is to get 350 rwhp

GCG Ball Bearing High Flow on the Group Buy for $1750 delivered with all the parts necessary to fit straight on.

http://www.skylinesaustralia.com/forums/in...howtopic=121128

:P cheers :)

If you want 350rwhp an you get the gcg high flow factor in doing your cams as well, I have searched on these forums and not that many high flows have reached your figure of 260 rwkw.

The GT30R will be able to achieve this figure easily with more tuning maybe more, I have had a good look into the two myself. Im going with the GT30 I guess it depends on a few other things though as well like wat are you wating to do with 350rwhp ,track ,drift ,1/4. Wat other supporting mods would be in place to back up the turbo.

well the car is set for track

i have pfc, fmic, pod, z32, ebc, fuel pump and fuel reg, turbo back zorst and when i get the turbo ill get bigger injectors

my car is tuned at 261 hp on a base/safe tune due to my turbo seal goin it cant be tuned for more otherwise bang

*sigh* they are external only.

any internal models are having other housings machined up to suit as the garrett items are not yet released

if people cant understand that yet i give up

have seen a similar turbo low mounted, it was off the new falcon, featured ar.7 compressor cover and ar.82 rear internally gated. extensive modification of the engine mount necessary. plus custom plumbing in speedflow for oil & water feeds and custom dump pipe, intake pipe & intercooler pipe. looks fully standard though, cant pick it other than the large intake pipe.

hey guys

was wondering if the GT30R internal gated will fit in the stock low mount position of the factory turbo

if so is it an easy fit or a tight fit and are the water and oil lines easy to setup for this

cheers guys

andrew

well im swaying more to the gcg as there is minimal work and expense to install is and running it

and if this turbo can give me 330-350 rwhp ill be happy :D

cheers

andrew

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • First up, I wouldn't use PID straight up for boost control. There's also other control techniques that can be implemented. And as I said, and you keep missing the point. It's not the ONE thing, it's the wrapping it up together with everything else in the one system that starts to unravel the problem. It's why there are people who can work in a certain field as a generalist, IE a IT person, and then there are specialists. IE, an SQL database specialist. Sure the IT person can build and run a database, and it'll work, however theyll likely never be as good as a specialist.   So, as said, it's not as simple as you're thinking. And yes, there's a limit to the number of everything's in MCUs, and they run out far to freaking fast when you're designing a complex system, which means you have to make compromises. Add to that, you'll have a limited team working on it, so fixing / tweaking some features means some features are a higher priority than others. Add to that, someone might fix a problem around a certain unrelated feature, and that change due to other complexities in the system design, can now cause a new, unforseen bug in something else.   The whole thing is, as said, sometimes split systems can work as good, and if not better. Plus when there's no need to spend $4k on an all in one solution, to meet the needs of a $200 system, maybe don't just spout off things others have said / you've read. There's a lot of misinformation on the internet, including in translated service manuals, and data sheets. Going and doing, so that you know, is better than stating something you read. Stating something that has been read, is about as useful as an engineering graduate, as all they know is what they've read. And trust me, nearly every engineering graduate is useless in the real world. And add to that, if you don't know this stuff, and just have an opinion, maybe accept what people with experience are telling you as information, and don't keep reciting the exact same thing over and over in response.
    • How complicated is PID boost control? To me it really doesn't seem that difficult. I'm not disputing the core assertion (specialization can be better than general purpose solutions), I'm just saying we're 30+ years removed from the days when transistor budgets were in the thousands and we had to hem and haw about whether there's enough ECC DRAM or enough clock cycles or the interrupt handler can respond fast enough to handle another task. I really struggle to see how a Greddy Profec or an HKS EVC7 or whatever else is somehow a far superior solution to what you get in a Haltech Nexus/Elite ECU. I don't see OEMs spending time on dedicated boost control modules in any car I've ever touched. Is there value to separating out a motor controller or engine controller vs an infotainment module? Of course, those are two completely different tasks with highly divergent requirements. The reason why I cite data sheets, service manuals, etc is because as you have clearly suggested I don't know what I'm doing, can't learn how to do anything correctly, and have never actually done anything myself. So when I do offer advice to people I like to use sources that are not just based off of taking my word for it and can be independently verified by others so it's not just my misinterpretation of a primary source.
    • That's awesome, well done! Love all these older Datsun / Nissans so rare now
    • As I said, there's trade offs to jamming EVERYTHING in. Timing, resources etc, being the huge ones. Calling out the factory ECU has nothing to do with it, as it doesn't do any form of fancy boost control. It's all open loop boost control. You mention the Haltech Nexus, that's effectively two separate devices jammed into one box. What you quote about it, is proof for that. So now you've lost flexibility as a product too...   A product designed to do one thing really well, will always beat other products doing multiple things. Also, I wouldn't knock COTS stuff, you'd be surprised how many things are using it, that you're probably totally in love with As for the SpaceX comment that we're working directly with them, it's about the type of stuff we're doing. We're doing design work, and breaking world firsts. If you can't understand that I have real world hands on experience, including in very modern tech, and actually understand this stuff, then to avoid useless debates where you just won't accept fact and experience, from here on, it seems you'd be be happy I (and possibly anyone with knowledge really) not reply to your questions, or input, no matter how much help you could be given to help you, or let you learn. It seems you're happy reading your data sheets, factory service manuals, and only want people to reinforce your thoughts and points of view. 
    • I don't really understand because clearly it's possible. The factory ECU is running on like a 4 MHz 16-bit processor. Modern GDI ECUs have like 200 MHz superscalar cores with floating point units too. The Haltech Nexus has two 240 MHz CPU cores. The Elite 2500 is a single 80 MHz core. Surely 20x the compute means adding some PID boost control logic isn't that complicated. I'm not saying clock speed is everything, but the requirements to add boost control to a port injection 6 cylinder ECU are really not that difficult. More I/O, more interrupt handlers, more working memory, etc isn't that crazy to figure out. SpaceX if anything shows just how far you can get arguably doing things the "wrong" way, ie x86 COTS running C++ on Linux. That is about as far away from the "correct" architecture as it gets for a real time system, but it works anyways. 
×
×
  • Create New...