Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey forum just a general knowledge question here. I used the search function, but found no topics on the subject. I just would like to know what effect what a machined 3076r comp housing have on a gt35r?

Faster spool, slower spool, same spool, less horsepower at same boost or same horsepower at same boost?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/340336-effect-of-smaller-comp-housing/
Share on other sites

think i read a while ago from someone of the xr6t persuasian that swapping from .5 to .7 on a gt35 is worth 20 or 40 kw in the top end or someting, not a massive amount... i'd imagine spool would be effected relatively proportional to power

think i read a while ago from someone of the xr6t persuasian that swapping from .5 to .7 on a gt35 is worth 20 or 40 kw in the top end or someting, not a massive amount... i'd imagine spool would be effected relatively proportional to power

Hmmm so where would the .6 get you? Would you still have the top end capability of a 35r with a somewhat quicker spool time? Or would the effect be negligible? Would it still make more power than a 3076r of the same specs?

That hybrid 35r would prob make better powar than a 3076r, purely because it's got the larger rear, and less exhaust restriction.

I'd say response would be the same, the comp. wheel's inertia is the same, and the hot side is unchanged.

However you'd probably make more/better power at lower boost levels, and I'd imagine less power at higher boost levels.

i.e. it would move the efficiency range of the turbo down a tad.

think of it like installing a smaller profile camshaft, just makes different power at different revs.

that's my $0.02...

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 .

Edited by discopotato03

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

    • Oh ok that makes so much sense. Thanks for clearing it up!
    • And these modern "environmentally friendly" EV vehicles also run on the same smoke! When the engine, wiring, or batteries let it escape it also stops running!
    • Yeah - I found the same information too.. 30% open is like 85% of flow etc. So it's probably going to be minor if not completely imperceptible. I also have a larger pod filter here, will swap that on and see if there's any difference. The hardest part is finding a place to uh, test this. It's quite noticable just how much having ducting to the otherwise completely open pod cools the intake temps down. It's better boxed, or shielded but driving for 30 seconds really makes it plummet to near ambient temperatures. I recall in the past when I was a RB land and had a nice flowing airbox -  - Then I took the lid off and put a pod there, and gained 9 psi of boost and about 60kw from the restriction I didn't know I had - with the controller at same duty cycle. However finding people using over the radiator intakes having similar KPA drops at WOT on built setups makes me think there restriction could be the exhaust or potentially the headers. Either way though, there's no real estate to play with and nothing that can realistically be done about it. The original dyno plot without the airbox, and the larger pod had a better curve. It was later I added the ducting and airbox, and a smaller pod to make it fit in there...
    • That's not completely truthful now is it? Any flex fuelled factory cars also had the option to run on steam.
    • Yeah so I guess your mechanic would know turnaround better than me....but I would have thought you had access to same day or overnight rack rebuilds there....any big city here in Australia has that service.   There are a couple of o-rings and seals involved, I guess the risk is the part is specific not general. Other option is if you can have it on stands in your garage for a while, steering rack removal is pretty simple (2 mounting brackets, 2 ball joints (separate by undoing the nut to the top of the threads, put a pry bar between the steering arm and control arm to put pressure on it then medium force on the side of the ball joint or top of the nut with a hammer to break it free) and then the trickiest bit is the splines to the steering rack (not too bad to undo, one nut then it slides out, but mark it first so you can reassemble it straight)
×
×
  • Create New...