Tr30R Pics And Details You Don't Often See .

[discopotato03]

Just in case you never get to see them .

http://classifieds.s14power.com/showproduct.php?product=759

And details .

http://www.tdesystems.com/default.aspx?page=customer&file=customer/tudiel/customerpages/news.htm

Note the 71mm 60T wheel comp map that looks cruisy and pumps out 60 lbs/min of air at 4 bar .

Also I think I quoted in the past that TR30 60mm turbines were 63 and 76T , one of the pages in the second link shows them as 73 and 76Ts though they quote mm which was a typo - note the exducer sizes .

A .

Edited March 3, 2013 by discopotato03

[Dale FZ1]

Looking at the performance maps, and some of the dimensions, this range appears (to me at least) to be 100% designed for racing within rules. Mention of defined turbine exducer diameters, rally spec turbines, and compressors with inducers not much larger than rule-mandated intake restrictors all point the way to engineering gear that can do the business with high PR efficiency but not necessarily (spec dependent) flow great amounts in absolute terms.

Both the WRC engines and LMP diesels run very high boost but within their own design parameters are not intended/able to exceed certain hp due to inlet restrictions.

Blade shape, blade count, and hub sizes also no doubt contribute to the performance characteristics, but I wouldn't think they are likely to be the type/spec of unit you would use anytime soon on a mild/responsive road application. I'd think the use of smaller trim turbine might give the transient response you've made comment about, but given the obvious restriction to exhaust flow through the turbine itself, design focus on flow efficiency through the wastegate system would become more important.

The use of round turbine inlet is a good thing, don't really get why Garrett persist with the rectangular flange and flow paths with angular edges on regular production items. MHI are onto it, and the engine manufacturers generally use circular cross sections in their head port shapes. "Because they've always done it that way" doesn't cut it for me when the rest of the engineering/design world has moved on.

The asking price of $3500 per unit is high but not exorbitant and it would be interesting to see someone with the budget and drive to acquire and fit one just for kicks. Wonder how you'd go for spares or an overhaul kit?

Good find.

[GTSBoy]

A rectangle or square gives you more cross sectional area than a circle of the same gross dimensions. This matters less for the turbien housing itself, because it obviously has to nozzle down to the turbine anyway.....but it makes designing a decent exhaust manifold a lot easier.

Everything is a compromise somewhere.

[STATUS]

peekaboo i have two...

[discopotato03]

TR30Rs are a purpose built no compromise series of competition turbochargers with no regard to production road engines whatsoever .

In the early days of competition turbochargers there were no inlet restrictors but the people writing the rules decided there should be a way to even the field , and allow NA engines to compete against them in some cases .

I think the old saying that torque wins races horsepower sells cars is still valid . What the restrictor does is put a cap on the total volume of air you can have and that forces the engineers to make as much torque as possible before the flow limit is reached . History has shown that the pre WRC Group A Rally engines could generate 650 Nm of torque from a 2L turbo engine even with air restrictors . That they hit the wall at 5500 revs says a lot about what you can do with 2000ccs , though they did have anti lag systems as well .

I don't think these engines or turbos would have had a problem with exhaust restriction , no turbo engine likes to be pushed hard with restricted exhausts and it really shows with torque output . When you think of "small trims" remember these TR30 turbines are 60mm like a GT30 UHP but they have less (9) blades and no doubt very carefully designed exducer tip heights . They have a range of turbine housing ARs and if ones not enough and the rules allow you strap on two turbos .

Also note the range of compressor wheels and IMO the most impressive one is the 71mm 60T one . The 76.2mm 56T one looks good in a GT3076R sort of way too .

I also doubt these would perform poorly at more mundane pressure ratios and some of these maps look vaguely similar to some GTX maps - higher PR capable than many of the GT ones . The trend these days is to run higher PRs in production petrol and diesel engines and the one that springs to mind is the Mitsy 4B11T that has I think 21 pounds of boost off the showroom floor .

To make good torque with higher PRs you need to have even inlet and exhaust manifold pressure on boost and in the past that was hard to do if you wanted boost/torque from low revs OE style . These days we want our cake and eat it so the engine has to make good torque from low revs and then stick a boat load of boost into it . Things like good heads/variable cam timing and lift/direct injection/bore to stroke ratios etc all pay off .

Personally all I'm interested in is that turbine because it makes the 1989 era GT30 look like a total piece of agricultural shit . All the woes of Gt30 turbos stem from that turbine and the sooner Garret improve upon it the better . If the GT30 had been the gun thing there would have been no need for the TR30 one .

Later , A .

[Dale FZ1]

I'll stand corrected, but believe that in the transition from Group B to Group A rally, restrictors were mandated at an early stage to limit hp production to ~300 @ crank. FIA have then since played with the actual size, from 40-32mm depending on category and the comp series. Circuit racing Group A cars were not restrained in the same way.

Without a mandated max boost pressure for the rally machines, and anti-lag permissible they were able to push 2 bar (so 3 bar absolute) into the engine and make the massive, low-mid range torque that slingshots them out of corners. Restrictors make the torque fall over very quickly, and current restrictor-equipped cars typically use 5000rpm as a change point, making them sound like a John Deere tractor while they blast past.

So I can see a lot of sense in spec'ing those compressors according to rule driven restrictors, and also the turbines according to drive requirements - hence the rally-spec 73 trim rotor. Both the 71mm and 76mm comp maps do appear very similar to what is published for the GT3071R and GT3076R, in shape at least.

On-thread, the TR30 turbine is an interesting piece of gear, both from the housing used, and also the design features. Drop the blade count increases high-speed efficiency and flow but at the cost of response. Build it from ultra light material, and regain some of the lower end response via reduced inertia. Also shape the blades according to current knowledge/experience to make the best use of the gas flow. All of that I like.

Disco's advocacy of reduced trim sizes contributing to response, and comments from Lithium in another thread drove me to check out a few things regarding production items available from other manufacturers, focus on MHI and the Kinugawa copies. What an interesting find: TD06H, broadly similar dimensions to the GT35 turbine is a 77T and available in 12, 11, and 9 blades. Inconel is the metal used, not titanium. Blade shape looks very similar to the Garrett design also, maybe a little more open in the exducer area.

TD06SL2 has broadly similar dimensions to the GT30 turbine, 79T and available in 12 and 11 blade options. I'm sure a bit of fishing around would (maybe) yield availability of either a 9 blader or titanium options, given that was the extent things went to with the Evo TDO5H.

Neither of those components are comparable to a high cost, competition only prototype but it is interesting to see what design features other manufacturers are making available to the public, and perhaps what sort of home-brew developments can be bought at affordable prices.

It would be good to see some detailed pictures linked into this thread, maybe including some of the BW EFR gear so we can try to gauge the variety of ideas being implemented into current, (relatively) up-to-date turbine technology vs the low volume racing prototypes.

Edited March 6, 2013 by Dale FZ1

[GTScotT]

TD06SL2 has broadly similar dimensions to the GT30 turbine, 79T and available in 12 and 11 blade options. I'm sure a bit of fishing around would (maybe) yield availability of either a 9 blader or titanium options, given that was the extent things went to with the Evo TDO5H.

I am aware of a TD06SL2 9 blade wheel actually!

Maybe we should get Stao to see if the same is available via the foundries in Taiwan.

Refer to:

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Nissan-Turbo-HIGH-END-TD06SL2-20GTX-AR-8-Nissan-Silvia-S13-S14-200SX-240SX-/140744047319?pt=AU_Car_Parts_Accessories&hash=item20c4ffbad7&_uhb=1#ht_5666wt_1163

[Dale FZ1]

This thread is a bit of an interesting oddity, would be good to hear from Stao regarding the trim sizes and maybe what Kamak do have available to trial.

I'd also like to see it keep on-track, and maybe pics of other machines that run the TR30.

[discopotato03]

Like turbine housing AR variations trim sizing makes big differences to how a turbine family performs overall . Its not often you see big trim sizes on a turbine unless the intent was to increase the flow capacity for a given major diameter . AR and trim size work together and to see this note the GT30 UHPs turbine graphs - the flow rate increases quickly with AR size .

The NS111 turbine design is also not new but people inside Honeywell claim aero wise they are very good , as I said recently the smaller VATN turbos are getting improved turbines and they look similar to NS111s in some ways .

I wouldn't write the TR30 turbine off as being restrictive and in the 76T size with a suitably sized turbine housing they should be able to make real good power - with a good/better spread of torque than the GT30 can .

Yep many have noticed over the years that other manufacturers use different turbine trim sizes on similarly sized turbines and I think its because they want a good spread of power .

If you spend time looking in turbo families note how many but not all of Garretts Diesel spec GT turbines are 84 trim . Also note that diesels tend to work over a much narrower speed range than petrol engines and their usable rev ranges can be quite narrow too . To cater for a narrow power range and not be restrictive you'd think the logical solution would be to have a big trim turbine and try to limit the turbines major diameter - innertia .

Generally "spooling" turbos on big diesel engines is not a major issue because they tend to run in a loaded state for longer periods than small/ish petrol engines and the transient priority is much lower . Next time out on the highway listen carefully to the turbos on truck prime mover engines and note they spend long periods of time on boost .

In some ways these engines are more like competition car engines because they spend so much time loaded and boosted where a typical road car doesn't need boost just to cruise around .

So to me big turbine trim means this thing is really only going to work well over a narrowish power/engine speed range compared to a lesser trim turbine .

Now IMO 84 is a LARGE trim size not a normal one and most of what I see in the OE petrol world uses sizes more like say 62 to 78 . All your basic T25/T28 turbines were around 62T and its the 53.8mm NS111 that allows the more potent GT28 BB turbos perform as they do . You all know what happens when you change OE RB26 turbos for say GT2530s (GT2860R in todays speak) and let me tell you you were never going to make twin 2530 power with OE sized turbos - even if they had steel OE sized turbines . Dash 9/GTSS turbos have I think NS111 turbines but they are 62 rather than 76T .

The only OE app that I can think of that uses a GT30 or GT35 BB turbo is the Ford XR6 and a GT35R is not exactly a big turbo for a four litre engine . I'd say Ford went this way because they wanted a reasonably cheap compact turbocharger and to have an integral wastegate + T3 flange . Soo they gets a big trim turbine in a compact ish GT30 big AR housing and it doesn't choke the thing at 1500 engine revs . Four litres doesn't need much boost pressure to make decent torque so the compromise is workable . Note that these don't need high boost from nowhere revs but they do need to be unrestrictive to make good off boost economy at low revs . I haven't had a turbo XR6 but we drive the NA ones often at work and these sit on 1700 revs at 110 (auto) .

Now us in the aftermarket . We want strong torque over a wide range and very small is the segment of society that regularly winds their cars of the clocks on the street . Those that do are pure morons with no respect for their own lives or anyone elses . Accidents waiting for headlines .

The rest of us want a usable spread of power because thats what works on the street , making too much power is easy peasy but making "good" power ie not Camry dog lag monsters takes a bit more effort .

Trying to do it with GT30 based turbos introduces too many compromises IMO because to get them on song early means having twin scrolls or the sort of turbine housing that has higher gas speeds at lower engine revs - and then it falls off in the upper rev ranges . I have no doubt whatsoever that that a TR30 turbine substituted in some of the GT30R turbo range would wake them up significantly earlier than a GT30 UHP turbine does and still not be overly restrictive in the right AR sized turbine housing . It would be real interesting to compare TR30 and GT30 turbine maps in the same AR sized housings because that would tell you the real flow/exhaust pressure story .

A .

[jet_r31]

I am aware of a TD06SL2 9 blade wheel actually!

Maybe we should get Stao to see if the same is available via the foundries in Taiwan.

Refer to:

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Nissan-Turbo-HIGH-END-TD06SL2-20GTX-AR-8-Nissan-Silvia-S13-S14-200SX-240SX-/140744047319?pt=AU_Car_Parts_Accessories&hash=item20c4ffbad7&_uhb=1#ht_5666wt_1163

Thats one expensive chinese turbo....

cheers

darren

[GTScotT]

lol stao can build one for the normal L2 price.

just ask for the Kamak STS 9 blade turbine

[hypergear]

A turbo contain two wheels and two housings. I'm interested to see a dyno reading of this TR30R turbocharger on its full potential out of a Rb25det. Will be an challenging project to DIY a turbocharger that matches its response and power delivery curve.

[Lithium]

The rest of us want a usable spread of power because thats what works on the street , making too much power is easy peasy but making "good" power ie not Camry dog lag monsters takes a bit more effort .

Trying to do it with GT30 based turbos introduces too many compromises IMO because to get them on song early means having twin scrolls or the sort of turbine housing that has higher gas speeds at lower engine revs - and then it falls off in the upper rev ranges .

Not true at all, myself and plenty of other people here have run around for years with .82a/r GT3076Rs which neither choke nor are lag monsters. Please stop spreading your theory based opinions as flat truths, while I am in no way implying the GT30 is any gods gift - I knew when I bought mine it wasn't, but it WAS something that would suit my purpose fine, and clearly did.

I know you are going to steam roll this with theoritical bollux but the fact of the matter (for those who know no better, and encounter this thread when trying to research for their own choices) is that it does not make a car into an automatic lag monster which is only good for high speed runs. Fact: My car was no worse to drive (in most cases better) than your typical factory turbo EVO/STi for low rpm driveability. If you think that a GT3076R is that bad, you are making a statement about the boost threshold and response of some of the most popular performance cars on the market.

I have been long fascinated by and read much into the TR30Rs over the years as well, and had a good ponder on them - you have to remember these things were made to perform as well as possible while meeting particular class requirements. Due to compromises we can't assume that the performance difference is going to be AS different as you might be hoping or implying. I'm certainly not going to say it won't either - but you are hypothesising to the point of make believe so I thought I'd make sure the real world (where we can't just bolt these on and try it to find THE TRUTH) isn't forgotten about.

When you are moving into a different family of wheel design (unless you are an aerodynamics expert, which it is clear to me you aren't - and neither am I) you can't extrapolate the performance of one wheel of a slightly different size or trim with another. The same as you can't line up a bunch of turbine wheels from different manufacturers and order wheel sizes and trim from smallest to largest and say "Ok - this is the order of response and flow". It won't work. Same will apply to wheels of different families of the same manufacturer, even T-series vs GT-series...

I am ever pondering a way to become all rich and powerful, it seems tricky but I assure you if I succeed my hollowed out mountain will have a lot of performance testing equipment and lots of Frankenturbos will be built/acquired/tested and other silly things would happen. Don't hold your breath, sadly.

The only proper legendary motorsport turbo anyone I know have acquired for personal use was an IHI RX8 which is hardly useful to our interests, it was for his drag car and while it had a lot of compressor it didn't prove as magical as he had hoped - exhaust manifold pressure skyrocketing on high boost, the turbo was clearly much better suited to how they were used on Indy cars than on a Mitsi drag car.

It is interesting to see how they work on a dyno though, here is a couple of dyno plots from a seriously built hillclimb car using a TR30R - not all events it entered required a restrictor so they set up two tunes for it, one with and one without. Shows fairly well how they perform with and without, with all the boost thrown at it:

[scotty nm35]

With race fuel too right?

It certainly doesn't come on as hard as a GT, but without knowing the housing AR's there is little use comparing them I guess.

[GTScotT]

Lith any idea what car that TR30R was set up on and the stroke/cam combo?

[Lithium]

2.3litre stroker, 10:1 compression on E85 - the guy ended up upgraded to a HTA35R for his un-restricted events and never looked back... said the TR30R's performance was not the expect magic lag free stuff people would imagine and he concluded that the TR30R's main advantages was that it met class restrictions where applicable and that it was lighter and stronger (ie for antilag/general punishment) than typical units.

Here's a blog from after he upgraded to the HTA: http://blog.amsperformance.com/2009/08/12/amsnos-energy-drink-hill-climb-evo-takes-1st-in-class-at-lands-end-hill-climb/

Iirc the car ended up on the dyno with the same engine setup and ended up with around 670whp - ultimately schooled the TR30R.

[Dose Pipe Sutututu]

Lith, good write up on post #13

[Lithium]

I have to add here, don't take these nudges personally Disco - apologies if it is a bit like that, you have a great amount of knowledge to share which is good, I often enjoy your posts when they aren't distorting reality. All I am trying to do is keep theory, opinion and fact clearly defined otherwise you are misrepresenting information and leading people astray... making things more complicated than they need to be when trying to decide how to spend their well earned money. The way you described a GT30R as driving paints it out to be like what a T51R is actually like. Try and keep it real, and you won't have me leaping into your face

[Dose Pipe Sutututu]

TBH a GT3076 on a RB25DET isn't that laggy considering you'll be on full noise a touch before 4000rpm. In saying that a mildly worked GT-R doesn't go full noise till a about 4000rpm. (just my experiences)

[discopotato03]

Yeh well thats kind of the issue because I never wanted GTR type power delivery .

I was back at Insight today sorting out a few ViPec tune settings and got to talking about this GT30 business . Scott does enough tuning and travels overseas looking at all kinds of performance things and agrees about this turbine stuff . He thinks that there are good smallish and good biggish turbos around but until recently no-ones really done a good mid sized wheel turbocharger . He says that really the wheel sizes and trims need to be right and fitting small turbine housings to GT30/35 sized turbos is a bit self defeating .

He's curious to see how this GTX3067R would go and reckons its an option , expensive experiment ...

The more I research them the better EFR 7163s sound but solid results are hard to find because the only ones in existence are prototypes sill being fine tuned in some areas . I have to make enquiries OS about turbine housings for EFRs because I need an IW T3 flanged one if possible .

Lithium I did ask him Scott wat would happen if I used that GT3076R 52T 0.82 AR turbo and he said it'd make good power but lose most of the nice drive it every day stuff . He knows what I like and what I don't and he knows I won't like it so why go there .

I also asked briefly about TR30Rs and he said brilliant things in the right sizes . Almost forgot , these are more like a 10 grand turbocharger that comes with a contract so I don't expect to see many on road cars .

Cheers A .