Garrett G Series

[discopotato03]

I think HKS got the first of the Inconel GT turbines in the early 1990s . Think things like GT2530 and GT3037 on early GTRs .

I'm a bit surprised that Garrett haven't gone with something along the lines of the 7163s mixed flow turbine . Sort of half way between a (conventional) radial in flow turbine and an axial flow turbine . This can make turbine housing designs specialised and maybe this is too much of a change for Garrett at this stage . They have to think of production economics as well as performance improvements . 

[Lithium]

Yeah I was a bit surprised too, I am sure I saw hints somewhere they were toying with them but it looks like the gas hits the blade in a fairly radial manner going by the wheel shape on the G25.  Otherwise yeah - 9 blade turbines seem to be a thing of the moment currently 

 

Either way, going by what they are saying they clearly flow really well - here is hoping they derive enough torque from the exhaust gas to drive the rotating mass good... They are suggesting that the new design also improves spool which is pretty epic if accurate for a given wheel size, especially with the massive flow improvement.  

 

[R_34]

I have the same concern about feeding the compressor correctly, especially on the 660. That's big power for such a small turbine. I'm stoked by the claimed flow on .92 a/r, those things flows like hell compared to a gt28 turbine.
I'm waiting some dyno/video of them in action to see if the claims are realistics or not.

[LaurelPWR]

I would assume they have plans for G30 sizes... Here's hoping these G25's do what is claimed... And If so, could it be too much to hope for a G30 type to produce 400-700hp [emoji848][emoji848]

[Lithium]

19 hours ago, LaurelPWR said:

I would assume they have plans for G30 sizes... Here's hoping these G25's do what is claimed... And If so, could it be too much to hope for a G30 type to produce 400-700hp

And that's exactly where I am at, if these are anything to go by - and the response matches what we'd expect from a Garrett with those wheel sizes, then a G30-range could be a game changer.  They should be shipping from December/January apparently, here's hoping some people get their hands on them and let loose.

[LaurelPWR]

And that's exactly where I am at, if these are anything to go by - and the response matches what we'd expect from a Garrett with those wheel sizes, then a G30-range could be a game changer.  They should be shipping from December/January apparently, here's hoping some people get their hands on them and let loose.

Yes let loose is the key words... 20-30psi should do [emoji1362]

[fatz]

This may be the return of the high mount twins

[R377]

With brand new model turbos are they a bit like brand new model cars ?  The first model (year of manufacturing) they have a few issues, then get it sorted out by year 2 (best time to buy) ??

[R377]

also with quoted horsepower ratings is that at the flywheel or at the wheels ?

[GTSBoy]

No turbo manufacturer is going to quote power at the wheels.

[fatz]

Surly that would be power at the wheels in america

 

 

[Lithium]

2 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

No turbo manufacturer is going to quote power at the wheels.

I think it's pretty much as retarded that they are claiming it at the engine.

Wonder if we can put one on a good 5.9litre Cummins and hook it to an engine dyno shooting for 660hp and take Garrett to task for it when it doesn't, but the Borg Warner compound setup we shove on next does it without hesitation.

[GTSBoy]

1 hour ago, Lithium said:

I think it's pretty much as retarded that they are claiming it at the engine.

Yuh, obviously.  But at least there is a semi-reasonable formula for converting mass airflow into power in an optimised petrol engine.  Whereas wheel horsepower depends on the number of rubber bands in the dyno software, or some other ouija board factors.

Edited November 8, 2017 by GTSBoy

[Lithium]

12 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

Yuh, obviously.  But at least there is a semi-reasonable formula for converting mass airflow into power in an optimised petrol engine.  Whereas wheel horsepower depends on the number of rubber bands in the dyno software, or some other ouija board factors.

Agreed, though 660hp @ engine is pretty optimistic stuff on petrol from that turbo     

[GTSBoy]

Oh yeah.  Not arguing about that. 

[Lithium]

2 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

Oh yeah.  Not arguing about that. 

Didn't think there was any argument about anything, I was just viewing my disdain for any turbo manufacturer making hp claims    It has made for some very frustrating conversations in the past

 

[GTSBoy]

<nod>

[infamous_t]

I know there's a general dislike around the joint for twin setups, but given the hit and miss results of the GTX series, I'm interested to see what results come out of the woodwork for the G series.

...and if that fails, how good this series (larger frames) are in single config

[Super Drager]

The power number is nothing more than a guide, a 50lb/min turbo will be rated around the 500hp mark. I don't know why people find this hard to understand.

[Lithium]

3 hours ago, Super Drager said:

The power number is nothing more than a guide, a 50lb/min turbo will be rated around the 500hp mark

No no, Garrett have changed their new turbos to be 11hp per lb/min but continued rating their older turbos with 10hp per lb/min.  They may as well have just made their dyno read higher for all their newer turbos

Flow numbers make a lot more sense, you work out how much your engine needs - you pick a turbo from it and if you've done a good job - profit!  It'll make what it makes on your chosen dyno.