# GT3076r - best choice for 2.8L 24v VR6 DD?



## CRAIG1MACK (Mar 26, 2000)

Guys,

Just wanted to get your take on this. I am swapping a 2.8L 24v VR6 into my daily driven A4. I am shooting for around 400awhp on pump gas. Do you think that a GT3076r is the best choice? Are there cheaper alternatives that don't give up too much in the performance department? I am not looking to something to span the gap should I want more power... so going for something larger isn't in my interests. Just need something to put 400-450awhp down, and need it to be done on pump gas without meth/other enhancers... This motor will be mostly stock / mildly built.


What do you guys think?


Thanks in advance:beer:


----------



## Amsterdam087 (Dec 31, 2007)

i wouldn't put anything smaller than a gt35 on my vr


----------



## charlie hayes (Jun 4, 2007)

pte 6262 will get the job done and not too expensive.


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

Amsterdam087 said:


> i wouldn't put anything smaller than a gt35 on my vr


Could not be said better.


----------



## therealvrt (Jul 21, 2004)

its a nice choice for a streetable powerband


----------



## DannyLo (Aug 2, 2006)

charlie hayes said:


> pte 6262 will get the job done and not too expensive.


best bang for the buck indeed

gt30 is too small (unless it's for a purpose like maybe autocross with supporting mods), and you'll break things in the drivetrain because a very quick onset of torque when you decide to stand on it.


----------



## kevhayward (Mar 13, 2007)

V-dubbulyuh said:


> Could not be said better.


x3

Can probably get away with a 1.06 turbine housing on the 24V and still full boost around 3500


----------



## dub_slug (May 12, 2008)

X2. Go big or you'll regret it later when you go to buy another turbo. 6265 on my 12v :thumbup:
Have fun!


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

kevhayward said:


> x3
> 
> Can probably get away with a 1.06 turbine housing on the 24V and still full boost around 3500


The 1.06 is an excellent match on a VR. I ran that for a while.


----------



## dub_slug (May 12, 2008)

I have the t4 .81, it spools about the same as my Old t3 .63 60-1(full boost in first at about 4k) but if I was doing it again, i'd get the .96

To the op: go big or go home; your awd!


----------



## KubotaPowered (Jan 27, 2005)

The GT3582R .82AR will have similar spool characteristics as the similar 3076 with more top end.


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

chance of getting 450Awhp with a gt30 = pretty close to zero

i wouldn't even consider a 3076 on a 12v, let alone a 24v. a 3582 is the smallest you should be considering. definitely a t3 1.06 or t4, 82

lag just means you're in the wrong gear. plus having too small of a turbo means you'll have crappy driveability and even worse mileage.


----------



## kevhayward (Mar 13, 2007)

KubotaPowered said:


> The GT3582R .82AR will have similar spool characteristics as the similar 3076 with more top end.


Yep. I had a 3076 0.82 on my 12V, which died. Replaced it with a 3582 0.82 and it spooled exactly the same, but the 3582 hits much harder and for longer when in boost :thumbup:

I think I will upgrade to the 1.06 housing soon though as I want a little more in the top end.

Anyone know how much genuine Garrett hot sides are?


----------



## CRAIG1MACK (Mar 26, 2000)

Thanks guys :beer:

I'll be going with the GT3582r or similar. What specs/features would you recommend on that GT3582r?


----------



## therealvrt (Jul 21, 2004)

my customers 12v with a 5862 (pretty damn close to the 3076) makes 110MPH on 10psi
too small? i think not


----------



## dub_slug (May 12, 2008)

kevhayward said:


> Anyone know how much genuine Garrett hot sides are?


Check Atp's website they should sell a full line of hitsides.



CRAIG1MACK said:


> Thanks guys :beer:
> 
> I'll be going with the GT3582r or similar. What specs/features would you recommend on that GT3582r?



Sorry, but Why spend the extra $$$ on the dbb Garrett? You can get the 6265 dbb for $1495 on eBay. I bought mine from TD-Autowerkz, great guys with great prices! Email them and I Can almost guarantee they will offer you a lower price than what's listed :thumbup: IMO 35r is kinda small for the vr and the 6265 spools the same. On an engine our size The Difference between spool up on dbb 6265 and journal bearing model is only ~200rpm... so I went with the journal bearing. $855 shipped from TD Autowerkz


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

kevhayward said:


> I think I will upgrade to the 1.06 housing soon though as I want a little more in the top end.
> 
> Anyone know how much genuine Garrett hot sides are?



Just sold my last of these last night. 

They can run anywhere from $150-350 depending if you go new or used.


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

CRAIG1MACK said:


> Thanks guys :beer:
> 
> I'll be going with the GT3582r or similar. What specs/features would you recommend on that GT3582r?


Got one for sale... PM me if interested.


----------



## kevhayward (Mar 13, 2007)

V-dubbulyuh said:


> Just sold my last of these last night.
> 
> They can run anywhere from $150-350 depending if you go new or used.



Or $386 if ever there was a strange price! http://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchan...tp&Product_Code=ATP-HSG-044&Category_Code=GTH

Is it just me or does that casting look a little rough by Garrett standards? I've seen other users on here refer to them as "ATP special castings", implying they're not proper Garretts? I know ATP have, shall we say, a good relationship with China 

I'm just picky when it comes to things like that. They've screwed me over with a faulty 3076 before and I don't want to make that mistake again.

What's the difference in spool time to full boost between a 35R with .82 T3 and a 1.06 T3 on an otherwise identical engine / car?


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

kevhayward said:


> Is it just me or does that casting look a little rough by Garrett standards? I've seen other users on here refer to them as "ATP special castings", implying they're not proper Garretts? I know ATP have, shall we say, a good relationship with China
> 
> I'm just picky when it comes to things like that. They've screwed me over with a faulty 3076 before and I don't want to make that mistake again.
> 
> What's the difference in spool time to full boost between a 35R with .82 T3 and a 1.06 T3 on an otherwise identical engine / car?




The .82 is a T4 housing made by ATP at one time... not even sure if that is still available as I have not looked into that recently. The 1.06 is a genuine Garrett part. I don't think looking up close at them both that one casting is superior over the other. I've had 2 of the ATP T4 housings and they functioned well and were no less effective than Garrett's housings.

The 1.06 T3 and .82 T4 are almost identical in terms of spool time. Volumetrically they are very similar and the increase in flange size of the T4 compensates for any slight volume decrease that you might see going from the 1.06 to .82. Overall I really can't detect any difference between the two.

I have never driven the GT35R with a .82 T3 so I have no idea. My expectation would be however that it would spool significantly faster than the same AR in T4 but of course not have the same top end potential.

If you are looking to stick with a T3 flange though, I'd suggest the 1.06 AR. It is NOT laggy contrary to what people have heard, assuming that you have a properly flowing exhaust system.


----------



## PjS860ct (Dec 22, 2002)

didnt want to make another thread and sorry about the jack... but

what do you guys think about the 6765 with .96 T4 exhaust housing on a SP built 12v 3L??? (goal is 500whp to high 600whp?)

I have been thinking of which exhaust side should I get for my new turbo the .81 or the .96 and I cant decide!!! :banghead: The car will be a weekend beater and some track time as well... 

Thanks
Paolo


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

PjS860ct said:


> what do you guys think about the 6765 with .96 T4 exhaust housing on a SP built 12v 3L??? (goal is 500whp to high 600whp?)


That is a great setup... even on a 2.8L 12V with improved breathing that turbo spools well. I like it.


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

PjS860ct said:


> what do you guys think about the 6765 with .96 T4 exhaust housing on a SP built 12v 3L??? (goal is 500whp to high 600whp?)


T4 96 is huge. i would recommend that if you wanted a 700+Whp drag car, but not for a street car. Street i'd be more likely to recommend a 6262 or 6265 with 82 t3 hotside (or comparable t4 size).


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

kevhayward said:


> I think I will upgrade to the 1.06 housing soon though as I want a little more in the top end.
> 
> Anyone know how much genuine Garrett hot sides are?


arent you still running a 2.5" exhaust system? if so, thats why you're losing top end.

:beer:


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

TBT-Syncro said:


> T4 96 is huge. i would recommend that if you wanted a 700+Whp drag car, but not for a street car. Street i'd be more likely to recommend a 6262 or 6265 with 82 t3 hotside (or comparable t4 size).


Have you driven a T4 .96? If you did what RPM did you start spooling at and with what DP?


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

V-dubbulyuh said:


> Have you driven a T4 .96? If you did what RPM did you start spooling at and with what DP?


driven similar. i'd expect hard spool of a 6765 T 96 on a 24 around 5200-5800.

its a nice turbo for a 700 or 800+ Whp drag car, but is definitely not the turbo for what the OP is asking.

check out honda-tech for more info on their characteristics, there are a few guys on there running that exact turbo.
:beer:


----------



## dub_slug (May 12, 2008)

I would recommend the .96 t4 6265


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

TBT-Syncro said:


> driven similar. i'd expect hard spool of a 6765 T 96 on a 24 around 5200-5800.
> 
> its a nice turbo for a 700 or 800+ Whp drag car, but is definitely not the turbo for what the OP is asking.
> 
> ...


I run that turbo (6765 bbb) with the 82 on a 12v Mk4 that is why I was asking. It is a matter of preference but I don't find it significantly laggier than the 96. That turbo is so efficient and with a free flowing exhaust system I can make high 20's by mid-4000's. The 96 shifted me to the right no more than 500 RPM or so. The thing is that if you are running lower boost numbers you can still achieve them way earlier in the RPM band. :thumbup:


----------



## PjS860ct (Dec 22, 2002)

I am thinking very hard of which size hotside I want to get for the that Ill be ordering soon... my 3L is ported and polished and SP 263 cams, supertech (valves stock size) ... downpipe will be 3" to an electric cutout at the test pipe... but I might go 4" to cutout if theres enough room for it


V-dubbulyuh- how much boost are you running on the 6765 and where is it in the rpm? 

thanks:thumbup:


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

V-dubbulyuh said:


> I run that turbo (6765 bbb) with the 82 on a 12v Mk4 that is why I was asking. It is a matter of preference but I don't find it significantly laggier than the 96.


this makes no sense.  the 96 is going be laggier than the 82. also the 82 is t3, and the 96 t4, so there is quite a large size difference.

i also dont understand recommending a turbo thats going to spool 1500 rpm later than a turbo like the 3582 (which is more than capable of meeting the OP's HP goals).


----------



## zwogti (Jan 11, 2004)

PjS860ct said:


> didnt want to make another thread and sorry about the jack... but
> 
> what do you guys think about the 6765 with .96 T4 exhaust housing on a SP built 12v 3L??? (goal is 500whp to high 600whp?)
> 
> ...


24V vr6 600WHP go T4 96A/R spool up 4700, full boost around 5100-5300, take it to about 7500 RPM, power band line WHP/WTQ till about that, for 500 WHP I would go with the 81AR. 600 WHP is too much power on your tranny for full boost before 4700RPM


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

*You are joking right?*



TBT-Syncro said:


> this makes no sense.  the 96 is going be laggier than the 82. also the 82 is t3, and the 96 t4, so there is quite a large size difference.
> 
> i also dont understand recommending a turbo thats going to spool 1500 rpm later than a turbo like the 3582 (which is more than capable of meeting the OP's HP goals).



Dude, you need to slow down a little bit. I am usually pretty tolerant but sometimes your arrogance really agitates me so PLEASE learn to read instead of dictating bull. You have a nice car and in general I have respect for some of the things that you post but that can be completely inverted by your know-all antics.

For your information, there is a .82 T4 hotside made by ATP for the GT35, I just happen to own one. Secondly there is a .81 T4 hotside for the PT6765, I just happen to own one. The quote that you were so quick to highlight was obviously a typo (being 81 instead of 82 as I posted). As knowledgeable as you are how could you not know that was a typo? I do not post whore like you do however I have considerable experience with multiple turbo setups as I change them yearly.

With respect to the 6765 I said that the 96 is NOT considerably laggier than the 81 (all T4). I am not repeating someone else's opinion... I've have driven both at some time and currently drive one of them (the 81). You are free to speculate on whatever you want though.

With respect to the Gt35 I said that the 82 T4 is NOT much different from the 1.06 T3. Again I have had BOTH at some point in time. Believe what the hell you want. Oh and for your education go view the T4 hotside that I was referring to. You are free to come inspect my car too so that you can be further convinced. http://www.atpturbo.com/mm5/merchant.mvc?Screen=PROD&Product_Code=GRT-TBO-006&Category_Code=GRT


Within the context of what I was stating ALL of the hotsides were T4 so I don't know what ice-pick you have stuck in your pupil preventing you from reading clearly.

I am going to cease now because I don't want to get into a pissing contest with you. :thumbup:


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

i realized that atleast half of it was probably a typo, hence the smile face. 

I still get back to my question. why recommend a turbo that's going to spool 1500rpm later (and designed for 300hp moore), then the one that will spool sooner, and still easily meet the OPs HP goal.

p.s. I said nothing negative about you, however you made multiple digs at me.


----------



## KubotaPowered (Jan 27, 2005)

It's my understanding that ATP's T4 housings are not true T4 housings on the GT3582R. Garrett never made a T4 GT3582R in any configuration, its the end user or retailer that sets them up. Correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

KubotaPowered said:


> It's my understanding that ATP's T4 housings are not true T4 housings on the GT3582R. Garrett never made a T4 GT3582R in any configuration, its the end user or retailer that sets them up. Correct me if I'm wrong.



You need to clarify "true T4 housings", I don't know what you are implying. Why is a T4 housing produced by ATP any less true than Garrrett? The flanges are identically sized and the housing is comparable to other 81-82 T4 housings such as Precision, Turbonetics, etc. I thought I was clear that within my post that it was an ATP, ie non-Garrett housing but as you have stated, Garrett never made a T4 GT3582R.


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

TBT-Syncro said:


> i realized that atleast half of it was probably a typo, hence the smile face.
> 
> p.s. I said nothing negative about you, however you made multiple digs at me.



You are condescending period and I don't phuck around when it comes to comments like yours.


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

V-dubbulyuh said:


> You are condescending period and I don't phuck around when it comes to comments like yours.


then why dont you answer the basic question? why suggest a 900hp turbo for a 500hp setup?


----------



## PjS860ct (Dec 22, 2002)

ok guys... be nice :beer: 

I'm going with the .96 for the 6765 that I'm about to order :thumbup:


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

PjS860ct said:


> ok guys... be nice :beer:
> 
> I'm going with the .96 for the 6765 that I'm about to order :thumbup:


I'm sure it'll be a beast (just in the midst of helping a buddy put dual 6265 on his LS2 powered 71 Camaro).


----------



## V-dubbulyuh (Nov 13, 2005)

TBT-Syncro said:


> then why dont you answer the basic question? why suggest a 900hp turbo for a 500hp setup?



If you want to speak to me so enthusiastically you can shoot me a PM and I will tell you exactly what I think. Then I can comment to you directly and be as explicitly nasty as I want. 

To the OP, sorry to pollute your thread.


----------



## KubotaPowered (Jan 27, 2005)

V-dubbulyuh said:


> You need to clarify "true T4 housings", I don't know what you are implying. Why is a T4 housing produced by ATP any less true than Garrrett? The flanges are identically sized and the housing is comparable to other 81-82 T4 housings such as Precision, Turbonetics, etc. I thought I was clear that within my post that it was an ATP, ie non-Garrett housing but as you have stated, Garrett never made a T4 GT3582R.


ATP's T4 housing has the same internal volume as the T3 housing, just with the larger flange, it quickly necks down to the same 1.06 or .82AR that the T3 has available and are internally identical.


----------



## kevhayward (Mar 13, 2007)

V-dubbulyuh said:


> The .82 is a T4 housing made by ATP at one time... not even sure if that is still available as I have not looked into that recently. The 1.06 is a genuine Garrett part. I don't think looking up close at them both that one casting is superior over the other. I've had 2 of the ATP T4 housings and they functioned well and were no less effective than Garrett's housings.
> 
> The 1.06 T3 and .82 T4 are almost identical in terms of spool time. Volumetrically they are very similar and the increase in flange size of the T4 compensates for any slight volume decrease that you might see going from the 1.06 to .82. Overall I really can't detect any difference between the two.
> 
> ...


 Thank you sir  

Just to clarify, it's the T3 .82 housing I currently have (3" V band option) which is an ATP bought turbo. I did consider the T4 housings at the time of purchase for the extra flow, but as the outlet in my ATP manifold is only T3 size, I didn't really see the value of T4 for my application. I would have preferred a manifold with a T4 sized outlet. 

I was interested in seeing how much the 1.06 T3 would slow the spool up time compared to .82. .82 for a street car feels about right to me, but if the difference between the 2 is only a couple of hundred rpm, I might go for it


----------



## kevhayward (Mar 13, 2007)

TBT-Syncro said:


> arent you still running a 2.5" exhaust system? if so, thats why you're losing top end.
> 
> :beer:


 I am indeed. And a cat  It's a road car first and foremost, so I like to obey the emissions laws and respect my neighbours. 

It may be a contributing factor, but not the sole cause. 

My lambda correction map shows fuel being added from 5500 - 6500 rpm in the 50 - 85% MAP load sites. If the cat and 2.5" system were major restrictions, I would expect huge exhaust reversion in the cylinders, and consequently detonation. Neither occur. But to be safe, I have pulled the timing 7% @ 1 bar boost to account for _some_ reversion from the cat. 

The system is a TT single borla, single res and I know for a fact this system is capabale of flowing to 500whp from a 35R .82 @ 20psi. I only run 15psi. 

3" imo, is not required unless you are talking full throttle and full (target) boost. Outside of those conditions I don't see an advantage, especially when you consider the turbine wheel is the mother of all restrictions to begin with, which is before the exhaust even starts. IMO, turbine housing size is more beneficial to flow than pipe diameter.


----------



## TBT-Syncro (Apr 28, 2001)

kevhayward said:


> 3" imo, is not required unless you are talking full throttle and full (target) boost. Outside of those conditions I don't see an advantage, especially when you consider the turbine wheel is the mother of all restrictions to begin with, which is before the exhaust even starts. IMO, turbine housing size is more beneficial to flow than pipe diameter.


 then why do we see 30-40 HP gains at the much lower 300HP level from going to 3" from 2.5"  once you get to 550+whp, even the 3inch is a restriction. 

if you had an egp gauge you could find out how big of an impact it's really having. 

:beer:


----------

