I believe Garret turbo's are underated.

 

Maybe by using a .82 housing or larger instead of .48 or a .63?

 

By almost 40 percent? He said 600 WHP. With driveline losses at minimum, that would mean crank hp close to 700 hp at a 15% driveline loss.

 

That's an interesting option. I have already gone from the .63 to a .48 and then back to the .63, since I didn't gain any spoolup with the .48. As a matter of fact, it not only kept the same spoolup, but lost over 20whp across the board vs the .63.

l8r)

 

how would the 3076 be without cams? im debating if i should just install my turbo now and maybe get cams in the future or if i should just get 272 and install both at once. i'm tired of having my turbo sit around. i want to put it in already but i have no money for cams at this time

 

Almost a waste. It holds boost up top, why choke it? You would still make power but not the numbers you would be looking for witha way short powerband.

Get 272's. Do it right.

 

Ludikraut, the GT3071R was not downsized per se, as there are actually three different versions. Two versions are listed on their website-- those are the ones sold as complete turbos in the wastegated T25-inlet turbine housing. In these versions the turbine wheel is modified down to 56.5mm to fit properly in the housing.

The third version is the traditional GT3071R which comes from Garrett as a CHRA (their distributors bolt on factory Garrett housings to make it a complete turbo). This version has the same 60mm turbine wheel as the GT3076R, and therefore can use the same range of T3-inlet turbine housings.

So there is no real gap, it's just that Garrett doesn't list this latter GT3071R on their site since the site only lists complete turbos (with few key exceptions like GT42/R). They sell tons of CHRAs and components that aren't listed on their website. If they listed ALL their bits the site would be immense.

FWIW

 

The hp ratings themselves are a guideline, really. Garrett's hp number ratings are more to show how their turbos compare relative to one another, rather than a max hp possible. This is because the hp a turbo will support is very application-dependent.

And wouldn't you rather a turbo support higher hp than its rating indicates, instead of the other way around?