GTX SHOWDOWN: GTX3076r vs GTX3576r
Mar 11, 2012, 06:54 AM
#1
GTX SHOWDOWN: GTX3076r vs GTX3576r
Summary:
This is not a true apples-to-apples comparison as I ran slightly higher boost and ditched the CAT. The GTX3576r will provide similar spool to the GTX3076r, but will be benefited by the additional flow above 5000rpm.
Some of you may have seen my build thread, but if not please check out the following link:
Short Runner T4 TS GTX3076R Experiment
SETUP
2006 EVO IX
Stock 2.0L Block (72K miles)
Curt Brown Head
Curt Brown Tune
MAP H11 head studs
GSC S2 cams with GSC springs
Skunk 2 intake
Stock TB
Custom short runner twin scroll header
Dual Tial 38mm MVS wastegates
GTX3076R with T4 1.06a/r TS
custom 3" exhaust with no CAT
24"x12"x3.5" Garrett Core with custom tanks by MPFAB
COP
ACT 6 puck
These are VD results with outside conditions at ~39F and all runs done on the same stretch of road. Additionally, all runs are done in 3rd gear. I need to point out that I no longer run the MIL.SPEC CAT so the old results are with CAT and the new results are without. You can also see that I am running about 1.5psi more boost, but have lowered timing 1deg on the topend.
The first graph is comparing virgin (1st of the day) runs before any heat soak with starting rpm in 3rd gear at 2500rpm. The results compare my best previous run with the GTX3076r and the virgin run from this morning. The GTX3576r out spooled the GTX3076r and made 31psi@4k RPM.
The 2nd graph is comparing virgin (1st of the day) run for the GTX3076r before any heat soak vs the 2nd run with the GTX3576r, but the starting rpm in 3rd gear is 3000rpm. The GTX3576r spooled slightly better than the GTX3076r and made 26.5psi@4k RPM. The point of the graph was to compare spool with starting rpm at 3000rpm.
This is not a true apples-to-apples comparison as I ran slightly higher boost and ditched the CAT. The GTX3576r will provide similar spool to the GTX3076r, but will be benefited by the additional flow above 5000rpm.
Some of you may have seen my build thread, but if not please check out the following link:
Short Runner T4 TS GTX3076R Experiment
SETUP
2006 EVO IX
Stock 2.0L Block (72K miles)
Curt Brown Head
Curt Brown Tune
MAP H11 head studs
GSC S2 cams with GSC springs
Skunk 2 intake
Stock TB
Custom short runner twin scroll header
Dual Tial 38mm MVS wastegates
GTX3076R with T4 1.06a/r TS
custom 3" exhaust with no CAT
24"x12"x3.5" Garrett Core with custom tanks by MPFAB
COP
ACT 6 puck
These are VD results with outside conditions at ~39F and all runs done on the same stretch of road. Additionally, all runs are done in 3rd gear. I need to point out that I no longer run the MIL.SPEC CAT so the old results are with CAT and the new results are without. You can also see that I am running about 1.5psi more boost, but have lowered timing 1deg on the topend.
The first graph is comparing virgin (1st of the day) runs before any heat soak with starting rpm in 3rd gear at 2500rpm. The results compare my best previous run with the GTX3076r and the virgin run from this morning. The GTX3576r out spooled the GTX3076r and made 31psi@4k RPM.
The 2nd graph is comparing virgin (1st of the day) run for the GTX3076r before any heat soak vs the 2nd run with the GTX3576r, but the starting rpm in 3rd gear is 3000rpm. The GTX3576r spooled slightly better than the GTX3076r and made 26.5psi@4k RPM. The point of the graph was to compare spool with starting rpm at 3000rpm.
The following users liked this post:
RWD4G63 (Jan 27, 2020)
Mar 11, 2012, 07:10 AM
#2
Hard to believe the gtx35 is actually outspooling the gtx30 in the low end. Now I really can't see the point in the gtx3076r. I don't think losing the cat would've affected results that much. Is there any situation where the gtx30 feels more responsive?
Are you trying to limit your torque at all on the low end because of the stock shortblock? And IMO you should try lowering the boost to the same level as before to see how the power compares too. Just so the skeptics won't complain.
Are you trying to limit your torque at all on the low end because of the stock shortblock? And IMO you should try lowering the boost to the same level as before to see how the power compares too. Just so the skeptics won't complain.
Mar 11, 2012, 07:25 AM
#3
Hard to believe the gtx35 is actually outspooling the gtx30 in the low end. Now I really can't see the point in the gtx3076r. I don't think losing the cat would've affected results that much. Is there any situation where the gtx30 feels more responsive?
Are you trying to limit your torque at all on the low end because of the stock shortblock? And IMO you should try lowering the boost to the same level as before to see how the power compares too. Just so the skeptics won't complain.
Are you trying to limit your torque at all on the low end because of the stock shortblock? And IMO you should try lowering the boost to the same level as before to see how the power compares too. Just so the skeptics won't complain.
Mar 11, 2012, 08:13 AM
#5
The intent of the thread is to report my findings in the context of the changes made for my setup.
Here are my thoughts between the two turbochargers based on the 1.06 A/R T4 TS turbine housing.
Spool: If you only change the turbo and all else remains equal you will likely not see a difference in spool. If I had to pick a winner it would be the GTX3076r.
Power w/ 3" exhaust and High Flow CAT: If you run a 3" exhaust with CAT and run 30psi of boost you will likely not see a significant benefit going to the GTX3576r. This is likely due to the CAT being the limiting factor
Power w/ 3" exhaust and no CAT: If you run a 3" exhaust and no CAT you will see a benefit of going to the GTX3576r if you are trying to exceed 475-500hp@wheels. The GTX3076r hits a wall around the 475-500hp@wheels due to the restrictions created by the smaller turbine wheel. It is not to say you can't make more power, but it will be much easier with the GTX3576r.
Summary: If I had to make a simple rule of thumb between the two turbochargers it would be the following....
<475@wheels GTX3076r
>475@wheels GTX3576r
Here are my thoughts between the two turbochargers based on the 1.06 A/R T4 TS turbine housing.
Spool: If you only change the turbo and all else remains equal you will likely not see a difference in spool. If I had to pick a winner it would be the GTX3076r.
Power w/ 3" exhaust and High Flow CAT: If you run a 3" exhaust with CAT and run 30psi of boost you will likely not see a significant benefit going to the GTX3576r. This is likely due to the CAT being the limiting factor
Power w/ 3" exhaust and no CAT: If you run a 3" exhaust and no CAT you will see a benefit of going to the GTX3576r if you are trying to exceed 475-500hp@wheels. The GTX3076r hits a wall around the 475-500hp@wheels due to the restrictions created by the smaller turbine wheel. It is not to say you can't make more power, but it will be much easier with the GTX3576r.
Summary: If I had to make a simple rule of thumb between the two turbochargers it would be the following....
<475@wheels GTX3076r
>475@wheels GTX3576r
Last edited by 240Z TwinTurbo; Mar 11, 2012 at 08:35 AM.
Mar 11, 2012, 11:24 AM
#9
Well, something to test.
Regardlesss, the numbers are pretty nuts for 93 octane. Damn you Cali and your crap 91 oct!
Last edited by spdracerut; Mar 11, 2012 at 11:33 AM.
Mar 11, 2012, 01:49 PM
#13
Regarding the effect of the cat.
Here's a dyno chart on an Evo X going from the stock O2 housing and stock cat to a AMS widemouth and a test pipe.
It looks to be roughly 150pm difference in spool. Remember, this is going from the very restrictive stock O2 housing and cat to the free flowing AMS widemouth DP and a test pipe.
In the case of 240Z, he went from a high flow cat to the test pipe. I figure in this case, it's maybe a 50rpm difference in spool up between the high flow cat and test pipe. Maybe somewhere around 10-15whp difference in peak power. Hard to say as it depends on the cell count of the high flow cat, etc.
Looking at the two sets of graphs from 240Z, the GTX3576 make anywhere from 45-55whp more peak in combination with the test pipe. So the actual contribution from the turbo may be 35-45whp, give or take.
Here's a dyno chart on an Evo X going from the stock O2 housing and stock cat to a AMS widemouth and a test pipe.
It looks to be roughly 150pm difference in spool. Remember, this is going from the very restrictive stock O2 housing and cat to the free flowing AMS widemouth DP and a test pipe.
In the case of 240Z, he went from a high flow cat to the test pipe. I figure in this case, it's maybe a 50rpm difference in spool up between the high flow cat and test pipe. Maybe somewhere around 10-15whp difference in peak power. Hard to say as it depends on the cell count of the high flow cat, etc.
Looking at the two sets of graphs from 240Z, the GTX3576 make anywhere from 45-55whp more peak in combination with the test pipe. So the actual contribution from the turbo may be 35-45whp, give or take.
Last edited by spdracerut; Mar 11, 2012 at 01:55 PM.
Mar 11, 2012, 01:59 PM
#14
Evolved Member
Very interesting comparison, cheers for sharing.
Looking at the graphs it makes it seem almost like the GTX3576R has the 30 sorted everywhere, while you give the GTX3076R the advantage for lower power levels - there must be a reason for you deciding that? When you drove the GTX3576R did it feel like it had something lacking compared to the GTX3076R?
Looking at the graphs it makes it seem almost like the GTX3576R has the 30 sorted everywhere, while you give the GTX3076R the advantage for lower power levels - there must be a reason for you deciding that? When you drove the GTX3576R did it feel like it had something lacking compared to the GTX3076R?
Mar 11, 2012, 02:30 PM
#15
Love it. Continuing to shed light on the GTX line...I see serious potential in the 3576. Great results. There's gotta be some trade-off going from the 3076 to the 3576 tho...? The graphs seem to disagree but I'd like to hear some more driving impressions once you get to know the turbo a little better.