Ford Focus Forum banner

Garrett Turbocharger

2.4K views 16 replies 9 participants last post by  Ducman69  
#1 ·
I've heard the WRC uses the Garrett TC. Other than knowing it's used in the WRC that's all I know about it. Are there any dyno charts? What about reliability? How does it compare to the Aerocharger and other turbo kits. What about prices. Are there any other sites with info on the Garrett TC. Thanks in advance.

------------------
Stephen M Proud
2000 Infa-Red Focus SE Sport
My Website
 
#2 ·
Garrett is a turbo manufaturer, they dont sell kits.

You can make your own from their pieces. That is what other companies do. Aerodyne on the other hand actually makes their turbos.
 
#3 ·
Yes, Garrett is a manufacturer. They make hundreds of different turbos.

You can't just ask for "a Garrett turbocharger".

That's like walking into a hardware store and asking for "a bolt".
 
#7 ·
Hey, Garrett has a new turbo comming out.

"New Ballistics Concept turbo TA34 - Prime usage 1.8 to 2.4l "

I would like to know about this 'concept' since most of the turbos available on the market use 10+year old technology. Maybe its a new VNT (ballistic??) technology?
 
#9 ·
No no no. What I mean is: maybe there is a revolutionary evolvement to the current and/or past tech with this TA34 turbo. I am just speculating.

BTW I dont believe variable geometery turbos are in major usage, except for the Aerocharger, on passenger cars. It seems that the coolest thing right now is the ball-bearing 'option'.

Duc, As an aside it seems that in many of my posts you enjoy twisting my words with your responses?!?
Image
 
#10 ·
I think it's revolutionary only to Garrett.

I thought the AC was state of the art. Some other people told me Chrysler was putting VNT turbos on 2.2 back in the 80's!
Image
 
#11 ·
that was a really interesting little article... it brought to mind a few questions that I have had since I started reading Maximum Boost (i skipped ahead to ch 17 that talked about VTN, and then restarted on ch1
Image
) anyways, I wanted to know what materials the vanes were made of, and also what the device they pivot on is made of... my reason for asking is my concern that they wont seize up after prolonged exposure to extremely high heats and other elements of exhaust streams. the only reason i even thought about that was because i seem to remember that aerodyn turbos were first build for deisel engines which run significantly cooler than gas... mostly just curiousity tho...

rob
 
#12 ·
Well, if heat is the ONLY problem, it should fail sooner than the 1 year warranty. Metal fatigue over time could be another factor.

Doing some research, it seems that they call the turbo a VATN turbo, but that was for an article published via the SAE in 1983. Probably not even be the same turbo design and I don't know what it stands for. VVT, VNT(whatever) turbos are very popular with diesels and less so with petrol powered cars. Perhaps heat was the reason. Regardless it seems to have a clean track record as long as people don't overspool the turbo (possibly due to the heat sensitivity... but I think all turbos can be overspooled). And the advantages of the design are apparent.

There is no main link to this URL on Aerocharger's site that I had been able to locate, so this is new. It is very interesting though, so check it out:
http://www.aerocharger.com/tech2.htm

It has a neat exploded picture of the Aerocharger for example:
Image


NOOOO!!! I just realized I did it again... turned a non-aerocharger topic into one.
Image
For endurance, it notes the design life as 5000 hours and had undergone a 1000 hour endurance test. The 5300 (that we are using) can be used both on petrol AND diesel engines and it shows the respective hp ranges it can be fitted to on each and AFC (136 cfm to 320 cfm). The details are a moot point though, because we know for a fact it works well on Foci (Chris F's dyno).
Image


[This message has been edited by Ducman69 (edited 10-13-2001).]
 
#14 ·
very interesting duc... still would like to know the construction materials and such for the vanes and the components that go with them... lesse 5000 hours is about 4.5 years if you drive 3 hours a day (average commute, plus personal driving, plus weekend trips and vacations averaged out). thats not to shabby at all... i was researching this more, and not to beat an old topic to death, but the miata came up again... seems like ome of them had a similar problem as to what i was asking, with the vanes frezing in a single posistion, causing lowered performance and eventual turbo rebuilds. Jim said this was due to trying to get more power out of the turbo, hence i assume they were overspooling it and as a result probably over heating the system as well...
 
#15 ·
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by treewebsurfer:
5000 hrs equals 2hr a dayX 5 days a week X 52 weeks a year= approx. 10 yrs of design life<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

heh, looks like you beat me to that calculation... appears i drive more than most people
Image
 
#16 ·
Uhh yeah a lot more. Just figure in your average mileage per year. Most people put on 15,000 miles a year at an average speed of about 35mph (since you are slowing down and speeding up and some highway etc..).

There are 8760 hours per year. If you travel 15,000 miles at 35mph gives you 429 hours of driving.

At 8760 hours per year, that would give you about 20 years!
Image
Now if you drive twice as many miles per year or only drive on highways, it will be less.
 
#17 ·
Arskiker... its not intentional if I do.
Image


Very Nifty Technology. This is really cool. They mention Aerodyne dallas!
Image
I think this is quite an older article though (early 80s, so that gave Aerodyne quite a bit of time to perfect the technology since this article).
Image

Image

http://www.xmission.com/~dempsey/shelby/sheldod9.htm

Other than the Shelby CSX, it was on the Daytona Shelby and Chrysler LeBaron GTC. These were all limited runs though. After 1990, the VNT was dropped officially for "cost reasons".

My second part WAS a real question (not sarcasm). What is Aerocharger's variable vane turbo technology called? For example VNT can be implimented in different ways. So aerchargers design might be slightly different and go by a different name.

Regardless aerochargers turbo seems to be unique due to the drip feed lubricant for the bearing. I don't think I've seen this in use elsewhere.

[This message has been edited by Ducman69 (edited 10-13-2001).]