The Top DSM Community on the Web

For 1990-1999 Mitsubishi Eclipse, Eagle Talon, Plymouth Laser, and Galant VR-4 Owners. Log in to remove most ads.

Please Support ExtremePSI
Please Support STM Tuned

Information on EVO3 GT turbochargers from manufacturer.

This site may earn a commission from merchant
affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Moderators,
Please do not close this thread. This debate will go on until real results are posted. If this thread dies, who knows how many will pop up elsewhere. It has remained mostly civil (thanks to everyone for that) and hopefully will remain so. It is no surprise that some in the community feel lied to, or betrayed. Tempers will flare in these circumstances and considering this, things are very calm.

As for the legal case:
US companies must give fair representation of the product that is being sold and are not to withhold pertinent information from the purchaser. That is the law. However, if the person in question did not ask for an Evo 3 16G and did in fact order an Evo 3 GT, then the consumer is responsible for the order and is subject to the suppliers restocking fees, handling fees and any other BS fee that is stacked on top. With all of this in perspective, both purchaser of the turbo and supplier may want to consult a business lawyer for further insight into the possible repercussions. Please don't discuss this further in this thread as it may lead to it being locked. Start a new thread called "Didn't get the turbo I thought I ordered."

As for where it is made:
China has the largest counterfit market in the world. If you want a knockoff, they’ve got it. Everything from Callaway golf clubs, Harry Potter books, even baby formula. Most of these knockoffs are harmless look-alikes that function much like the original, but have no R&D behind them and break easily because they are low quality. Taiwan however, is a different country all together (not according to official US policy however). If the R&D was done in Taiwan, then it could be done for far less than a State-side company, thus lower overhead and lower cost, with far less engineering concerns for loss in quality as compared to a look-alike from the mainland. If you are going to call it a China GT and it’s from Taiwan, please call it a Taipei GT to signify it is from Taiwan, not mainland China. This is very important to those who know about the implications of Chinese counterfits.

As for the turbo:
If the Evo 3 GT is in fact the turbo it was designed to be, then it will stand the test of DSMer abuse. What I am curious to know is the physical abilities/attributes of the turbo. It has a larger flapper, and is made with thicker blades (not typically a great thing for spool). It is also made of different materials. But what does this all amount to. Let’s examine the evidence.

Buschur has decided that this is a good turbo and posts that the information on SBR’s site is bogus. Buschur’s information says that the ported housing is in the cast. The picture from SBR’s site tells the same story.
From SBR’s site:
You must be logged in to view this image or video.

From Buschur’s info:
You must be logged in to view this image or video.


Buschur’s information then points to an upgraded flapper and SBR’s site does not even mention this (also a design feature that should have told SBR the engineers knew what they were doing as this is a design flaw on the MHI spec 3). Again, the picture from SBR’s site shows the bigger flapper, but doesn’t mention it.
From SBR’s site:
You must be logged in to view this image or video.

From Buschur’s info:
You must be logged in to view this image or video.


I could pick apart the information further, but this debate will still be here tomorrow and if you’ve followed along this far, then you get the idea. I am unbiased in the matter and will probably buy whichever turbo is, in the end, a better performing turbo for my application (street driven car).

What I still want to know is the reasoning for twice the blade thickness on the GT. The metallurgy argument will depend of what SBR posts (which will hopefully sound more like confirmation of Buschur’s post).

To Buschur and SBR:
Both of you have become very reputable in the DSM community, and many enthusiasts owe you debts to turning our passions into a reality. I for one thank you both for reporting your finds. When the dust settles, the facts will be known, and hopefully we will have another great turbo to choose from and you will have a new product to offer. Thank you both for your time and devotion to seeing this through. A dyno sheet, timeslip, or some other quantifiable measure of the GT turbo would be a key end-all figure in this.
 
Injected said:
Moderators,
Please do not close this thread. This debate will go on until real results are posted. If this thread dies, who knows how many will pop up elsewhere. It has remained mostly civil (thanks to everyone for that) and hopefully will remain so. It is no surprise that some in the community feel lied to, or betrayed. Tempers will flare in these circumstances and considering this, things are very calm.
I agree.


As for where it is made:
China has the largest counterfit market in the world. If you want a knockoff, they’ve got it. Everything from Callaway golf clubs, Harry Potter books, even baby formula. Most of these knockoffs are harmless look-alikes that function much like the original, but have no R&D behind them and break easily because they are low quality. Taiwan however, is a different country all together (not according to official US policy however). If the R&D was done in Taiwan, then it could be done for far less than a State-side company, thus lower overhead and lower cost, with far less engineering concerns for loss in quality as compared to a look-alike from the mainland. If you are going to call it a China GT and it’s from Taiwan, please call it a Taipei GT to signify it is from Taiwan, not mainland China. This is very important to those who know about the implications of Chinese counterfits.

Wow at least someone in the US knows that Taiwan is a separate country! China is threatening to invade it every 5 minutes. I don't think they would would bother if it was the same country :)

I look at it this way. SBR by their own admission sent a turbo to China TO GET A "KNOCK OFF". They got the sample back and were not happy with it.
The intent on the web site is clearly to get a "KNOCK OFF" done. SBR showing a clear allegiance to MHI turbos :thumb:

Someone else did the same thing but did their homework and got it done properly in Taiwan. Gee shows exactly the same intent as SBR.

So one party was successful and another wasn't. I can clearly see a basis for sour grapes here.

But yes let's talk about the turbo that would be good :)
 
david buschur said:
The Evo 3 GT comes equipped with a standard ported turbine housing upgrade. The inside is not shiny, like a normal port job, because the porting was done in the casting and not done by a machinist.

My Evo III 16G is not ported. It isn't required. 118mph in a 3315lb 2G. It seems to work just fine without porting the housing. All that exhaust still has to go through the same 7cm^2 opening in the turbine housing regardless of how much you remove from the throat.
We increased the size of the wastegate and flapper to help avoid the ominous “boost creep.” This feature on the GT is identical to the aftermarket upgrade available from any turbo shop. The only difference: This upgrade is done at our factory at no additional cost.

My Evo III 16G does not have a larger wastegate flapper. Larger flappers contribute to boost drop at high exhaust pressures. It is a bad tradeoff for performance. It is better to let the consumer decide if this is right for them.
In order to comfortably pass this rigorous compressor wheel strength test, we decided to make the blades on the compressor wheels thicker than Mitsubishi’s. Fundamentally, Mitsubishi’s 49178-01470 (Evo 3) is designed to be stock replacement turbo. The Evo 3 GT was designed and built for racing.

Thicker blades on a compressor mean less airflow and less performance.

Dave, you have done extensive work with the Evo VIII's turbo. It has the same compressor on it as the Evo III, only reversed. Have you ever seen a problem that would indicate to you that the blades need to be thicker? You seem to think that the VIII's turbo is awesome, especially since it outperformed your home-grown 20G. Ever figure out why that 20G-R wheel didn't work? Odd that things that look so similar can perform differently, eh?

Don’t judge the performance of a turbo by its color. Test the GT against the normal Evo 3 on a car, on a dyno, or in a testing lab, and you won’t find an inferior turbo in the GT.

Put your money where your mouth is, whoever you are. Set up a car with this turbo and let's see the results!

The GT was created to provide the Mitsubishi enthusiast community with a low-cost, high-quality turbo for their Mitsubishi cars. As is the case with any new product, some people with vested financial interests in the current product will say anything, true or false, to ruin the market for the new product. Don’t be fooled by these slander artists into paying more money. The GT is an excellent turbo at an excellent price.

Anyway, I don't see anything here that would make me want to purchase this turbo over a normal Evo III turbo since the Evo III is proven, and both turbos cost about the same. The GT is a blatant copy, meant to steal sales from another manufacturer.

The Evo III isn't much more expensive at a retailer than the GT is. So who is benefiting from the "low cost?" Certainly not the "Mitsubishi enthusias community." I'm sure the middle-man is, though. Dave, how much do you pay for these things? How much do you pay for the real deal?
 
SexyDSM95 said:
Yea very mature and you read into it wrong. I meant cheaper as in cheaper to manufactuer as in PRODUCE. I think it's somewhat unfair to charge the same price "Evo GT" vs. 16g. Pass the savings onto the consumers since the DSM is a rapidly growing market. I think they should change the name, how would you feel if you bought Ralph Lauren or Polo from Wal*Mart and come to find that it's not the "real" Polo or Ralph Lauren? You are sitting there assuming everyone is smart enough to see the housing that specifically says EVO III GT and have them NOT believe it's not from an Evo? Come on now....I still say rename it. Like I said before, isn't it illegal anyways to use or endorse a product that uses a model name from Mitsubishi without their consent or participation?

I will admit when I am wrong, but nothing at all I said was any worse than anyones "this turbo isn't l337" crap. People keep making conclusions on things they know nothing about.

Yes. If people want to make a purchase, you look into it first. I'll tell you what, the next time you buy a car, don't look into it at all. Just say "oh, it's a Talon, I'll buy it." People RESEARCH before making purchases. Or they should, anyways. If they make the mistake, it is just that - their mistake.

As for the pricing, I don't care one way or another how much they charge for them, as I will never own any 16g. However, the pricing seems fair enough considering the flapper and port job, IF the turbo performs as it should.
 
defrag010 said:
If I had a barstool that I named the "EVO3 barstool", would you think it was from an evo? ROFL
Yes...if I wanted an bar stool from a Mitsu Evo and you sat there and told me that's what it was. I would buy it and if it was not then that's false advertising and you would get into legal trouble. And it's not an assumption it's true fact. Not everyone can be as smart as you and figure that it's JUST a name. (Prez already provided an example of someone believing he had a Mitsu Evo turbo) If I went around saying and selling that my T25 is a Supra T25 and can withstand temperatures of a certain degree straight for this many days, do you know how many I could sell?
 
Coup D E'Tat said:
Yes. If people want to make a purchase, you look into it first. I'll tell you what, the next time you buy a car, don't look into it at all. Just say "oh, it's a Talon, I'll buy it." People RESEARCH before making purchases. Or they should, anyways. If they make the mistake, it is just that - their mistake.

As for the pricing, I don't care one way or another how much they charge for them, as I will never own any 16g. However, the pricing seems fair enough considering the flapper and port job, IF the turbo performs as it should.
I have done it...a lot of people have done it. It's called eBay, I bought my Wrangler off there and was not provided a VIN number. It runs great and works fine and I've had it for almost 6 months. As for pricing, if you are sitting there and thinking that port work and a flapper costs $400 then you need to disown your DSM. I have said it before and I will say it again, pass the savings along to the consumers.
 
On passing the savings on I agree, Sexy, but (to put it bluntly) Capitalism dictates that you don't have to pass it on. More profit, you see.

Anyways, I don't know crap about this fracas, so I'll limit my post to what I know.

Keep it clean gentlemen, so far it's been okay. :cool:
 
leet said:
On passing the savings on I agree, Sexy, but (to put it bluntly) Capitalism dictates that you don't have to pass it on. More profit, you see.
Unfortunately I see your point about more profit. It sucks but hey if people are still buying the product and not too bitter about the price then good for them. I will not be touching the product until I see actual results from daily drivers.
 
Why is the DSM community so stuck on porting turbine housings? Where else do you hear about people doing this? Do you ever hear about power gains from porting turbine housings? Do you ever hear about someone who just ported their Garrett turbine housing? I sure haven't.

Honestly, I don't think you gain anything from porting a turbine housing. I have never heard of a back to back test with a ported and unported housing to show any gains. But sometime in the past, someone decided that porting a turbine housing must make more power. So now, it is pretty much a given that if you have a 7cm housing, it gets ported.

My turbine housing is not ported. If someone wants to give me a ported one to try out at the track this year, I'd be happy to do so. I think my car is consistent and fast enough to determine if there is really value added with porting. I'm honest, and I'll post the results, even if it proves me wrong.

Now, on to the larger flapper. Exhaust pressures in an exhaust manifold can get up to 2 to 3 times the pressure in the intake manifold. 25psi in the intake manifold, 50 to 75psi in the exhaust manifold. Pressure on the wastegate flapper increases with the square of the radius of the flapper. The larger the flapper, the more likely your boost will drop when the pressure gets high in the exhaust manifold and presses on that large flapper, cracking it open wider. Definitely bad for power.

Of course the GT has both of these "features" standard, and they are sold as big plusses. And you can't undo them!
 
ShapeGSX said:
Of course the GT has both of these "features" standard, and they are sold as big plusses. And you can't undo them!
I think someone posted their GT turbo is unported...just has the flapper I was figuring it was a "feature" that you could choose to have done.
 
ShapeGSX said:
Now, on to the larger flapper. Exhaust pressures in an exhaust manifold can get up to 2 to 3 times the pressure in the intake manifold. 25psi in the intake manifold, 50 to 75psi in the exhaust manifold.

I think I would be redesigning my turbo system if I had 75psi exhaust manifold backpressure at 25psi boost :notgood:
I would say the turbine housing is way too small maybe porting it would help :)
 
I haven't actually measured it yet. But basically it is damn high, and enough to push wastegate flappers open.

The pressure in the exhaust manifold is caused by the restriction of the turbine nozzle and turbine. I don't know of any port job that touches the nozzle area.
 
I agree w/ shapegsx. Neither of these are really performance mods (at least the flapper isn't). They are just a marketing tool to sell the turbo to people who don't understand exactly what they do.

I would never pay extra for a larger flapper that would blow open and reduce the amount of boost I could run.
 
*sigh* pointless arguing...Does anyone else want to see...

1) Results of SBR's metallurgy analysis, which should have been done before claiming that the turbo is made from inferior metals...
2) Reviews/results from one of the 50 or so people who supposedly have the turbo on their cars and have been running them for several months without any failures?

Some nice hardcore evidence would be nice...

Thanks.
 
tighty said:
*sigh* pointless arguing...Does anyone else want to see...

1) Results of SBR's metallurgy analysis, which should have been done before claiming that the turbo is made from inferior metals...
2) Reviews/results from one of the 50 or so people who supposedly have the turbo on their cars and have been running them for several months without any failures?

Some nice hardcore evidence would be nice...

Thanks.


Agreed. You can't argue facts.
 
So, with all the testing and R&D that went into the GT, it would seem like a compressor map would also be available, right?

What is the name of the company that makes the GT?

david buschur said:
The truth is, nobody has ever attempted to pass off the GT has a genuine Mitsubishi turbo. Why would we? The GT is a specialty performance turbo that is affordable, not an overpriced stock replacement with overpriced upgrades.

This is hard to believe. First of all, the GT has the real Mitsu part# cast in it's compressor cover. For what purpose other than trying to mislead people into believing it is a real Mitsu turbo could this possibly serve? Secondly, Turbochargers.com did infact pass the GT off as a real Mitsu Evo16g to Buschur and RRE, with a ported turbine housing and larger flapper. Obviously, they failed to mention anything about it being a non-Mitsu "specialty performance turbo" initially. It seems like these vendors wouldn't appreciatte being decieved by Turbochargers.com in such a way.

If Turbochargers.com gave you a really good deal on Garrett turbos, and when you recieved them you found out they were really knockoffs made by companies like XS power that you see on EBAY, would you be ok with that as well?
 
Yeah...conclusions based on conjecture are great...but I'd still like to see those responses from Buschur and his customers about the GT, and the data the metalurgist gets from SBR...everything else is just talk.

Put up..or shut up I say.
 
Orange_dsm said:
That may have been one of the dumbest things I have ever read on one of these boards, and I have read a lot of crap. Have you even been to the TC.com website and seen what they say about it?

Here: "This Evo 3 Big 16G turbo is sold also as a GT model. Both turbos have smaller turbine scroll for quicker spool up. The GT turbo at $580.00 is the same turbo with the additions of a full port job and 34 mm waste gate port and flapper disc."

And they have two pictures taken at such an angle that you can not see what is on the compressor cover (handy enough). Now I agree that people need to research before they buy things, but even someone who has could easily think they are getting the 'real' thing. So to say it is all their fault is just plain ignorant.
It might be dumb to you, someone who assumes things about vendor's products. I know that if I'm gonna spend 600$ on a turbo, I'm gonna ask every question in existance, making sure I got what I want. The mere mention of "gt model" would prompt me to ask 321432 questions, making sure to confirm that the "GT" model was a genuine MHI turbo.

Since you pointed it out, the GT model is the same turbo... it's just made by a different manufacturer. The specs are the same, so what makes it physically different besides manufacturer? It's all about how you interpret things.

It's different when you say "This is the same turbo", and "This is the MHI evo3 16G with a different turbine housing".
 
defrag010 said:
Since you pointed it out, the GT model is the same turbo... it's just made by a different manufacturer. The specs are the same, so what makes it physically different besides manufacturer? It's all about how you interpret things.

The specs are NOT the same! They have admitted as such in this very thread. Thicker blades means less airflow. A bigger wastegate flapper means you can't run as much boost with it. Who knows what other differences there are?
 
Enough with the hypothesis and conjecture.

Facts:
1.) No these are not the same exact turbos which anyone not living under a rock should know by now.
2.) Many of these have been sold to date by Buschur and, RRE (two of the most respected shops) and not one person has posted any mechanical problems with them.
3.) Not a single Turbo builder other than the GT's builder (SBR is not a turbo builder) has chimed in to give an opinion.
4.) 12mo/12k no quibble warranty on GT from vendors (manufacturers warranty on MHI)
5.) GT built with $200 portjob/bigger flapper for < than EVO version with same "extras".
6.) Made in Taiwan not China.

Unfortunately "hype" seems to be the main driver in the turbo market these days. Be it the B-52, Holset, GT-XXX whatever. To such an extent that people forget that a turbo is only one of many componenents needed to make a car go fast. If you can bank $200 from the purchase of a new GT and go buy supporting mods, all the better IMO.

And for one company to call a "copy" bad without prima-facia evidence, when they themselves have been selling copies of others manifolds, O2 housings for years.. I say sour grapes :notgood:
 
well heres my 2 cents..... ive ordered parts from sbr. i should be recieveing them today infact. they were really helpful and went out of their way to help me out. for that i will always use them. but for the sake of curiosity i would buy the gt version just to test it out. ive learned what i know with cars by pass or fail,trial and error! i dont have alot of money to buy parts cause of where i live so if i save and get a decent part them im all for it. im not the type of person to bash anyone or any company for that matter. all that matters here is weather or not it works! i plan on buying a evo3 16g from sbr but with the gt out im also goin to buy one of those at some point. i will be happy to put it through any daily driver testing. there are more hills and little wind factor to cool turbo's/cars here. the fastest speed limit is 35mph but there are 45degree hills everywhere so the turbo here is always spooling. ide rather not get angry... rather just test it for my self... just think of all the new products that have come out and someone has gotten a better idea for a new product because of them. i dont know much about the diff in the turbos but i will be testing them to what i think will determin my opinion about them. sorry if i made anyone angry or whatever i just think its not worth the effort to argue over....
 
ShapeGSX said:
The specs are NOT the same! They have admitted as such in this very thread.

And that's a fact.

A one-year warranty is nice enough, and only time will tell how long these hold up longterm. One worry I have is for people who don't buy these from a vendor who stands behind them. I've been on DSM forums a long time and can't remember a single time a customer said turbochargers.com warranteed their dead turbo. I do remember times when they blamed well-known, competent DSM'ers for using contaminated oil and other nonsense, though.

And that leads into tc.com's ad-copy posted in this thread. VERY shady. Buyer Beware? Come on. Buyers shouldn't need a microscope. The GT's are far from well-known. And people who don't read the various forums on a regular basis will NOT know the GT isn't a normal Mitsu turbo with a flapper and port job just like how David Buschur himself (and other vendors I could name) didn't know that's what they are. "Seller Beware," I guess.

If vendors who sell the things and who have been around for over ten years have to be informed that their products are not what they think they are, then the average customer doesn't have a chance of knowing. It used to be DSM vendors would test their products to see if they're good and would at least know what it is they are selling. More and more vendors now somehow get customers to do their testing for them and then a year or three later we find out if the product was any good or not. So let's all meet back here a year from now.

One main thing: whether these are good or not, they are not an evo-anything and are not 16g-anything, and they should not be named as such. I'm sure turbochargers.com will get right on that to make sure their customers know exactly what they are buying. :thumb:
 
defrag010 said:
Since you pointed it out, the GT model is the same turbo... it's just made by a different manufacturer. The specs are the same, so what makes it physically different besides manufacturer? It's all about how you interpret things.

How would you know the specs are the same? THey have said in this thread that they are not. How about materials used? How about quality control? We know that Mistu must be pretty good at it, they did build themselves into a multi-national business. The maker of the GT hasn't even said what there NAME is. Lots of good that 12 month warranty will do when you don't even know the name of the manufacturer, not to mention if they'll even be around by then. What about engineering? Something tells me that Mitsu can afford better engineers (at least they could in the past!!) then our no-name company.

No, they are NOT the same turbo. One is a knock off of another. It may even be as good (yeah right), but they are not the same.
 
Welp, I'm still waiting for those 2 questions to be answered from Buschur and SBR before I make any final decisions.

We know that Mistu must be pretty good at it, they did build themselves into a multi-national business.

Maybe if you give this company a chance and not damn them to hell before you even try their product or have actual usage statistics they will turn into a multi-national business?

Everyone has to start somewhere....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Support Vendors who Support the DSM Community
Boosted Fabrication ECM Tuning ExtremePSI Fuel Injector Clinic Innovation Products Jacks Transmissions JNZ Tuning Kiggly Racing Morrison Fabrications MyMitsubishiStore.com RixRacing RockAuto RTM Racing STM Tuned

Latest posts

Build Thread Updates

Vendor Updates

Latest Classifieds

Back
Top