Evo III 16G or GT?s

[weaver]

I'm buying a evo 16g from turbochargers.com They give you the choice of the 16G or the 16g GT version. I was wondering what you guys thing about the GT version. Is it as well made as the 16G? They have a page on their website defending the negative remarks about the GT, but I want to know what you thing about it.

Thanks

 

[dsm-onster]

, but 3 failed turbos out of the thousands of people on this board (never even 2 in a row) and this turbo is garbage? Do you have any idea how many of those TC.com sells, and yet all we can come up with is 3 failures, which could easily be related to boost leaks, oil problems, etc.

QUOTE]

How can you say 3 failed turbos out of thousands?? Wheres the data? Anyways, just buy the mhi its proven. The reason why i say this is because its proven and Ive had severe problems w/ tchargers.com honoring warrantys. Ive never had to deal w/ such BS warrantys as those guys at tchargers.

For the sake of objectivity...

It's very reasonable to assume that thousands of turbos have been sold...

Let's get a list of DIFFERENT accounts from this forum about EVO3 gt failures...

That will take a little searching... so far there are three here, right?

Tchargers.com sells their turbos cheaper than anyone. when you go elseware you're paying for the better warranty. It's nothing personal. It's just business.

RRE sells the GT .See Road Race Engineering. They offer a good warranty on this turbo. Just like T-netics does now... If you had a problem with a EVO3 GT warranty then you should have bought it from a more reputable vendor. T-netics turbos that they sell fail, too.

 

[ShapeGSX]

Tchargers.com sells their turbos cheaper than anyone. when you go elseware you're paying for the better warranty. It's nothing personal. It's just business.

RRE sells the GT .See Road Race Engineering. They offer a good warranty on this turbo. Just like T-netics does now... If you had a problem with a EVO3 GT warranty then you should have bought it from a more reputable vendor. T-netics turbos that they sell fail, too.

You do realize that anyone who sells the GT in the US is getting them from Turbochargers.com . RRE's warranty is just turbochargers.com's warranty.

And frankly, I don't trust turbonetics, either.

 

[dsm-onster]

You do realize that anyone who sells the GT in the US is getting them from Turbochargers.com . RRE's warranty is just turbochargers.com's warranty.

And frankly, I don't trust turbonetics, either.

My father and his buddy have had one T-netics t3-t4 on their GNs for about 4 years now. My father has put almost 50K on his.

So RRE does a bad job getting guys a new EVO GT turbo if there's an issue?

 

[fwdeclipse]

No, they CHARGE $50 less than a real Evo III. You don't know what they cost. They might cost $200 less to make than a real Evo III.

Regardless, I am certain that vendors make more money off of the GT, otherwise they wouldn't have had a reason to make it.

I just bought a MHI evo3 for 459,and on there website there selling the GT for 499.

 

[ShapeGSX]

My father and his buddy have had one T-netics t3-t4 on their GNs for about 4 years now. My father has put almost 50K on his.

And a friend of mine had one of their turbos blow almost immediately after install and they didn't warranty anything.

So RRE does a bad job getting guys a new EVO GT turbo if there's an issue?

I dunno, I haven't bought one.

 

[dsm-onster]

The warranty thing sucks. What did T-netics say as the reason why it failed?

I have to say though that turbo failures happen in every brand, even MHI. MHI puts out super reliable turbos. But don't go looking for one that will outflow a 56-trim by a whole bunch. They have their place. Garrett, on the otherhand, has a BROAD range of turbos. But back when I first bought my T-bird TC, the stock garrett was shot (PO "over boosted" it for several months and drove around w/ out the airfilter). The car had great oil pressure, so I forked over the bones for a new stock turbo (I knew nothing about forced induction back then. I cut my teeth w/ my TC). And it blew in under 6 months. I never ran over stock boost. I never ran low on oil or had an oil pressure issue. It's just one of those things that happened. But I don't think garretts are any more unreliable than any other becasue of my issue. my father's upgrade to a t-netics t3-t4 was because of a garrett failure (it lasted for a decent while: 100K w/ stock boost and no oiling issues or running w/out an airfilter or anything). The evo3 gt has had problems. Would it be safe to say that almost everyone who has a turbo failure talks about it and that most people who do not don't say anything because the turbo is just doing what it should? No one really comes on dsmtuners.com and just screams, "man my EVO3GT didn't fail today! WOW!". It is absolutely understandable to get a turbo that has the best reliability record in the business. It's like buying a Toyota instead of a Mitsubishi . All that I'm saying is that it's entirely likely that there is a lower precentage rate of failure than everyone may think.

 

[Nitercr02]

Okay, now I am paranoid about buying an EVO III 16g, period...

 

[dsm-onster]

Everyone should be paranoid about how they take care of their turbo, no matter what brand. They all have small unforgiving tolerances. Ford guys say that fords are more reliable than chevys. Chevy guys say fords are tinker toys and chevies stay on the road longer. And all of them point out examples of the other brand's failures.

P.S. periods are for women. . . .jk

 

[MyBeatGSX]

Okay, now I am paranoid about buying an EVO III 16g, period...

Just keep it in perspective. All we can come up with on this entire board is THREE, I repeat THREE (3) failures out of the thousands of people on this board. And as already mentioned, my local shop gets 5 per week. All of which sell the same week, neither I nor any of my friends, nor anyone in CCDSM have heard anything bad about them from anyone locally. Much of this is just 'NET garbage and wide spread paranoia over a couple of (most likely) user error failures.

In all honesty, buying a DSM was a worse decision with a PROVEN higher failure rate than this turbo.

 

[-TunedDSM-]

In all honesty, buying a DSM was a worse decision with a PROVEN higher failure rate than this turbo.

I couldnt have said it any better myself. You are always going to have bad stories about everything and anything. Just go with what you feel best and most confident with, dont let these forums make the decision for you, its your car and your cash and do what you want with it. Good luck with what you choose and let us know how it goes .

P.S I may get slammed for saying this but you may also want to consider a T-28 Turbo.

 

[dsm-onster]

P.S I may get slammed for saying this but you may also want to consider a T-28 Turbo.

It's not MHI! You traitor! Good day to you. . .

. . .I said good day!

 

[MyBeatGSX]

What's that Charlie? You got the golden ticket!?

Yes grandpa joe, that's funny, look what it says...

"Garret turbos are more efficient and better designed than MHI turbos." -Willy Wonka

That's blashphemy Charlie, burn it....

 

[dsm-onster]

HAHAHA! Entirely too funny! I wll stop my pointless threads with no facts or info now...

 

[Enraged78]

Just keep it in perspective. All we can come up with on this entire board is THREE, I repeat THREE (3) failures out of the thousands of people on this board. And as already mentioned, my local shop gets 5 per week. All of which sell the same week, neither I nor any of my friends, nor anyone in CCDSM have heard anything bad about them from anyone locally. Much of this is just 'NET garbage and wide spread paranoia over a couple of (most likely) user error failures.

In all honesty, buying a DSM was a worse decision with a PROVEN higher failure rate than this turbo.

...Make that four failures. I can't account for the signal to noise ratio of the Evo III GT from SSAutoChrome vs. the Evo III GT from TC. I also can't account for the slowboy vs. TC.com debate.

What I can comment on is that I was preaching the exact same thing that you are four months ago. There were a few Evo GT vs. MHI Evo III debates here on tuners, and I came to the defense of the GT a few times. I listened to my local shop (same as your's Beat, I missed the last few CCDSM meets. I have Kevin's injectors in my car if you want to know who I am.) and figured I'd try a turbo that was a hair better than the tried and true Evo III. It seems like a great deal. Higher nickel content than the Evo, better warranty, porting built into the housing. I boosed mine to 16 PSI, warmed it up, and cooled it down properly. Now, 7,200 miles of owning it, it has decided that it wants to puke oil out of both the intake and exhaust housing. This is on a built 7-bolt block with a fresh 1G head. I used a stainless oil feed with an Evo III oil filter housing. My oil feed to the turbo is filtered. My PCV is drilled and re-routed to my catch can. My drain pipe and gaskets were new. The turbo has zero shaft play in any direction. My local shop took the housing off and could find nothing wrong with it, other than the fact that it doesn't want to hold oil.

Please keep in mind, I DO NOT know what killed this turbo. I am NOT going to speak ill of TC.com. They are a great company, and their turbo's are putting down some very impressive numbers. However, the facts are that my GT is not working correctly, and it will be pulled off the car this weekend for a warranty claim. In trying to seperate facts fom the noise, it seems that I'm not the only one to have this problem. In the meantime, I don't want any downtime, so I am swapping an MHI Evo III in it's place. Luckily, my shop is helping me out, as they always have. They are a great bunch of guys.

Only time will tell whether or not this is my fault, a freak accident, or somthing I have not contemplated. Either way, not all of the GT reports are false or erronious.

Thanks,
Matt.

 

[dsm-onster]

Thanx Enraged78 for your report...

Only time will tell whether or not this is my fault, a freak accident, or somthing I have not contemplated. Either way, not all of the GT reports are false or erronious.

Please tell us the findings when you determine why the turbo failed.

No one is saying that any of the actual GT experiences that have failed are erronious. It's just that, lets say your turbo failure is entirely not your fault. And now there are only 4 failures. HAHA! I wish all turbo brands had that track record.

 

[ShapeGSX]

No one is saying that any of the actual GT experiences that have failed are erronious. It's just that, lets say your turbo failure is entirely not your fault. And now there are only 4 failures. HAHA! I wish all turbo brands had that track record.

Well, there are 4 recorded on this forum. Do you think that is all of them?

How many people on this forum do you think are running a GT?

 

[dsm-onster]

Well, there are 4 recorded on this forum. Do you think that is all of them?

How many people on this forum do you think are running a GT?

None. I think 4 guys have run them and they ALL have failed HAHAHA!.

How many do you know have worked just fine? How many have sold? How many have failed? How man have failed on the consumer end? How many have failed on the manufacturers end? How many have sprouted wings and flew? Lets stay objective. That is all I'm promoting here. I don't mean to come to the GT's defense at all. So don't take my last post that way. I'm coming to objectivity's defense. Actually, I'm not a fan of either turbo brand. Who care's about reliability of said brand, if there's no turbo offered by that particular brand that flows what I need it to flow for my goals? But that is another subject entirely.

 

[ShapeGSX]

None. I think 4 guys have run them and they ALL have failed HAHAHA!.

How many do you know have worked just fine? How many have sold? How many have failed? How many have sproouted wings and flew? Lets stay objective. That is all I'm promoting here. I don't mean to come to the GTs defense. So don't take my last post that way. Actually, I'm not a fan of either turbo brand.

I know that Tom's hasn't failed. But, really, I haven't been keeping track.

But you have to keep in mind the sample size if you are going to be taking a survey. So if 4 turbos have failed amongst the GT owners in this forum, you have to compare it to all the people in this forum who have run a GT. But don't compare it to the number of people in the world running GTs. That would skew the results. Not all of them are DSMTuners members.

But I don't think all that many people on this forum are running these turbos. Maybe 30? 50? That's just my gut feel. Who knows.

 

[dsm-onster]

I know that Tom's hasn't failed. But, really, I haven't been keeping track.

But you have to keep in mind the sample size if you are going to be taking a survey. So if 4 turbos have failed amongst the GT owners in this forum, you have to compare it to all the people in this forum who have run a GT. But don't compare it to the number of people in the world running GTs. That would skew the results. Not all of them are DSMTuners members.

But I don't think all that many people on this forum are running these turbos. Maybe 30? 50? That's just my gut feel. Who knows.

Sample sizes have nothing to do with culture. The moderators and wizemen are constantly trying to pushout negativity. It is a part of this culture. If a negative person has the oportunity to be negative he will be negative. But a positive result will not be discussed because this is what the turbo "should have done".

I am absolutely not negating ) ) what you just said. To make a truely objective survey one must understand the sample size as you just said. I don't have the backing nor the resources to complete a scientific survey. Do you?

The only way to get the best results is to get ALL failures inside and outside dsmtuners.com, and ALL purchases inside and outside dsmtuners.com. Not gona' happen.

With the success that you've had w/ your MHI, I'm glad to see that you typed that Tom's GT hasn't failed.

 

[Marc91GSX]

To me, it's the fact that this turbo is a direct punch at the beloved MHI EVO3 16G. Everyone loves this turbo. because of its broad range of application. It will suffice for a 300whp car and it will suffice for a 400whp car. . . But if you know what you want, there are much more efficient turbo's than the EVO3 at 300hp or 350hp or 400hp. This turbo is for the novice who has no idea where he wants to go, but will surely b!tch and moan about spool and just wants a turbo that will keep putting out after he gets more upgrades to beat the mullet-head down the street.

I have to disagree with this. I think that most people go with the mhi turbo because of several reasons. It is a turbo off a production car that was designed to last a minimum of 30k miles (because that is the factory warranty on the car it came on) which is allot better than the 12k that you get on the GT. Also it uses a mitsu center section so you do not need to change anything to bolt it onto a 1g and change very little to bolt it onto a 2g.

You are right that there are several turbos out there with better maps than this one but I chose the e3 because it was a direct bolt-on, flowed the air I wanted, and was a cheap turbo. Oh and one other reason why people like the e3, visibly it is identical to the stock turbo (1g) which helps with emissions or class rules.

 

[ccasey645]

Okay, now I am paranoid about buying an EVO III 16g, period...

evo III can wistand more heat while staing more efficent

 

[dsm-onster]

I have to disagree with this. I think that most people go with the mhi turbo because of several reasons. It is a turbo off a production car that was designed to last a minimum of 30k miles (because that is the factory warranty on the car it came on) which is allot better than the 12k that you get on the GT.

What is stock boost on the EVO III? What boost do you plan on running when you get the MHI evo3 .

Also it uses a mitsu center section so you do not need to change anything to bolt it onto a 1g and change very little to bolt it onto a 2g.

Isn't the GT the same?

You are right that there are several turbos out there with better maps than this one but I chose the e3 because it was a direct bolt-on, flowed the air I wanted, and was a cheap turbo. Oh and one other reason why people like the e3, visibly it is identical to the stock turbo (1g) which helps with emissions or class rules.

Class rules don't apply to a heads up race and the street. But yes those are all very valid reasons to get an EVO3. If you going to do this, then why not get a sleeper 16G?

 

[dsm-onster]

evo III can wistand more heat while staing more efficent

HAHAHAHA!

 

[MyBeatGSX]

evo III can wistand more heat while staing more efficent

Actually the Evo III has horrible efficiency. I made a thread about it but no one seemed to care.


Ok so we got one failure in CCDSM. I'm still not going to trash the turbo, but I'll let it be know that I myself went with an MHI because I plan on running 20-22psi which is really pushing it on either turbo. Of course I quickly regretted that for the above reason, but that's the problem with researching after the fact. Nothing would have been different with the GT however. Even at max efficiency both of these turbos are horrific. I can only hope I'm wrong and the EvoIII has some efficiency improving compressor changes over the B16G.

Just to look on the other side of things and for comparison's sake. How many people here do we have with failed MHI turbos?

 

[ShapeGSX]

What is stock boost on the EVO III? What boost do you plan on running when you get the MHI evo3 .

I don't think that there is an Evo III 16G that has been abused more than mine. Two and a half years of 20psi daily driving. Probably at least 30,000mi (I figured it out recently, but forgot! ). And drag racing once a month at 32+psi. It is still in perfect shape.

Regardless of the warranty of the original Lancer Evolution III, this is one tough little turbo. There should be no question about that.

For that matter, the turbo in the Evo VIII is basically the same as the Evo III, and it is also very reliable. Have you ever heard of an Evo blowing its stock turbo?