New GTX gen II ???

[Jeff23spl]

I just read about these new turbo but it seem too good to be real ?

i'm wondering if at some point the advertised number are calculated the same way as for older ones? I was into car audio many years ago before peak power rating was used and for an old low distorsion rating 2x100wrm 4ohm 12v amp you now have to buy a 400+ rms to get the same power or a 1200w peak...Is it the same for turbos ? (It s a little more costly to try few to know about it lol)

If you check for exemple 3071 size:
Older GT3071 was flowing for about 400-450hp in the best conditions
GTX3071 gen1 with machined wheels was pushing this to around 500-550 (Flow of a GT3076)
GTX3071 gen2 got a flow map and advertised max flow of about 650hp (flow of a GT3582)

So i get that machined wheel can increase max flow. There is also difference from GT to GTX gen1 like the extended blade and 1mm larger overall + smaller nose etc....
But i'm surprise that these already upgraded wheels can still be upgraded that much....Is there something or i can really expect another 20-25% power increase from a gen2 ?

When looking at the map, it seem to get that increase mostly just at a specific pressure ratio point so i'm also wondering if it that extra flow isn't just at a specific point that would not be really usefull?

I was looking to change my gt2871 for a 3076 but was not sure if I was better with a GTX3071 or x3076 but now, it looks like i can get the flow of a x3076 with the lag of a 71mm wheel ?

I want to hear what you think about this?

GT3071 old model

https://turbobygarrett.com/turbobyga...argers/gt3071r




Saved map of GTX3071 gen1



GTX3071 gen2

https://turbobygarrett.com/turbobyga...tx3071r-gen-ii

[Jeff23spl]

I calculated that i should be using a pressure ration of about 2.5 to 3 so i tried to color the extra portion of the map i could use vs the other ones..

[WetzMS3]

I believe @mituc; reached out to ATP to see if there will be a MZR flanged Gen 2 release or not.

[mituc]

Originally Posted by WetzMS3 I believe @mituc; reached out to ATP to see if there will be a MZR flanged Gen 2 release or not.

Yes, I contacted @EdgeAutosport.com and asked them to check with ATP if they're going to release anything with the 2.3DISI-T flange. They replied with this:

Originally Posted by EdgeAutosport.com Hello, We're excited about these as well! Unfortunately they aren't producing them with the Mazda flange yet, but they will be at some point. Unfortunately they would not give us a time-frame yet. ​Regards,

I suppose that if we really have to we can port the hot side housing of a gen1 to a gen2 since the difference is only on the intake side and possibly other stuff in the CHRA itself, but the outside diameter of the turbine wheel is the same and all the flow increase supposedly comes from the different shape and materials used for the compressor wheel.
ATP also sells this mazda proprietary flanged exhaust housing separately, I hope it's compatible, I'll ask Edge about this as well.

So we'll see...

The thing is that for those who are pleased with the GTX3071 spool but would like more top end without moving to a slower spooling turbo like the GTX3076 (I'm in that situation) the gen2 GTX3071R would be the supreme turbo for anything between 320 and 550-600hp, instead of just like 450-480 now (to be honest I'm not sure how far these were pushed, there were a few people on the forum pushing them to like 32-33PSI, I'm only pushing mine to 30 and making about 410-420 crank HP or so with a 800ml/min meth nozzle).

[Djohns]

If worse comes to worse we can always 1. Buy a flange adaptor if one is available or 2. Cut our flange off and weld on a new one.

[WetzMS3]

It is worth noting that the MZR specific hotside of the ATP GTX turbos is a limitation for the turbo, and has resulted in less than advertised air flow (comp maps) on the older GTX series. For example, the GTX3076 is rated and capable of 600hp, however getting it to put out 550hp on the MZR hotside is a stretch and only been done a handful of times.

Originally Posted by Djohns If worse comes to worse we can always 1. Buy a flange adaptor if one is available or 2. Cut our flange off and weld on a new one.

If you're doing all that, just buy a v-band GTX and dont fuck with all the duct tape fixes. Probably equal in cost if not cheaper.

[mituc]

Originally Posted by WetzMS3 It is worth noting that the MZR specific hotside of the ATP GTX turbos is a limitation for the turbo, and has resulted in less than advertised air flow (comp maps) on the older GTX series. For example, the GTX3076 is rated and capable of 600hp, however getting it to put out 550hp on the MZR hotside is a stretch and only been done a handful of times.

I guess this is why EFR deliver their turbo with a complete kit.

[Jeff23spl]

Originally Posted by WetzMS3 I believe @mituc; reached out to ATP to see if there will be a MZR flanged Gen 2 release or not.

Oh man you ruined my day if you are right
I though because the turbine was same size and same series, i was expecting i could use my old gt30 atp hotside on a gtx30 gen 2 like gt/gtx hotside are compatible as long as they have a 60mm turbine...
I checked quickly some standard hotside and i can see same part # availaible for a gt30 and a gtx gen2 too...so i will check again if i took the wrong column but usually, if one type fit on both, why the atp wouldn't fit both too?

Differences would be the new bearing housing with ceramic bb like others brand?

[mituc]

@EdgeAutosport.com FTW!

Originally Posted by EdgeAutoSport.com I just talked to ATP and they confirmed that you can swap the housing and put a mazdaspeed turbine housing on a GTX gen 2.

[Jeff23spl]

thanks Mituc for clarifications

Will you swap it soon ?
Regadless of the ATP case restrictions, it should flow more overall if they can get more flow out of a 3076 using the same hosing...Surely not 650 but i would be happy to go above 500 or if it can give an extra +/-50 more at the same rpm it mean less exaust restriction and less heat to help knock...

So hp rating can be sketchy but more lbs/min should mean more flow...

Originally Posted by mituc @EdgeAutosport.com FTW!

Not sure if Edge have them listed without hot side...

[mituc]

Originally Posted by Jeff23spl thanks Mituc for clarifications Will you swap it soon ?

I'm not sure, I have to chose between rebuilding a second engine (and that's going to be about $2.5k in parts and another $1k in labour) and have it as a spare, and get a new turbo while the one I have now is still good, serves me well and provides enough power for a daily driven FWD car. I'm not decided yet.

The thing is that acquiring this turbo without a hot side housing and adding the ATP hot side later/separately may increase the costs above what an ATP kit normally costs. Not by much, but it will definitely be an increase (the hot side housing is around $300 IIRC, I have to look it up).

Now I think it's down to what each individual wants... that's why we have BNR S4 and CS turbos basically on a similar frame, and for almost twice the price we have these Garrett kits from ATP. So everybody has what to chose from.
And if for a stock block I'm not sure the almost $1k extra worth over an S4 or CS, but for a built block it's a no brainer as long as that $1k can be spent along with the will to be spent.

Originally Posted by Jeff23spl Not sure if Edge have them listed without hot side...

No they don't... but I'm pretty sure they can get it for you if you ask them, they're ATP resellers afterall, they care resell whatever ATP has on sale.

[Jeff23spl]

Is there a larger CS or you talk about the one on a k04 frame ? The wheel are smaller, it is more like a 2867 than a 3071...anyway

I got an used atp hotside waiting for a good deal on a gt30 but i may consider buying the gen2 alone and stop wondering about 71-76...

[mituc]

Originally Posted by Jeff23spl Is there a larger CS or you talk about the one on a k04 frame ? The wheel are smaller, it is more like a 2867 than a 3071...anyway .

Well, it spools like a gt30 and flows kind of like a gt30, to be honest I don't know the exact details, I just assumed.

[EdgeAutosport.com]

We can definitely get our hands on anything ATP sells, so if you don't see it on our site, just ask. As to the Gen 2 GTX, we are very much looking forward to its availability as a bolt on option. At this time, I'm not entirely sure what has to be done to make it work, but I'll see what I can dig up in the meantime.

[Jeff23spl]

Originally Posted by EdgeAutosport.com We can definitely get our hands on anything ATP sells, so if you don't see it on our site, just ask. As to the Gen 2 GTX, we are very much looking forward to its availability as a bolt on option. At this time, I'm not entirely sure what has to be done to make it work, but I'll see what I can dig up in the meantime.

''What has to be done'', Do you mean to package an ATP hotside + turbo like previous model or if you aren't completly sure of the previous quote Mituc made from you that old ATP design would work on the new model ?

[EdgeAutosport.com]

Originally Posted by Jeff23spl ''What has to be done'', Do you mean to package an ATP hotside + turbo like previous model or if you aren't completly sure the old ATP design would work on the new model ?

I'm not sure exactly what is different that is stopping them from just slapping a gen2 onto some bolt-on housings. I assume if it were that simple, it wouldn't be a problem, but there has to be something that is stopping this from happening.

[Jeff23spl]

ok let us know. Maybe they want to design one with a larger A/R to fully benefit the gen2 gains....

Because when i check a GT3071 and GTX3071 gen2, the part # for Turbine kit PN seem the same but even if it looks like to be the hotside pn, i'm not completly sure it is really that as the table are different...

GT PN
Turbine Kit PN A/R Inlet Outlet Wastegate Divided Trim
Super Core and Turbine Kit Sold Separately 740902-0009 0.63 T3 V-Band Free Float N 84
740902-0008 0.82 T3 V-Band Free Float N 84
740902-0007 1.06 T3 V-Band Free Float N 84
740902-0036 0.61 V-Band V-Band Free Float N 84
740902-0035 0.83 V-Band V-Band Free Float N 84
740902-0034 1.01 V-Band V-Band Free Float N 84
Wastegated Turbine Assembly does not include bolts, clamps, or actuator Turbine Asbly PN A/R Inlet Outlet Wastegate Divided Trim
771300-0006 0.63 T3 5 bolt Wastegated N 84
771300-0005 0.82 T3 5 bolt Wastegated N 84
771300-0004 1.06 T3 5 bolt Wastegated N 84


GTX gen2 PN
Notes: Assembly Kit PN Super Core PN Turbine Kit PN A/R Inlet Outlet Wastegate Divided
Assembly Kit PN Includes Super Core and Turbine Kit 856801-5006S 851154-5002S 740902-0009 0.63 T3 V-Band Free Float N
856801-5005S 851154-5002S 740902-0008 0.82 T3 V-Band Free Float N
856801-5004S 851154-5002S 740902-0007 1.06 T3 V-Band Free Float N
856801-5018S 851154-5002S 740902-0036 0.61 V-Band V-Band Free Float N
856801-5017S 851154-5002S 740902-0035 0.83 V-Band V-Band Free Float N
856801-5016S 851154-5002S 740902-0034 1.01 V-Band V-Band Free Float N
Wastegated Turbine Assembly PN does not include bolts, clamps, or actuator
856801-5021S 851154-5002S 771300-0006 0.63 T3 5 bolt Wastegated N
856801-5020S 851154-5002S 771300-0005 0.82 T3 5 bolt Wastegated N
856801-5019S 851154-5002S 771300-0004 1.06 T3 5 bolt Wastegated N

[flyhigh]

subd cuz its time to go BT and I can't make up my mind

[impossible]

All of the v2 turbine specs are same as v1 so they will work on the shitty ATP hotside if you must have but it will probably make 5whp more with that shite flowing turbine housing.

[Jeff23spl]

Originally Posted by impossible All of the v2 turbine specs are same as v1 so they will work on the shitty ATP hotside if you must have but it will probably make 5whp more with that shite flowing turbine housing.

Is it the restriction increase with larger turbo like the stock flange design to be a limitation for max hp or it is really the ATP design with a low AR ?

I would understand a GTX3076 G2 rated for a max of 750 may not pass thru the stock flange but what about the new 3071 flowing like the old x3076 both on the same housing with the same turbine....


Btw i sent a mail to Garrett to know if the hot side fit or not but i didn't get any answers yet...

[impossible]

It's the small a/r of the ATP MZR turbine housings that ruin Garretts.

[Voltwings]

The stock flange really is a limitation. I was tuning a buddy with a GTx3076 and we were fine at 30 psi, 31 psi... but the second the car touched 32 PSI it was instant 6+ degrees of knock. This was on a 50/50 E85 blend through a 6th port. Basically, there was so much back pressure between the turbine and cylinder head that it was actually blowing back into the cylinders and causing all sorts of issues. The car pegged right around 520-530 whp.

I had a GTx3576 on my personal car, and hit the same issue (same hotside) right around 520-530 whp, again on 50/50 E85, 6th port, etc... Doesn't matter how badass your setup is, on a stock flange, that is your limit.

Since CP-e now supports the tial V-band flange, THAT is what you should be pushing for. You're going to need an aftermarket manifold to be making those numbers anyways, so hoping for a stock flange really makes no sense.

[Jeff23spl]

ok thanks. i see the figures. So if someone plan for above 500whp no more stock flange but below it can still works ok while it will still benefit from Vband or larger flange?

My goal was more like 450-475whp on a mustang dyno...I already have a GT30 ATP hotside so the cost to continue with it or add manifold + flange is an heavy point to make my choice.

I just wonder if my thoughts sound good: If the gen1 x76 was able to make a 500 (or more) whp on ATP GT30 flange with an announced flow of 640 crank for the compressor. I should theoretically be able to reach it too with the new gen2 x71 with an announced max flow of 650?

Assuming same turbine with smaller comp wheel should make less exaust restriction because the comp wheel is smaller...So maybe lower BATs...

BTW switching later for a large twin scroll hot side and a diverter plate isn't impossible either...

[Voltwings]

Originally Posted by Jeff23spl ok thanks. i see the figures. So if someone plan for above 500whp no more stock flange but below it can still works ok while it will still benefit from Vband or larger flange? My goal was more like 450-475whp on a mustang dyno...I already have a GT30 ATP hotside so the cost to continue with it or add manifold + flange is an heavy point to make my choice. I just wonder if my thoughts sound good: If the gen1 x76 was able to make a 500 (or more) whp on ATP GT30 flange with an announced flow of 640 crank for the compressor. I should theoretically be able to reach it too with the new gen2 x71 with an announced max flow of 650? Assuming same turbine with smaller comp wheel should make less exaust restriction because the comp wheel is smaller...So maybe lower BATs... BTW switching later for a large twin scroll hot side and a diverter plate isn't impossible either...

This would also mean more RPM for a given output, so likely higher bats actually. A Gen 1 GTx3071 will hit your power levels, so i see no reason why a gen 2 would not.

[Jeff23spl]

Thanks

[zenit]

Originally Posted by Voltwings The stock flange really is a limitation. ... Since CP-e now supports the tial V-band flange, THAT is what you should be pushing for. You're going to need an aftermarket manifold to be making those numbers anyways, so hoping for a stock flange really makes no sense.

I wonder how much of the 'stock flange limitation' is more of an 'internal wastegate limitation'. I believe most/all of the ATP stock flanged turbos use a housing integral internal wastegate, which can only bypass so much exhaust, and the total flow restriction between the turbine and wastegate might be the overall HP limitation.

I don't know of anyone using an aftermarket non-stock flanged manifold that also uses an internal wastegate- they all use some type of external wastegate.

Originally Posted by Jeff23spl I just wonder if my thoughts sound good: If the gen1 x76 was able to make a 500 (or more) whp on ATP GT30 flange with an announced flow of 640 crank for the compressor. I should theoretically be able to reach it too with the new gen2 x71 with an announced max flow of 650?

I'm skeptical of the GTX's advertised max horsepower ratings. Garret publishes the absolute extreme part of the compressor map as the total HP rating- for instance the gtx2867r is something like 475hp. I don't know that you could realistically ever push it that far out of it's efficiency range (or would want to), or that you wouldn't run up against turbine housing backpressure limitations or serious BATs issues. It seems like the older GT series max horsepower ratings were more honest.

[Voltwings]

Originally Posted by zenit I wonder how much of the 'stock flange limitation' is more of an 'internal wastegate limitation'. I believe most/all of the ATP stock flanged turbos use a housing integral internal wastegate, which can only bypass so much exhaust, and the total flow restriction between the turbine and wastegate might be the overall HP limitation. I don't know of anyone using an aftermarket non-stock flanged manifold that also uses an internal wastegate- they all use some type of external wastegate.

Sorry, i should have mentioned both cars were fully EWG off the (CP-E) manifold. So, your thought process is probably correct, however, does not pertain to this particular situation.

To further expand on that thought though, any exhaust that cant make it through the wastegate would end up going through the turbine instead, and in a perfect world, make more power, which makes more exhaust, which gets backed up, etc etc until you ultimately hit the same cap. So ultimately the issue is the flange, but the instance you mentioned could probably exacerbate the issue.

[zenit]

Originally Posted by Voltwings Sorry, i should have mentioned both cars were fully EWG off the (CP-E) manifold. So, your thought process is probably correct, however, does not pertain to this particular situation. To further expand on that thought though, any exhaust that cant make it through the wastegate would end up going through the turbine instead, and in a perfect world, make more power, which makes more exhaust, which gets backed up, etc etc until you ultimately hit the same cap. So ultimately the issue is the flange, but the instance you mentioned could probably exacerbate the issue.

Thanks- this is really good information to have, as I hash out my plans for manifolds/turbos.
Interesting that you had two stock flanged EWG's turbo setups to compare- I'd never heard of that. I assume both setups had 38mm tial EWGs?

There is one additional confound with the stock flange vs. precision v-band vs tial v-band: stock flange ID is ~2 1/16", precision inlet ID is not published on the CPE website, but likely 2" based on what's available from precision, and the tial inlet v-band flange ID is 2 1/8" or 54.xxmm.

Knowing that @WetzMS3; is also running up against IWG/housing limitations on his stock flanged gtx3076r at approx. 550hp, leads me to the assumption that a single 38mm EWG flows approximately the same as a internal wastegate.

[Voltwings]

Originally Posted by zenit Thanks- this is really good information to have, as I hash out my plans for manifolds/turbos. Interesting that you had two stock flanged EWG's turbo setups to compare- I'd never heard of that. I assume both setups had 38mm tial EWGs? There is one additional confound with the stock flange vs. precision v-band vs tial v-band: stock flange ID is ~2 1/16", precision inlet ID is not published on the CPE website, but likely 2" based on what's available from precision, and the tial inlet v-band flange ID is 2 1/8" or 54.xxmm. Knowing that @WetzMS3; is also running up against IWG/housing limitations on his stock flanged gtx3076r at approx. 550hp, leads me to the assumption that a single 38mm EWG flows approximately the same as a internal wastegate.

The GTx3076 initially had that setup, the 38mm EWG housing and you're right lol ... it sucks. However, both cars had 46mm wastegates on the CP-E manifold. That is a monster wastegate, and while the CP-e design is still not ideal as far as evacuating exhaust to/through the wastegate, it still worked well. I mean, when you're running 30+ PSI anyways you're not really worried about creep haha.

[zenit]

Originally Posted by Voltwings The GTx3076 initially had that setup, the 38mm EWG housing and you're right lol ... it sucks. However, both cars had 46mm wastegates on the CP-E manifold. That is a monster wastegate, and while the CP-e design is still not ideal as far as evacuating exhaust to/through the wastegate, it still worked well. I mean, when you're running 30+ PSI anyways you're not really worried about creep haha.

Interesting, time to do some research on how the big horsepower guys have their manifolds and wastegates setup.

For lols and chin scratching:

[Voltwings]

Hell, its a better design than the ATP housing.

[GabbyChaves]

Originally Posted by zenit I wonder how much of the 'stock flange limitation' is more of an 'internal wastegate limitation'. I believe most/all of the ATP stock flanged turbos use a housing integral internal wastegate, which can only bypass so much exhaust, and the total flow restriction between the turbine and wastegate might be the overall HP limitation. I don't know of anyone using an aftermarket non-stock flanged manifold that also uses an internal wastegate- they all use some type of external wastegate. I'm skeptical of the GTX's advertised max horsepower ratings. Garret publishes the absolute extreme part of the compressor map as the total HP rating- for instance the gtx2867r is something like 475hp. I don't know that you could realistically ever push it that far out of it's efficiency range (or would want to), or that you wouldn't run up against turbine housing backpressure limitations or serious BATs issues. It seems like the older GT series max horsepower ratings were more honest.

My .02
Having the Cpe atmosphere kit with the Tial V band- ewg and gtx 2867. Put down 410 whp on a mustang Dyno @25 psi which is close to if not more than the rated 475 hp.
I guess conditions were great with 40* ambient and meth helps. But it seems achievable with the right set up

[zenit]

Originally Posted by GabbyChaves My .02 Having the Cpe atmosphere kit with the Tial V band- ewg and gtx 2867. Put down 410 whp on a mustang Dyno @25 psi which is close to if not more than the rated 475 hp. I guess conditions were great with 40* ambient and meth helps. But it seems achievable with the right set up

Too many variables here to definitively say anything conclusive about Garrett's published hp figures as compared to whp on a dyno.

The only thing I might counter with, is to say that the GT2871r / BNR S3 are known to also deliver 400whp on a speed3- and garrett touts the GTX2867r as the more efficient/better flowing replacement for the gt2817r (which garrett says has a max hp rating of 400hp vs 475 on the gtx).

[GabbyChaves]

Originally Posted by zenit Too many variables here to definitively say anything conclusive about Garrett's published hp figures as compared to whp on a dyno. The only thing I might counter with, is to say that the GT2871r / BNR S3 are known to also deliver 400whp on a speed3- and garrett touts the GTX2867r as the more efficient/better flowing replacement for the gt2817r (which garrett says has a max hp rating of 400hp vs 475 on the gtx).

Yes that's true. I guess I should have followed up with that the gtx should still be in its efficiency range at more than 25 psi, say 28-30 so there was more power left on the table but I was out of fueling headroom at 110% + idc with 100% meth thru a do7

[Jeff23spl]

Originally Posted by zenit I wonder how much of the 'stock flange limitation' is more of an 'internal wastegate limitation'. I believe most/all of the ATP stock flanged turbos use a housing integral internal wastegate, which can only bypass so much exhaust, and the total flow restriction between the turbine and wastegate might be the overall HP limitation. I don't know of anyone using an aftermarket non-stock flanged manifold that also uses an internal wastegate- they all use some type of external wastegate. I'm skeptical of the GTX's advertised max horsepower ratings. Garret publishes the absolute extreme part of the compressor map as the total HP rating- for instance the gtx2867r is something like 475hp. I don't know that you could realistically ever push it that far out of it's efficiency range (or would want to), or that you wouldn't run up against turbine housing backpressure limitations or serious BATs issues. It seems like the older GT series max horsepower ratings were more honest.

i don't understand how the wastegate type or size could be a max power limitation, to me it is just a way to decrease boost....(I had to port my gt28 atp to limit creep with a catless exaust because it was overboosting at spool.)
Unless the back pressure created by the exaust flow returning on the same downpipe i don't see how EWG also returning into the same downpipe would give more power? to Benefit from it i believe it need to use a screeming pipe separated from the downpipe...Let me know where i'm wrong?

I'm a bit sceptical too (but i'm always sceptic lol) about the upgraded flow of the gen2...I understand the upgrade from GT to GTX and other brand talk about same gains from machined design and extended tip. We can also see the figures between a gt3071 and a gtx3071 gen1 with peoples running them.
But the new power gains announced without no really huge difference is a bit hard to believe......(They upgraded the already upgraded wheel....)
We can see on the flow chart that it give more flow only at a specific pressure ratio so if you aren't right at that spot at your max power point, you may not benefit from it either...

I just wait to see someone, not paid by Garrett, to try it and show the results...
At the end even if it isn't 110hp but just 50 or even 40...it is still a better turbo...

[Voltwings]

Originally Posted by zenit Too many variables here to definitively say anything conclusive about Garrett's published hp figures as compared to whp on a dyno. The only thing I might counter with, is to say that the GT2871r / BNR S3 are known to also deliver 400whp on a speed3- and garrett touts the GTX2867r as the more efficient/better flowing replacement for the gt2817r (which garrett says has a max hp rating of 400hp vs 475 on the gtx).

A comment i'd like to add here, and i dont know that it is in response specifically to your quote, but rather the conversation as a whole here, but what exactly does a turbo rated for X hp mean?

In my mind, it always meant the turbo will provide X amount of airflow, which is about Y amount of horsepower worth of airflow. Keep in mind though, the engine still makes power with timing, compression, vvt, etc... so you can essentially have a turbo make more power than it is rated for. If i'm not mistaken, our stock K04 is rated at like 29 lb/min, yet we routinely see 320, 330, 340 whp dynos on the stock turbo.

[Jeff23spl]

you are so right. You can always push more or less going close or far from the danger zone...or be limited by something else...There is also few power units and variables when it is time to accurately measure it.

[SpeedyTurd]

@GabbyChaves; was this your CP-e atmosphere kit that put down 410hp and was it with the gen 2 GTX2867?

[GabbyChaves]

Originally Posted by SpeedyTurd @GabbyChaves; was this your CP-e atmosphere kit that put down 410hp and was it with the gen 2 GTX2867?

No, it was a gen 1 gtx2867 with .86 ar
On meth and E

[SpeedyTurd]

@GabbyChaves; how was that setup with a .86 AR?