I’m writing this from direct experience, not theory. I’ve owned, run, bought, sold, and walked away from multiple stock-location turbo options on this platform, and my opinions changed as results, data, and time accumulated.
I personally ran GH Gen3 turbos. I limited them to 19 psi and used nitrous and meth to make power, and they lived. Around the same time, a close friend of mine ran an 11.8 on stock turbos with supporting mods at New England Dragway on a Brew City Boost tune, on the same day I set the world record for the platform. That alone showed me that turbo upgrades are not always the limiting factor people think they are, especially when the overall combination is right.
When I started my engine build, I originally opted for GH Gen3R turbos. At the time, they were rumored to outflow ATP, but there was no data to support that. That kind of “trust me bro” messaging is common from this developer, and in my experience it rarely pans out long term. I sold my original Gen3 set, which were in great condition, and used that money to buy a lightly used set of Gen3R turbos from Jordan. One wheel had a small amount of FOD, meaning foreign object damage where a small piece of debris lightly contacted the wheel. I had them ported by Max Power Automotive, just like I did with my Gen3s.
As I got deeper into the build, I started getting uneasy about the actual ceiling of these turbos. I didn’t want to spend a large amount of money only to end up boxed in by their max power, especially knowing that max usually lives outside the efficiency range anyway. Around the same time, it became harder to ignore that many of the GH variants seemed overrated. A lot of people expected major gains and ended up with lackluster results relative to the hype.
There’s also a lot of false honor wrapped around full-weight dogma in these discussions. Running full weight is not easy, and getting into the 11s full weight is still a real accomplishment. But using full weight as a shield to explain underwhelming results doesn’t change the underlying performance limits. Physics doesn’t care about labels.
That’s when I decided to get out before going further down that road. I sold the Gen3R turbos to the same friend who had run 11.8 on stock turbos. He installed them and began tuning with GH. Despite the upgrade, he was never able to match that 11.8 pass again. That made it clear to me that I had avoided a major setback in my own build, and honestly, I was disappointed for him. The expectation was that upgraded turbos would move the needle forward, not backward.
Before getting into recommendations, one thing needs to be said clearly. A lot of turbos fail from overspeed caused by excessive drive pressure, not simply from too much boost and not because someone didn’t follow a turbo break-in procedure. When exhaust flow can’t support the requested boost, drive pressure climbs fast, shaft speed increases, and parts fail. That’s a flow and physics problem, not a driver problem.
CRP Engineering
This is who I would recommend right now for stock-location turbo upgrades. Their turbos are being used in real high-level builds, including the world’s fastest Explorer ST. That matters more to me than claims or screenshots. Results like that require correct compressor and turbine matching and enough flow to keep drive pressure under control. From what I’ve seen, CRP approaches this from an engineering standpoint, not just bigger wheels and hope.
GearHead Tuning
I previously ran GH turbos and understand why people are drawn to them, especially when they were priced around $1,900. At that price point, the decision made sense. With pricing now near parity with other options, that value advantage is gone. Combined with years of real-world outcomes that haven’t consistently matched early expectations, GH is no longer who I would point someone toward today. This isn’t about personalities or loyalty. It’s about what the last several years have actually shown.
Turbo Bay Performance
Turbo Bay has offered stock-location options as well, but I’ve seen mixed experiences. One case involved issues on a built motor, with part of the explanation being a required turbo break-in procedure. Turbos don’t have wear surfaces that need break-in like engines do. They live or die by oiling, balance, boost control, and drive pressure. When problems get explained primarily through break-in language, that lowers my confidence.
ATP
ATP previously offered stock-location turbo options for this platform, but they are discontinued. They’re worth mentioning for history, not as a current option.
I’m not personally shopping for stock-location turbos. This is written for people who may not realize that the turbo upgrade landscape for this platform has matured. GearHead has now been around for the better part of six years, which means we’re no longer judging based on early hype or first adopters. We’ve had enough time to see patterns, limits, and repeat outcomes across many cars and many tuners.
For anyone who hasn’t revisited turbo options in a while and assumes the old recommendations still apply, this is simply an updated perspective based on what we know now. Based on pricing, accumulated real-world results, and a clearer understanding of what actually limits or kills turbos, CRP Engineering is the option I’m comfortable pointing people toward today.
That doesn’t mean everyone needs new turbos, and it doesn’t mean older options were useless. It just means the information has evolved, and recommendations should evolve with it.
I personally ran GH Gen3 turbos. I limited them to 19 psi and used nitrous and meth to make power, and they lived. Around the same time, a close friend of mine ran an 11.8 on stock turbos with supporting mods at New England Dragway on a Brew City Boost tune, on the same day I set the world record for the platform. That alone showed me that turbo upgrades are not always the limiting factor people think they are, especially when the overall combination is right.
When I started my engine build, I originally opted for GH Gen3R turbos. At the time, they were rumored to outflow ATP, but there was no data to support that. That kind of “trust me bro” messaging is common from this developer, and in my experience it rarely pans out long term. I sold my original Gen3 set, which were in great condition, and used that money to buy a lightly used set of Gen3R turbos from Jordan. One wheel had a small amount of FOD, meaning foreign object damage where a small piece of debris lightly contacted the wheel. I had them ported by Max Power Automotive, just like I did with my Gen3s.
As I got deeper into the build, I started getting uneasy about the actual ceiling of these turbos. I didn’t want to spend a large amount of money only to end up boxed in by their max power, especially knowing that max usually lives outside the efficiency range anyway. Around the same time, it became harder to ignore that many of the GH variants seemed overrated. A lot of people expected major gains and ended up with lackluster results relative to the hype.
There’s also a lot of false honor wrapped around full-weight dogma in these discussions. Running full weight is not easy, and getting into the 11s full weight is still a real accomplishment. But using full weight as a shield to explain underwhelming results doesn’t change the underlying performance limits. Physics doesn’t care about labels.
That’s when I decided to get out before going further down that road. I sold the Gen3R turbos to the same friend who had run 11.8 on stock turbos. He installed them and began tuning with GH. Despite the upgrade, he was never able to match that 11.8 pass again. That made it clear to me that I had avoided a major setback in my own build, and honestly, I was disappointed for him. The expectation was that upgraded turbos would move the needle forward, not backward.
Before getting into recommendations, one thing needs to be said clearly. A lot of turbos fail from overspeed caused by excessive drive pressure, not simply from too much boost and not because someone didn’t follow a turbo break-in procedure. When exhaust flow can’t support the requested boost, drive pressure climbs fast, shaft speed increases, and parts fail. That’s a flow and physics problem, not a driver problem.
CRP Engineering
This is who I would recommend right now for stock-location turbo upgrades. Their turbos are being used in real high-level builds, including the world’s fastest Explorer ST. That matters more to me than claims or screenshots. Results like that require correct compressor and turbine matching and enough flow to keep drive pressure under control. From what I’ve seen, CRP approaches this from an engineering standpoint, not just bigger wheels and hope.
GearHead Tuning
I previously ran GH turbos and understand why people are drawn to them, especially when they were priced around $1,900. At that price point, the decision made sense. With pricing now near parity with other options, that value advantage is gone. Combined with years of real-world outcomes that haven’t consistently matched early expectations, GH is no longer who I would point someone toward today. This isn’t about personalities or loyalty. It’s about what the last several years have actually shown.
Turbo Bay Performance
Turbo Bay has offered stock-location options as well, but I’ve seen mixed experiences. One case involved issues on a built motor, with part of the explanation being a required turbo break-in procedure. Turbos don’t have wear surfaces that need break-in like engines do. They live or die by oiling, balance, boost control, and drive pressure. When problems get explained primarily through break-in language, that lowers my confidence.
ATP
ATP previously offered stock-location turbo options for this platform, but they are discontinued. They’re worth mentioning for history, not as a current option.
I’m not personally shopping for stock-location turbos. This is written for people who may not realize that the turbo upgrade landscape for this platform has matured. GearHead has now been around for the better part of six years, which means we’re no longer judging based on early hype or first adopters. We’ve had enough time to see patterns, limits, and repeat outcomes across many cars and many tuners.
For anyone who hasn’t revisited turbo options in a while and assumes the old recommendations still apply, this is simply an updated perspective based on what we know now. Based on pricing, accumulated real-world results, and a clearer understanding of what actually limits or kills turbos, CRP Engineering is the option I’m comfortable pointing people toward today.
That doesn’t mean everyone needs new turbos, and it doesn’t mean older options were useless. It just means the information has evolved, and recommendations should evolve with it.
