water-cooled, oil-cooled or both?

[fastpace]

well I am about to buy a turbo from ebay for my car. the people who make them give the buyer an option of water-cooled, oil-cooled, or both. I have searched the forums and really couldn't find anything that answered my question. So my question is there any advantage in having water or oil-cooled or both types of lubrication-cooling turbocharges?

[HiPSI]

mostly depends on how much plumbing you wanna do. if you just want to run oil lines and hook up intercooler piping and be done with it then go oil only. every car before my 240 has run an oil only turbo and all have been dead reliable (except for one turbonetics POS turbo i had, but i replaced it with the garrett equivalent and the garrett one never skipped a beat). i've really never seen anyone prove one way or another which is "better" to have.

[andrave]

I think you may be confused, far as I know all turbos need oil feed lines, its just that you have the option of water cooling as well. My turbo's have it, and I figured I'd hook it up since they have it, can't hurt.

[SR20DETpwr]

I would get both - can't hurt to have that extra cooling on your side. My stock turbo has both oil and water lines.

[96twofourty]

all turbos are oil cooled. some just have the option of water cooling too. the water cooling just keeps the turbo cooler and allows for more longevity