anybody try the new billet 62/65 on a 81mm 1.8l?...just wondering how the spool is?..i currently have a gt35r and was wondering if it will be any laggyer then the 35r? or spool quicker? make more power over the 35r? power goals are 600whp
set is
81.50mm lsvtec
ramhorn
victor x
3''dp/exhaust
pro1 cams
any input would be great
thanks

 

You already have a turbo capable of 600+ whp so you dont need a bigger turbo for your 600whp goal, I would imagine a 6265 would be a good bit laggier than your 35R.

 

yeah, i concur - the GT35r will get you to your goals and more in the future if you wanted -- since you already have it, no reason to change in my opinion

 

ok..thanks guys..i was just wondering tho...but ill stick with the 35r then

 

The billet wheels don't help it spool any faster or make any more power.

 

I have had direct comparisons between the GT35R and a 62/65.. It wasn't on a Honda though, but on a Volvo 2.3L Turbo. The owner simply swapped turbos because the 62/65 is a larger turbo but supposed to retain the same spool characteristics and more efficient, and nothing else was changed except for a minor retune for fuel and timing.

On paper, the 62/65 really spools well, but besides the dyno, these two turbos behaved differently on the streets. The GT35R is still in fact a smaller turbo and it picked up sooner and had more streetable torque than the 62/65. I would only go for a 62/65 if you are looking for better power per PSI of boost, and a little more headroom for power with the expense of a bit more lag during street driving. If the car is a track car, then it shouldn't matter.

 

If anyone was going to make an educated guess on how many RPMs later the 6265 would make it to a certain amount of boost than an SC6152sp, say maybe 7psi or something like that, what would the guess be? A couple hundred RPMs, 500, 7-800? Figure a .63 a/r 4-bolt t3 housing on the SC6152, and a .63 a/r V-band t3 housing (equivalent I think) on the SC6265sp.

Thanks in advance for your educated guesses!

 

I would guess 200 rpm, u can look on garretts site cause they talk about it.

 

Tjabo, its hard to say. Im guessing closer to 800rpm, maybe a little more. That larger turbine is definitely a source for lag.

 

Na garrett straight up says the billet isn't anything real special and is virtually the same in spool time as the non billet. Like I said go to turbobygarrett.com and look for urself.

 

You are one of the people who still doesnt understand the Precision billet wheels. Its not the material, its all about the aerodynamic design of wheel(which is VERY different). The billet wheel does allow for a smaller center hub, which means the blade length is longer, the inlet area is larger, and that all adds up to more airflow.

Billet wheels are designed for applications to resist fatigue, and now theyre making their way to street applications.

 

So yes the wheel is stronger but look at the turbo maps and compare out put to the non billet and what do u have?? Who first came out with the billet wheel too?? If u like it and think it is better than go for it and have fun, it's ur money do what u want to with it.

 

Garrett compared maps between cast and billet wheels of identical design to prove a point, its not the material. Even before the comparison, it was obvious. Billet compressor wheels came out quite a long time ago, more than 15 years now. These new wheel

The Precision wheels are better than almost anything, plain and simple. They chose to use machined aluminum to make the center hub smaller, and also because its more advanced. Material use in cars in changing all the time. Garrett even has billet compressors with the more advanced designs, and they are FAR better than the old GT style compressors. Its fine that you will stick with old designs, you will just be left behind the competition.

 

Show how the power is better or bigger and the cost is comparable with the billet vs non. I haven't seen any maps that show a big differance yet. I'm not saying they can't improve but they haven't yet.

 

Billet wheels are more expensive in the long run, but they have been proven to last longer in OEM high stress applications. Yes, the wheels are improved, its been shown time and time again. Look at the Forced Performance HTA wheels compared with the standard Garretts, the HTA are far superior. Same goes Precisions billet wheels, they designs are better and have higher flow ratings along with higher PR capability.

Apparently you dont pay attention to all the numbers people are making. Plenty of people have switched to these new turbos and are making more power with less boost, and others are making much more power because the wheels can sustain very high boost levels, while still being efficient. When was the last time you saw a 35R make 800whp in a B/K series? Never. A few guys with the billet 6262 and 6265 are making those power levels, and its all thanks to the new wheels.

Just because Precision and FP dont have compressor maps doesnt mean the wheels dont work, the proof is in the pudding. Its all about tangible results, not theory.

 

This thread... LOL.

Billet wheels are the wave of the future.

The new Garrett GTRs are billet as well....

 

Td Autowerkes evo made 760+whp with a t3 6265

 

Are you implying that Precision came out with the first billet wheel compressor wheels? If so, that would be an incorrect assumption.

 

Not to mention the more agressive fin design possible by the increase in strength allowed by the construction...

 

No, I was implying that Garrett was the first as far as I know but I could b wrong on that.

 

Okay, I swapped from an SC6152sp to an SC6265sp, both the a .63 a/r turbine housing, but with a 4-bolt on the SC61, and a v-band on the 6265.

In testing of 4th gear spool to 150kPa, and 14.5psi (WG spring pressure), the 6265 is about 100-150 RPMs behind. This is on a 2.0 liter DOHC Neon engine that is stock other than for Crane 18 cams. DNP tubular manifold.

I've had to jack my fuel map WAAAAAY up, and the boost creep is worse with the new turbo. I'm thinking I should have switched to a .82 turbine housing. That would have probably slowed my spool a bit, and maybe reduced my boost creep. . . .

 

i made 778hp on my evo on a billet 6265 on 40psi.....im sure on a turbo honda it would make over 800hp.....the gains of a billet turbo over a cast wheel turbo are more than minimal .....

 

Alright, not only do I have a LOT of new boost creep, but I also seem to be going left of the surge line at times (based on sound).

I'm thinking of switching out the .63 t3 turbine housing for a .82. My thought is that the .82 would slow the spool a little bit, thereby helping me to avoid surge, and it would also alleviate a bit of the exhaust pressure buildup, thus reducing my boost creep some. . .

Thoughts?

 

Before doing all that by spending another $200 on a turbine housing, check other sources for the 'creep' such as wastegate placement relative to the manifold, ambient outside temperature, integrity of the vacuum lines you are using, operation of your boost controller or solenoid (if any). Simply switching out the housing only changes a slight amount of backpressure, but won't necessarily solve a 'creep' issue. Look to other sources before attempting to make such an investment.

 

About the only thing I switched with the turbo change was in fact the pressure line from the compressor cover to the wastegate. I switched from some rubber hose to some 1/4 nylon hose I scammed from my water/methanol kit, and I used stainless steel 90 degree swivel pushlock fittings. I suppose there could be a problem there, but I just find it hard to believe. Still I could switch back to rule that out. I guess a very simple test I could do that would tell me most of the story is to pop the nylon hose out of the fitting at the compressor, and blow air into it to open the wastegate (gently). Then I could blow it back into the fitting to make sure it woooshed out into the compressor housing.

Aside from that, I'm running the same TiAL 44mm wastegate on the same DNP manifold that I was before, and while I do feel that the exit from the collector area to the wastegate tube is less than ideal, there really isn't anything I can do about that.

I don't have a boost controller of any type on the car. It was suggested to me that I should run a softer wastegate spring, and then a manual boost controller to the top of the wastegate to do. . . . . something. Obviously I don't fully understand the concept, and therefore I'm not sure whether it makes any sense or not.

The next step softer spring is sitting on my bench, so I can slap that back in and see what happens I guess. Kinda hate to, but right now my boost cut set 1 kPa less than my MAP sensor is good to (255kPa) is not cutting it.

Ambient temps have been pretty stable throughout the entire swap/comparison.