TeggieeTuner

Mase maxxed out my Sc61 on the dyno yesterday at 443whp and 310ft lbs of torque on 116 octane sunoco.... and it made 383whp and forgot torque on pump gas..

My power goals are as close to 500 on pump gas as I can get and 650ish on race gas...

My setup is as follows:
Block:
84.5mm Benson sleeved B18a1
Benson micro-polished crank
Pauter Rods
CP 9:1 pistons


Head:
Port mached Gsr head
Skunk2 Pro 1 cams
Skunk2 Pro springs/retainers
fresh resurface, valve stem seals
Edelbrock Victor xintake
Hondata IM gasket
Omni Power 70mm Throttle body
ARP Head Studs
T1 race development catch can kit (6 line kit) Black braided lines
AEM Cam gears

King motorsports T3 Topmount + downpipe
Precision Sc61 .63a/r ,.70 ported "s" Compressor
Precision 46mm wastegate
Tial 50mm BOV
ID 1000cc injectors
Walbro 400lph pump
Aem Fuel rail
Fuel Lab FPR ( not installed)
Fuel lab inline fuel filter
Ignition:
Oem dizzy


My question is, should I go with the 6266 T3 flange, .82a/r 3" V band
OR the 6466 with the same.....

shawty22

6266 should get the job done. I would go with the .82 housing as well. Setup sounds really promising. Would of thought you could of got more out the sc61 though. Couple people i know up here are making right around 600whp with that turbo.

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

If he had the smaller turbine wheel that from the SC6152 (IIRC), then its very possible for him to max that out at that power. The turbine wheel can't deliver what the compressor wheel can push out. Remember, its the combination that determines the behavior of that turbo. not just the compressor wheel. With the smaller turbine wheel (housing would make little difference), then yes, 484whp could be a maximum output.

There's the 6266, and there are a bunch of others. Depends upon the power goal though.

*EDIT* I stand corrected. The older SC6152 actually had a modified stage 5 exhaust wheel at the time and not the smaller Stage III that I believe was the smaller 6169.. Please excuse the correction

ESP.net

6266 is a good turbo T3 .80+ A/R ... big boy 64 will have have more lag just all depends on what you want good street turbo etc...

H23V built sc6176e 473hp 373 trq 15 psi... sc61 is a good turbo with right specs. Imagine had more in it...

Going to 6266 on new h build.

TeggieeTuner

i was running .63a/r on my sc61

rico892002

i have the 6266 T3 82ar on my gsr. its a really nice turbo..the only issue i have IMO due to have a 66mm exhaust wheel its alot harder to control boost with running a 44mm gate. I think its a few other people here having problems with that also..I think would have been find if i ran just a regular 6262.

Hyper16-Johnny

If that's the case then something is not right. We had a setup that made 471hp on 91 pump @ 18psi and 540ish on c16 @ 23psi, this is on a sc6152 also with a 0.63 a/r. Of course this setup had a lot more in it but did not have enough pump. Fuel setup was intank 255 to inline 044 and 1600cc injectors with -10 feed and -8 return. Plenty of line and plenty of injector but was at 92% duty.

TeggieeTuner

Everyone says it should have made more. especially with these cams.... i might switch to hondata and see what cmb tuning can do

shawty22

Buddy made 580whp and 440ft with a 6152 with a .63a/r exhaust housing. That was with an Inline Pro Stainless Steel log manifold. 82mm GSR. Gsr Cams. 1600s and a single 255 on e85.

Another guy i know made 630whp and 500ft with a 6152 with .63a/r housing with an H series. Custom Turbo kit. 2150s and a 255 with an inline 255 on e85.

Both of those setups were pretty much to the point where they stopped making effiencent power per lb of boost. The GSR should have made more but the log manifold held it back.

LightningTeg

I dont think you should be maxxing that turbo at < 500whp. Thats like a 60 lb/min + unit no? I made 513 on a 6152E with a LS head and log manifold. Your part combo should be much more efficient.

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

Out of curiosity, what solenoid were you running when these control issues occurred?

TeggieeTuner

I think Mase did a fantastic job, but dyno dynamics are known for reading a bit low....
But Ive also had a handful of people tell me they think its in the tune...

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

^^ It's not the tune...Not when it comes to MA$E. That's just a low reading dyno.. its just a number, that's all. As long as you're able to keep up with it, who cares what "the numbers" are? Its calculated anyway.

Hyper16-Johnny

This makes a lot of sense now... If we would've known this from the get go, lol. If I remember correctly, Dyno Dynamics read approximately 12% lower than Dynojets.

TeggieeTuner

Yeah but still.... there are people with not as much of a setup as i have with the same turbo make 500 on pump...

Charlie Moua

iTrader: (3)

before you buy a new turbo, budget for bigger injectors too.

Good luck

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

fine. Just get the bigger turbo... Then this won't be a concern any longer, or for any further debate.

TeggieeTuner

From Mase:
Anyways, there are several variants of the SC61. You have probably the smaller one, combined with a .63 a/r t3 backhousing. I’m willing to bet the back pressure is through the roof. And with those cams, Im also betting they are hurting you.
Further switching to a larger turbo isn’t going to solve everything. First the manifold design isn’t the best due to the wastegate placement and boost creep you are getting even with a smaller sized turbo. It’s only going to get worse when you slap a bigger turbo on there. That turbo wasn’t completely maxed out, but you were constrained by the ignition system. With that being said, the power increase per psi was dropping, indicated a deficiency within the setup.

Your cams were dialed in, the timing was optimized, there was no more power to be made on the current configuration, especially with the ignition issues. But hey if it makes you feel better I can post dozens of 500-600 whp charts of sc61s, I’ve tuned just as many with great results on high reading dynojets, I can assure you, but that’s not going to solve anything.

rico892002

Mac, my car is running off wastegate spring with the 6266. I'm have a Mac valve hooked up but haven't used it yet. I'm going to try to put a 8psi spring in and see what it does. Then use the Mac valve to adjust boost accordingly

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

Hmm.. contact me in about a month or so.. i'm working on something that may help. I can't stand these MAC solenoids (makes my name look bad enough.. ), because these industrial solenoids were never designed to do what they're doing with the wide range of boost duty cycles that users want from a high exhaust energy, efficient exhaust energy setup at low boost levels.

I can tell you're going to have creep already. 8psi on a larger-midframed turbo? to small a spring..

But.. either way.. keep me updated as to your progress, k?

Balor_Gr

Well thats my thoughts too. Is there a chance thats the .63 a/r 6131E with S cover?



A stage 5 wheel inside .82 housing would work better with the same compressor side.You could save some money.

Nice setup by the way.

TheShodan

iTrader: (14)

More than likely that's the case. I was simply incorrect in my naming designation. As MA$E stated.

Yes, but not as much money as you think. It all depends on what he wants to do and what he's willing to spend.

rico892002

Lol, yea I would be very interested in the valve. But I will let you know how the lower spring works out.

foxgearshift

and i thought i am the only one whos facing issues holding the boost with 6266! good luck keep me updated too i need to solve it too

TeggieeTuner

Talked to a mutual friend between me and mase and he said i should for sure try upgrading my exhaust housing first. Would i have to change the exhaust wheel to put on the .82 exhaust housing v band?
http://www.treadstoneperformance.com...rbine+Housings