<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by NextelBuddy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

see this is the same BS i see people use as th reason to get a sc61 over a t3 60-1. that and that tired out saying "its a 15 yeard old design and its not as efficient as a precision" i see people making more power with t3 60-1 turbos then otehrs with the same setup using sc61 turbos. before i got the sc61 i was really considering getting a garrett turbo from cheap turbos.com adn then i got swayed by everyone saying that precision turbos are sooo much mroe efficient, well after seeing just how efficient they are against the predecessor the t3 60-1 i am not satisfied one bit. it is a joke that keeps going. the only other turbo i would consider otehr than the t3 60-1 wold have to be full races t3/t67 but at 925 bux i think i would go with e t3 60-1.</TD></TR></TABLE>

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by NextelBuddy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

um i dont base these things on my car. i have 2 other people making more power than me on sc61 but at the same time we have other guys running t3 60-1 on teh same setup making more power. i am not talking about spool time im talking about flat out power. there are a group of is and 3 of us have sc61's and 2 others have t3 60-1 we all have bsically the same setups besides pistons brands we all have same compression and all were tuned by the same guy and out of all of your cars the t3 60-1 put down more power at a lower psi level than our sc61's did. this is not just my car. my car had the lowest outpout.

so **** off chip. i stated my opinion about the sc61 based on personal as well as others peoples experiences. </TD></TR></TABLE>

everybody jumps on the H-T bandwagon. the SC61, from what i hear is good, but, 80% of the people biggin' it up have never even owned one. i've seen t3's w/.63 a/r make 340whp on a bone stock b16, yet everybody says its too small. the funny thing is that i saw the t3 compared to a t3/to4b at the same psi on the same motor make lees peak whp & wtq, and, at certain areas of the powerband (the t3) make 35whp more over a 1000rpm spread. like NT said, the sc61 is not god, and, the most important factor that should taken into consideration when purchasing a turbo, is, turbo sizing in relation to motor size, powerband and overall hp goal. not what everbody on HT says is the best, because a good amount of advise given on here is BS.

 

Well most people who pick up an sc61, or any large turbo for that matter don't really care about turbo lag. I think that it is over rated, because seriously, would you want your front wheel drive car to make 300whp at 3krpm's? You would never be able to get any traction.
So even if a small t3 turbo makes more power throughout the rpm range, it's kinda stupid to give up all that top end power. Most of our engines have 7-9k rpm redlines, why not make as much power up top as possible?
BTW, sorry for getting off topuc.

And Nextelbuddy,
Since you think that the t3 60-1's are better, dyno your car again with the sc61, and then throw on the t3 60-1 and let us know what the results are.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by m R g S r &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Well most people who pick up an sc61, or any large turbo for that matter don't really care about turbo lag. I think that it is over rated, because seriously, would you want your front wheel drive car to make 300whp at 3krpm's? You would never be able to get any traction. </TD></TR></TABLE>

True, I don't mind the lag at all, it's much better than being in boost all the time at such low rpm.

 

hey nextel buddy...
just to give you an idea of how shitty the 60-1 wheel is here...
this map is based on 1845cc ....
thing is a watse...
it may flow more air, but damn the thing is a piece.



then here is a GT40 wheel based on 1845cc...
now we understand that boost is not linear...
this map was mapped quickly...


and others like the gt35...
so here
maybe this will help you with your compressor choice...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by boosted_dc2 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

maybe there (guys with 60-1's) setups are installed beter. you cant compare like that, there are too many variables. the only way to ompare would be to dyno your car with the sc61, then put the 60-1 and dyno that.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

Landon

 

ever thought something could be wrong with the turbo? boost leak? exhaust leak?

 

Something is wrong in you setup some where. The sc61 is a good turbo.

 

Something is wrong in your setup some where. The sc61 is a good turbo.

 

Anyone wanna explain those air flow charts of the turbo's to me? When ever I see those I get confused as hell and just say **** it. I have no idea what it means. Thanks

 

where did u get that 60-1 chart? i remeber a thread a while back stating that they are all false charts...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 95GSRTT &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Anyone wanna explain those air flow charts of the turbo's to me? When ever I see those I get confused as hell and just say **** it. I have no idea what it means. Thanks</TD></TR></TABLE>
well basicly you apply a few different formulas to get one rpm plot... then you plot it on the map...
now with a map based on a turbine plot you will get your actual plot per RPM...
but the plots on page one are to give you an idea on which compressor configuration would be best with a 1845cc 4cyl.

basicly the pplots represent RPM....
the lines on the map represent which effeciency zone you are in... the middle most zone is the sweet spot... thats where you want to be... if your not there then as close to the sweet spot or peak effeciency zone as you can get will also work.
and at 22.5psi the damn 60-1 wheel is just a piece of ****...
see how high the plots are???
the 60-1 is a nice low boost compressor...
at about 15psi that thing is in its peak zone...
also the 56trim gt40 wheel the SC61 uses looks really good with 1845cc in mind...
sorry nextel buddy but something is wrong with yoursetup...
there are so many other sc61 setups that make more power than 414wheel or whatever...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by flip1199 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">where did u get that 60-1 chart? i remeber a thread a while back stating that they are all false charts...</TD></TR></TABLE>
what!? lol hmmm wierd...
do you realize how much it costs to prodce a map using a hot gas station?
the machine doesnt lie.

 

this is what i was reffering to..

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=524495

 

thanks for explaining that too much, makes alot more sense now lol

 

Does that last one in that thread, the one made by tony1, seem to be correct?

 

yea i think it is.. but is that the same one used in this thread??

 

NextelBuddy, you got something wrong w/ your set up. I told you this the first day I saw your dyno.. I hope you fix the problem at the same time you get the 60-1.

but as for comparison, rather then comparing your car to your buddy's car, how about we compare apples to apples; ask hybrid901 how much better the SC61 is then the 60-1? He had a perfectly tuned motor making 377whp on the 60-1, swapped over to the SC61, and w/ the same tune, at the same boost, the SC61 made so much more power that the 2nd night he went out racing on it he went too lean and blew the motor. Then proceeded to make 530whp @ 24psi w/ the rebuilt motor. The 60-1 is nice, but I don't think you are doin the right thing.

 

Looks like most of the people on here think you are making false assumptions NextelBuddy, so you might want to think twice before changing turbos.

You are, of course, welcome to spend the money on the new turbo and find out the hard way if you really want to.

 

I went from a 60-1 to an SC61 and all I have to say is :wow: WAY faster spool-up, huge powerband up top. Then when my SC61 took a ****, I went back to my 60-1. What a dissappointment Hows that for apples/apples. Same engine configuration, etc. BIG differences in powerbands/performance.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by NextelBuddy &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">needless to say i am selling this POS sc61 and getting a T3 60-1 from CHEAPTURBOS.COM. the turbo is cheaprer than a sc61, BIGGER than a sc61, puts out more power than a sc61 and well just better. everyone use to run t3 60-1 and then the sc61/gt30 bandwagon started and people forgot how good those turbos actually are.</TD></TR></TABLE>

First off, the sc61 is a gt35 not a gt30. And second, the SC61 is larger then the 60-1. It has a much better wheel which will spool up much faster.

Garrett GT techology owns you!

Your just wrong.

liam

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by flip1199 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">this is what i was reffering to..

https://honda-tech.com/zerothread?id=524495</TD></TR></TABLE>
thats an interesting thread... funny how an ITS rep said the map was wrong...
hmmm well after reviewing both maps side by side... they are damn near on the money with eachother...
the ITS map and the "real" 60-1 map ...
so i would venture to say that the map i posted is accurate...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DIRep972 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">ask hybrid901 how much better the SC61 is then the 60-1?.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I think (might have been someone else) the same goes for Blown90hatcH. He made 475whp with a T4/60-1 and went to the T4 SC61S if I remember correctly.

 

lol!

the 60-1 wheel just wishes it was 15 years old... try more like 25. drawn up in the late 70's, just like a lot of the old school T series shiat.

that thing is a hunk of shiza... 2.8 p/r? on an import? who are we kidding, you need PRESSURE to make power on these cars, not volume. At my altitude, with my 8:1 motor to run well past 20 psi would be way off the chart of that 60-1.

sc61

 

is the Sc61 very efficient around 10 psi? Reason I ask is while I get my motor built I should be around 10 psi, maybe 11 for quite awhile. Then going to 15-16ish. Will the sc61 make more power than say an sc34 or sc50 at such a low PSI? Thanks again

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 95GSRTT &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">is the Sc61 very efficient around 10 psi? Reason I ask is while I get my motor built I should be around 10 psi, maybe 11 for quite awhile. Then going to 15-16ish. Will the sc61 make more power than say an sc34 or sc50 at such a low PSI? Thanks again</TD></TR></TABLE>

I have yet to see the numbers surpassed or even duplicated at such a low PSI, but I remember Tony1 posting up a chart of a GSR he tuned with the sc61 that made 379whp @9 psi. I seriously doubt you will ever see the sc34 or sc50 making numbers like that below 12psi.