From precision

Highly Anticipated All-New 6466 CEA Turbocharger Released

Precision 6466 CEA (PN PTB505-6466 B) Turbocharger Specs:

Compressor Wheel 2.535" (64.39mm) inducer / 3.410" (86.61mm) exducer
Turbine Wheel 2.920" (74.17mm) inducer / 2.600" (66.00mm) exducer


Compressor Cover: Ported S (4.0" inlet/2.5" outlet)
Turbine Housing Options:
T3 .63 or .82 A/R with 4 bolt (2.5") discharge
T3 .63 A/R with 5 bolt discharge (with or without wastegate hole)
T3 .63 or .82 A/R with 3" V-Band discharge
V-Band inlet .82 A/R with V-Band discharge
T4 .58, .68, .81 or .96 A/R with 3 5/8" V-Band discharge
T4 Divided .84, 1.0, 1.15 or 1.32 A/R with 3 5/8" V-Band

Precision Turbo and Engine has released the highly-anticipated 6466 CEA ball-bearing turbocharger which features the latest and most powerful technology available.

A revolutionary unit which uses the most cutting-edge technology available and is rated to support 900 HP, the 6466 CEA (part number PTB505-6466 B) showcases an all-new 64mm Competition Engineered Aerodynamics (CEA) CNC-machined, 2618-forged aluminum compressor wheel and high-flow 66mm CEA turbine wheel for an MSRP of just $1,909.99.

Precision's 6466 CEA turbocharger will be offered with an air-cooled, dual ceramic ball-bearing center housing rotating assembly (CHRA) and utilizes PTE's "Ported S" cover compressor. As noted in the table below, a multitude of turbine housing options are available to best fit a wide variety of applications and provide the ability to customize and fine-tune the turbo's performance.





This is testing done from Sound Performance on Supra motors. Below is from what he posted.


"This was on a 3.4L 10-1 CR 2JZ with cams and all the turbos were all in!"




"Now look at this next dyno on Reid's car, (This is a 100,000 mile completely stock never opened supra motor) the 64 out spooled the 67 and made more HP showing that when inits efficiency range it outperforms the 6766, not until we went all in like on the 3.4 motor did the 67 make more HP"

 

Awesome info!!

 

Really really nice!!

 

That's awesome thanks for the info

 

Does anyone know how the 6266 would perform on a 2 liter gsr?

 

I was thinking about the 6266 for a 2.4L, but have yet to make my mind up on which turbo I want to use.

 

Honestly, a T4 6262 will make the same power as a 6266 on a 2.0L Gsr with a little better spoolup. 700whp is NO problem.

With the 2.4L if your looking to max it out, the 66mm turbine can be a little more beneficial.

IMO, it seems people are discounting the 6262 way too much. It's more than enough turbo for 95% of people out there but it seems like because alot of people are buying it, that now everyone thinks it's not enough for them. It's good enough to make 500whp+ on pump gas and 750whp on race gas/ethanol etc.... ****, even the 5858 will clear 600whp on ethanol and 450whp on pump. You won't have traction on street tires with anything above 500whp anyway and being that you can go 10's in a 500whp car (as long as it's not a tank) I think more people should consider the 5858 and the 6262.

 

On the KMOD RSX we made 726whp & 487wtq w/ a T3 6266 @ 24-26psi.
We had to stop tuning due fuel system limitations.


At 30-36psi I see this combo making over 800whp & we plan to step up to the 6466 after maxing out this 6266.

What is your opinion on a T3(.82a/r) 6466, Will a T3 6466 make over 900-950whp or will we have to step up to a T4?

-Marquis
-KMOD

 

My concerns with my setup is how the power would come on with a smaller turbo. Someone brought it to my attention that I may want to use something a little bigger since I will be using a stock K series transmission for now. I am not looking to break any records on the track or max out my engine.

We thought that the torque would spike up quicker with the smaller turbo and could be too much for the transmission, where as the bigger turbo would be a little more gradual and may be a little easier on the transmission that way. Is there any truth to this and is this point even valid?

I have been suggested the 6266 more than once, but if what I was thinking is true I will be more than happy to go with something bigger with a little more lag in hopes of keeping my tranny together longer.

 

Why in the final dyno plots did you run the other turbos at 36 psi and the 67 at 34 psi? Of course the 67 made less power its down 2 psi of boost? They are making the exact same power at "peak power" when boost was the same. If its dropping boost there is a issue somewhere, perhaps too small of a turbine housing with backpressure kicking the gate open? You need to look into why the turbo didn't run the same boost curve before you can compare them.

They are all good turbos, we just made 700awhp on a dsm here last weekend on the 6262 with more left on the table, like you said they are often overlooked.

 

didnt expect to see your name in a honda forum, we have been hearing alot about you in my area, the dsm is a beast! now how would somebody go about finding out where "mexico" is? a couple guys from my area would like to roll out lol

 

If you are into import drag racing this is the best forum to be on. It may be Honda tech but most of the import racers who are serious about the sport are here sharing information.

 

these are not my dyno plots, they are from sound performance

 

My mistake.