160/100 vs 205/30 Injector Testing

PSD POWER007 said:

So there’s a big difference between the 364.5 with 1.0 versus the 366 with .91 in overall power? I have the BASB (which is basically a 364.5) and absolutely love it. But if spool up is about equal but the 366 gives more mid range and topend power, the 366/.91 would be a no brainer. Especially if EGT’s while towing are a non issue.

Click to expand...

Nothing solid to report on power but It feels stronger mid to top range with a slight decrease in spool. Probably in the 150rpm range. The 366 with ,91 will start to boost about 1600rpm. This I measure by lugging in 4th to about 1400rpm and start applying throttle and seeing where boost starts showing on my mechanical boost gauge.

EGTs are fine. I towed across the country with our 5th wheel and family using 1023 street shredder tune and it was great to have solid power and good EGT control. Could never have done that with the 38r.

bigfords said:

Tmccoy, what made you want to change from the 364.5 to the 366 in the first place?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

The 364.5 had the smaller 68mm turbine and all I heard was how much it would help to go to the 73mm turbine and if that's the case may as well go to the 366 I figured. In that regard, I bet the 364.5 I had would be the faster spooling of the 364.5 offerings. So making the jump to the 366 was probably fairly significant change.

s364.5sxe just got dyno'd today. I'll have to get Charlie to finish up to write up and post the dyno.


Going into 238cc/80s probably this weekend or next, whenever time frees up and its not 110 degrees outside.

Well... we have a lot of data to report. I don't want to post up too much and make it a mess. But I don't want to leave anything out. I will display the info in a couple of different ways.




205/30
s369/73/.91 vs s364.5/73/.91

I know this is the one a lot of guys were excited for. I can tell you the graphs 100% backed up exactly what we noticed on the streets and towing.

For daily driving the s369 was a little lazy down low. It did not lack fuel down low at all and could be smokey at times. But the mid range and top end was a blast. It cleaned up those 205/30s to nothing once you got the turbo spooled.

Towing light the 369 did great and easily kept egts in check, but if you towed heavy and in high elevation the s369 was a NIGHTMARE! We would have to downshift into 2nd gear sometimes just to try and stay on top of the turbo. It would often shift and snuff out the turbo when rpms dropped. One time he even had to drop down into 1st gear just to keep going. Oil temps got really high also, often topping 250 on grades he has never had issues with. We were at UCC when James got the call from Zac after the first time he tried towing heavy in high elevation... I think his exact words were "I want this F**king POS off my truck right now" Zac uses his truck as a tow truck for a living.


The s364.5 spooled much better for the streets. It did not have quite the top end power of the s369 but was much easier to drive around with less smoke.

Towing the s364.5 did awesome. Just as good if not better than the BASB we had on before. Egts were almost never an issue unless lugging the motor in OD. Towed great light/heavy and in all scenarios. Where we would have to downshift into 1st or 2nd with the 369, the 364.5 would pull in 3rd or 4th with lower egts and oil temps. IMO this is the ticket for middle of the road guys who want great power and good towing.




Here is the dyno graph: It backs up exactly what we experienced.

On the top end the 369 did make 15-20hp more

But the s364.5 made 36tq more and made it 260rpms sooner (2280 vs 2440)

But as you move lower in the rpms it becomes even more impressive. The farther down in the rpms the better the s364.5 did. At 1900rpms the s364.5 made about 100hp and 300tq more than the 369.

Keep in mind this testing was done on an ALL OUT race tune. On a tow tune there is not enough fuel for the s369 to make any more power than the s364.5. Those 30% nozzles need a LOT of PW to make decent power. Most tuners won't even write more than a 4.2ms tune... but you can gain upwards of 100hp on a 5.6ms tune. Something to keep in mind.


Personal opinion... anything bigger than an s364.5 on 205/30% or smaller is a waste. You gain about 200-300rpms of lag and lose a ton of towing ability to gain a little top end power and only on an ALL OUT race tune (which most tuners won't even write for you unless you specially request it).

Oh... and we just swapped up to 238/80 with the s364.5... dyno results coming soon


Do you guys think I should keep all the info here? Or make a bunch of different posts? I don't wanna spam the pages but want the info there for guys who want to see it.

Just what I would of suspected. The gains are not worth the trade offs in my opinion.

Thanks for all the work and testing!!!

Swaan said:

Just what I would of suspected. The gains are not worth the trade offs in my opinion.

Thanks for all the work and testing!!!

Click to expand...

You are welcome... I think these 238/80s are going to be a different story... but we shall see.

KCTurbos said:

Oh... and we just swapped up to 238/80 with the s364.5... dyno results coming soon


Do you guys think I should keep all the info here? Or make a bunch of different posts? I don't wanna spam the pages but want the info there for guys who want to see it.

Click to expand...

I would rather see a post just with one injector size. So I done get so confused weeding out comments from all the sizes. I'm really interested in the 238/80 as thats the injectors I'm going and cant decided a KC or t4 turbo setup on my obs .

KCTurbos said:

Oh... and we just swapped up to 238/80 with the s364.5... dyno results coming soon


Do you guys think I should keep all the info here? Or make a bunch of different posts? I don't wanna spam the pages but want the info there for guys who want to see it.

Click to expand...

How do you think a 1.0 housing would do on the 364.5 verses the .91?

Also, I’m sure it’s buried in this thread, but what mods do the engine and trans of the test truck have? Oil system, fuel system, etc? Is the trans modded or built? What gear ratio? What tire size?

I run 180/80’s with my BASB. They are getting tired with almost 250k miles on them. So I’m very interested to see what the 364.5 does with the 238/80’s. That was what I was considering.
Gonna do any testing with the 1.0 on the 364.5? Would make it much more comparable to the BASB.

Nice writeup!
Really curious to see the 80% nozzles, fingers crossed it make the 369 wake up at a decent rpm.

As it sits, the 364 sounds perfect for a high pressure charger in a compound setup, may with a looser cover?

psduser1 said:

Nice writeup!
Really curious to see the 80% nozzles, fingers crossed it make the 369 wake up at a decent rpm.

As it sits, the 364 sounds perfect for a high pressure charger in a compound setup, may with a looser cover?

Click to expand...

I don't see how the bigger nozzles are gonna wake anything up... but we shall see. There is plenty of fuel down low when the s369 is lagging.

Also with the basb - the 160/100 spooled slower than the 205/30. So the bigger nozzles didn't help at all.

Even if the s238/80s do make the s369... they would also make the s364.5 spool faster also



The s364.5 does great as a single... would work well in compounds also IMO. s364.5/480 is a popular setup on lots of other platforms. Should work great on a 7.3 also

Strokersace said:

How do you think a 1.0 housing would do on the 364.5 verses the .91?

Also, I’m sure it’s buried in this thread, but what mods do the engine and trans of the test truck have? Oil system, fuel system, etc? Is the trans modded or built? What gear ratio? What tire size?

Click to expand...

Well, in all other tests we have performed the 1.0 housing will spool slower, lower ebp/psi slightly, and lower egts in the upper rpms.

At this point I don't see any need for it. Truck runs great with the .91 and would not want to add any more lag at this point. No egts issues when towing, unless lugging the motor in OD... which the 1.0 would make worse.


Did you have thoughts on how the 1.0 would improve the setup?

KCTurbos said:

I don't see how the bigger nozzles are gonna wake anything up... but we shall see. There is plenty of fuel down low when the s369 is lagging.

Also with the basb - the 160/100 spooled slower than the 205/30. So the bigger nozzles didn't help at all.

Even if the s238/80s do make the s369... they would also make the s364.5 spool faster also



The s364.5 does great as a single... would work well in compounds also IMO. s364.5/480 is a popular setup on lots of other platforms. Should work great on a 7.3 also

Click to expand...

I would agree that more fuel would speed spoolup with both turbos. My thought was that the 69 would improve mid to top end, maybe enough to make up for the lag on the bottom end? For some guys, anyway.
I'm used to seeing significant boost at 1700+, currently with my 38r, and I have no problems working with that. 2500 rpms and up can use some improvement, of course.
Not having tried it, personally, the 364 may already accomplish that.

psduser1 said:

I would agree that more fuel would speed spoolup with both turbos. My thought was that the 69 would improve mid to top end, maybe enough to make up for the lag on the bottom end? For some guys, anyway.
I'm used to seeing significant boost at 1700+, currently with my 38r, and I have no problems working with that. 2500 rpms and up can use some improvement, of course.
Not having tried it, personally, the 364 may already accomplish that.

Click to expand...

Oh, I think the top end is going to make a huge difference with the s369 and 238/80. I thought you meant it would spool closer to the s364.5


My point is I see people recommend the s369 for everything. Stock injectors, 160/stock, 160/30, 160/100, etc... Total waste IMO if you don't plan on going with bigger injectors.

Not saying at all the s369 is a pointless turbo... just not on such small injectors.

KCTurbos said:

Well, in all other tests we have performed the 1.0 housing will spool slower, lower ebp/psi slightly, and lower egts in the upper rpms.



At this point I don't see any need for it. Truck runs great with the .91 and would not want to add any more lag at this point. No egts issues when towing, unless lugging the motor in OD... which the 1.0 would make worse.





Did you have thoughts on how the 1.0 would improve the setup?

Click to expand...

No specific thoughts other than improved egts further in the upper rpm range (not lugging of course).

I guess it goes back o the last part of my post on how the truck is setup: engine mods, trans mods, driveline and tires. Where the .91 is ideal on a vehicle setup like the subject vehicle is, the 1.0 may perform the same or better on a truck with different gears and tire sizes.

I personally don’t see the point of a 1.0 housing on a street truck/tow rig/daily driver. Sure they do well in the upper rpm range, but we spend so little time there that I would much rather trade slightly higher ebp and egt occasionally at high(er) rpm than deal with additional lag, and heat, down low regularly.

Zeb said:

I personally don’t see the point of a 1.0 housing on a street truck/tow rig/daily driver. Sure they do well in the upper rpm range, but we spend so little time there that I would much rather trade slightly higher ebp and egt occasionally at high(er) rpm than deal with additional lag, and heat, down low regularly.

Click to expand...

Exactly... so by adding a 1.0 housing you will drop ebp/boost/egts in the upper rpms and gain lag.

So to me, spooling better will trump dropping 50 degrees egts on the top end. But that is me.

Racing egts don't matter to me at all. 2000 degrees for 10 seconds won't ever hurt anything. It is just not enough time. People worry way too much about those numbers.

So towing egts are all that really matter. Holding 1350 for 5 min going up a long grade. And most guys don't have issues towing heavy in the upper rpms and having egt issues. The issue is typically egts while low in the rpms... which the larger a/r housing is going to make worse.


Now racing, spraying nitrous, worrying about blowing up your bottom end. Larger a/r housing makes sense. But for an average 500hp daily driver that tows... not so much.

Zeb said:

I personally don’t see the point of a 1.0 housing on a street truck/tow rig/daily driver. Sure they do well in the upper rpm range, but we spend so little time there that I would much trade slightly higher ebp and egt occasionally than deal with additional lag regularly.

Click to expand...

I’d disagree based on my personal experience years ago. Now mind you this was a mostly stock truck. Had an exhaust, intake, gauges and reputable tuner but had stock fuel, stock oil, 4.10 gears, 31.5” tall stock tires, and Auto trans.

At the time I lived in central Montana and nearly always had a loaded trailer behind me. Minimum weight being pulled was 7k but usually up to 15k. The STOCK turbo with .84 housing “choked” the truck out when you got north of 2200 rpm. I would normally run down the highway at 2500 to 2800. It was all I could do to get it up to where I needed to and typically when I did it surged horribly! My only change was installing a van turbo (1.15 exhaust housing). The way I drove it at slower speeds in the lower rpm range, I noticed NO change to spool up and no lag. What I did notice was “my” upper rpm range was drastically different. Truck didn’t level or or choke out anymore. I could get to, be in, and maintain with lower egt’s without surge. I could get to and drive comfortably in that 2500 to 2800 rpm range where I couldn’t before.

Again, my only personal experience with changing exhaust housings on essentially the same turbo. But for my truck, my style of driving, and my location at the time, the larger housing was a benefit in every way. I know that other people did not have the same experience that I had.

With my newly acquired 7.3 that is basically setup exactly how the truck I described above was suspension wise, I have no plans to run bigger tires or do a gear swap to 3.73. I will be pulling similar weights and the same speeds I was before. My elevation now will be a few thousand feet closer to sea level than before though! If I decide to swap out the 38r that’s on it now, I’d like to go to a 364.5/73. The exhaust housing is what I haven’t decided on. Most testing and most people in general are running different gears and larger tires than I will. And I know first hand that the exact same engine trans setup performs differently when gears and tires are different.

Take the 6.4s I had for example: my 08 with stock tires and 4.10 and my dad’s 10 with 3.55 and 35’s. I built both engines and they were identical. Mine ran 20 mph slower at the same rpm as compared to my Dad’s. His was sluggish at lower rpm where mine was responsive. Mine was a towing machine at 65 to 70 mph, his was a dog at that speed due to lower rpm. His had much longer legs on the top end than mine did and running empty his got better fuel economy and was much nicer to drive at interstate speeds.

I know it’s all relative and if I decide to swap turbos, changing the exhaust housing isn’t terrible hard with the t4. Just hard to figure how something may work for me when many of the 1st hand experiences don’t run a setup like I do. My big tire days are over! Lol

KCTurbos said:

Exactly... so by adding a 1.0 housing you will drop ebp/boost/egts in the upper rpms and gain lag.

So to me, spooling better will trump dropping 50 degrees egts on the top end. But that is me.

Racing egts don't matter to me at all. 2000 degrees for 10 seconds won't ever hurt anything. It is just not enough time. People worry way too much about those numbers.

So towing egts are all that really matter. Holding 1350 for 5 min going up a long grade. And most guys don't have issues towing heavy in the upper rpms and having egt issues. The issue is typically egts while low in the rpms... which the larger a/r housing is going to make worse.


Now racing, spraying nitrous, worrying about blowing up your bottom end. Larger a/r housing makes sense. But for an average 500hp daily driver that tows... not so much.

Click to expand...

I wish there was a like button because this is my thoughts exaclly!

I get a kick out of the " bigger nozzles should really wake that turbo up"! . When currently it's got enough fuel down low to fog out a compleat town. Lmao!!

Strokersace said:

I’d disagree based on my personal experience years ago. Now mind you this was a mostly stock truck. Had an exhaust, intake, gauges and reputable tuner but had stock fuel, stock oil, 4.10 gears, 31.5” tall stock tires, and Auto trans.

At the time I lived in central Montana and nearly always had a loaded trailer behind me. Minimum weight being pulled was 7k but usually up to 15k. The STOCK turbo with .84 housing “choked” the truck out when you got north of 2200 rpm. I would normally run down the highway at 2500 to 2800. It was all I could do to get it up to where I needed to and typically when I did it surged horribly! My only change was installing a van turbo (1.15 exhaust housing). The way I drove it at slower speeds in the lower rpm range, I noticed NO change to spool up and no lag. What I did notice was “my” upper rpm range was drastically different. Truck didn’t level or or choke out anymore. I could get to, be in, and maintain with lower egt’s without surge. I could get to and drive comfortably in that 2500 to 2800 rpm range where I couldn’t before.

Again, my only personal experience with changing exhaust housings on essentially the same turbo. But for my truck, my style of driving, and my location at the time, the larger housing was a benefit in every way. I know that other people did not have the same experience that I had.

With my newly acquired 7.3 that is basically setup exactly how the truck I described above was suspension wise, I have no plans to run bigger tires or do a gear swap to 3.73. I will be pulling similar weights and the same speeds I was before. My elevation now will be a few thousand feet closer to sea level than before though! If I decide to swap out the 38r that’s on it now, I’d like to go to a 364.5/73. The exhaust housing is what I haven’t decided on. Most testing and most people in general are running different gears and larger tires than I will. And I know first hand that the exact same engine trans setup performs differently when gears and tires are different.

Take the 6.4s I had for example: my 08 with stock tires and 4.10 and my dad’s 10 with 3.55 and 35’s. I built both engines and they were identical. Mine ran 20 mph slower at the same rpm as compared to my Dad’s. His was sluggish at lower rpm where mine was responsive. Mine was a towing machine at 65 to 70 mph, his was a dog at that speed due to lower rpm. His had much longer legs on the top end than mine did and running empty his got better fuel economy and was much nicer to drive at interstate speeds.

I know it’s all relative and if I decide to swap turbos, changing the exhaust housing isn’t terrible hard with the t4. Just hard to figure how something may work for me when many of the 1st hand experiences don’t run a setup like I do. My big tire days are over! Lol

Click to expand...

Just push that little button on the end of the shift lever. She will cool down... or tow at 80mph... and dont pussy foot it.. that ole girl loves being drove hard.


And that is in the hot tune..... keep rpm up. She loves it..

I have set the cruise at 90 with my old 5er on the back of her. Hot tune. 1100°... giver!

live life full throttle