Another T4 thread

cjfarm111 · Feb 27, 2017

Don't know about the inspection part but personally I wouldn't go any bigger the a 64.5. I think a 363 would be better suited especially while towing

rhorsers · Feb 27, 2017

cjfarm111 said:
Don't know about the inspection part but personally I wouldn't go any bigger the a 64.5. I think a 363 would be better suited especially while towing

So why do you guys think I am being told the 366 is the way to go?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

mikeeg02 · Feb 27, 2017

Again. Personally my 238/100s seem to match up perfectly with a 366sxe and a 1.0 housing. Any smaller injectors and I feel like a 364.5 seems to match up perfectly.

rhorsers · Feb 27, 2017

mikeeg02 said:
Again. Personally my 238/100s seem to match up perfectly with a 366sxe and a 1.0 housing. Any smaller injectors and I feel like a 364.5 seems to match up perfectly.

I don't know much about how all this works with the injectors/nozzles paired with the turbo size and housings. In my case they are saying .91, my question is why would the vendor tell me a 366 if it wasn't going to be the best option. I know it's different for different applications too. I am not looking for huge horsepower but a fun truck with great reliable towing capabilities. Is it possible the 366 would put less stress on my PMR engine?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

mikeeg02 · Feb 27, 2017

I wouldnt pick a turbo any larger than necessary to complete your tasks. Many people following this thread with 200/80s, 175/80s etc really are happy with the 364.5, and even with a .91 housing. It's your choice, but If those.guys are happy with the performance of the 364.5 with those injectors, I don't see what there is to gain by going larger, aside from a small loss of spool up. And as I've posted here how well the 366 spools up, I wouldn't go that large if I was going to be under it more than in it while towing.

rhorsers · Feb 27, 2017

I definitely agree not to go larger than necessary for the task. It just doesn't make since for someone to sale/recommend something when the 364.5 is available. Do you think the 364.5 is maybe not as available as the 366?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

mikeeg02 · Feb 27, 2017

I haven't looked lately. They may stock more 366s. When I bought mine, the 366s were back ordered. Haven't kept up with the series since.

rhorsers · Feb 27, 2017

The 366 was recommended for my current 160/20 splits by 2 different groups. One was a tuner and the other a vendor. Does gear ratio have anything to do with the equation at all?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

mikeeg02 · Feb 27, 2017

I think I saw you had 4.10s? With 4.10s you may be in the power a little more often. But there are others running 4.10s (swaan I think) and even in a. 6 speed config that are plenty happy with the 364.5 with similar sized injectors. You may be fine. But with my setup which is 3.73s and a. 6 speed I wouldn't change a thing. But I have a little more fuel available.

rhorsers · Feb 27, 2017

No I have 3.73s and automatic

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

The Brad · Feb 27, 2017

When I called Barders Turbo, he recommended the 363/68 for my set up and usage. I went with a 364/74 because the price was right and couldn't be happier. Spools fast and drive pressure is less than 1:1 up to my EPB sensor limit and I'm between 40-45lbs boost. I have a 35psi boost gauge and the needle goes past and points straight down.

mikeeg02 · Feb 27, 2017

Knowing what I know watching boost vs backpressure on my truck. I'd never want to run something smaller than a 1.0 housing, and definitely not on an auto. Though having said that, the brad really likes how his truck runs on 3.73s, bigger tires, auto and a .9 housing. Just my .02

rhorsers · Feb 27, 2017

The .91 is supposed to make it spool faster right?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

The Brad · Feb 27, 2017

rhorsers said:
The .91 is supposed to make it spool faster right?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

The A/R on the turbine housing determines how tangentially the exhaust gasses hit the turbine. Another thing to consider is the 364, and I think the 363 both flow more air than the 38r, so you won't be any worse off on the top end, but will spool better in the bottom.

superpsd · Feb 27, 2017

Yes the. 91 is a tighter housing. A tighter housing typically has faster responses at the trade off of higher backpressure at higher rpms.

rhorsers · Feb 27, 2017

I am looking for low RPM power not high RPM power. Does that make any difference for using the 366?

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

The Brad · Feb 27, 2017

All the more reason to go smaller. That was my goal as well. I didn't want to have to be over 2300rpm to keep EGTs in check. But beware, making too much torque at low rpm won't be good on your PMRs.

rhorsers · Feb 27, 2017

Damn. I don't get why they would tell me the 366. I tend to trust the people selling the products

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk

The Brad · Feb 27, 2017

Any of them will work better than the 38r and you'll be happy. The only accurate input would be from someone who's ran both the 364&366 back to back. Maybe I'll get Mikeeg02 to drive out and swap turbos with me to compare!?