Every god damn day.
KC Turbos 6.4 turbo testing
- Thread starter KCTurbos
- Start date
Every god damn day.
Nope Nope Nope. Modified single pump go for it. Although I was running 60%'s with a stock pump in my red truck and as far as I know they are still in there.
Last edited:
sootie
Well-known member
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2012
- Messages
- 11,849
- Reaction score
- 36
*tongue in cheek...
The people driving 6.4's likely HAVE to drive them. If I could have went 6.7 I would have.
6.4's are like nothing else especially with some mods. It's like being with the crazy hot chick.. when it's good its great. But you WILL have problems. :toast:
6.4's are like nothing else especially with some mods. It's like being with the crazy hot chick.. when it's good its great. But you WILL have problems. :toast:
Wrong.
6.4 Stroker
Member
Meanwhile my 6.4 with a $3,000 7-year-old, stock rebuild, is living fine at 1,000+HP
cool to see more options coming
cool to see more options coming
Connor M
Youtube Certified Master Technician
Liked my truck so much I bought 2 more. Granted they both were cheap and I had to fix them.
makaveli200369
Member
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2014
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 0
Same here I bought two 6.4's and love them. Been raping all kinds of cars racing. 170k on the clock and hasn't blown up yet. Just slips a little on the 3-5 shift. The other truck is still under construction.
Roccafellas
Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2017
- Messages
- 357
- Reaction score
- 0
Roccafellas
Member
- Joined
- May 7, 2017
- Messages
- 357
- Reaction score
- 0
Definitely interested, over the “other guys” options with chit customer service.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
powerlifter405
Active member
I have a KC in my 05, and Charlie is the shiznit when it comes to customer service. I had a few hiccups and even on a sunday night, he answered his phone and had a replacement in the mail the next day, arrived 2 days later.
I've wanted to go back to a 6fo simply for the ridiculously capable power. And my wife is cute and relatively sane so I need some crazy somewhere in my life LOL
The truck is turning into a drive around town, tow. Its cheaper and easier to work on that a vett, the insurance is lower plus I can drive around town when we get a couple feet of snow. I understand the conundrum of the 6.4. I can afford anything I want but I refuse to fund dealerships, especially the Lions kneeling, anti-gun ford.
Erikclaw
Active member
What happened to this "new turbo's? .....Loved how he talks **** on Shane then dissapears. I'll stay with big compounds for $200. 91/66 should do fine. My 6.7 likes compounds too....
You should ask Shane... he knows how it is going. We message a few times a week.
But seriously, it has been slow. We ran into some wiring issues on the 6.4 and it was down for months. But finally back up and going. I will post a few updates.
Last edited:
Well it has been a little while since we have posted anything on our 6.4 testing here at KC Turbos. Better late than never? Right?
.
Chris Buhidar from Truck Source Diesel & Off-Road spent some time live tuning our truck on the EZ Lynk and it runs amazing! Coming from H&S the shifting and overall drive ability is amazing. The high idle option is also really cool... especially here in AZ when I sit idling and want to blast the A/C. The h&s did make a little more tq but runs a lot more timing and won't downshift on the dyno (which sucks on the street).
.
We are starting off with a drop in 73mm LP unit with stock turbine and cover. Stock HP turbo. Very impressive what adding just a 73mm wheel on the LP can do. No noticeable difference in spool up at all on the streets. Just more power up top.
.
Stock inj and HPFP (2200us and just barely starting to drop rail pressure down to about 22.5kpsi)
.
stock LP and HP (h&s) Yellow graph
590hp 1296tq
2500rpms 41psi boost and 47psi ebp
3500rpms 33psi boost and 65psi ebp
.
73mm LP and stock HP (TSD EZ Lynk) Blue Graph
628hp 1268tq
2500rpms 40psi boost and 48psi ebp
3500rpms 44psi boost and 73psi ebp
.
So the 73mm LP added a lot of power from about 2500hp and up. At 2500rpms the stock turbos start running out of air and drop boost all the way to redline.
.
Peak HP gains was 38hp
But at 3500rpm redline in gained 100hp
.
So what is the green graph? Well this is how we like to test spool up. The Blue graph would be more of a representation of a boosted launch at the track with a lot of load. The Green graph is just rolling into the throttle at 2000rpms with very little load.
.
Now that we are not switching tuning platforms, there willl be much better before/after graphs and will be able to start stacking them for data sake.
.
Chris Buhidar from Truck Source Diesel & Off-Road spent some time live tuning our truck on the EZ Lynk and it runs amazing! Coming from H&S the shifting and overall drive ability is amazing. The high idle option is also really cool... especially here in AZ when I sit idling and want to blast the A/C. The h&s did make a little more tq but runs a lot more timing and won't downshift on the dyno (which sucks on the street).
.
We are starting off with a drop in 73mm LP unit with stock turbine and cover. Stock HP turbo. Very impressive what adding just a 73mm wheel on the LP can do. No noticeable difference in spool up at all on the streets. Just more power up top.
.
Stock inj and HPFP (2200us and just barely starting to drop rail pressure down to about 22.5kpsi)
.
stock LP and HP (h&s) Yellow graph
590hp 1296tq
2500rpms 41psi boost and 47psi ebp
3500rpms 33psi boost and 65psi ebp
.
73mm LP and stock HP (TSD EZ Lynk) Blue Graph
628hp 1268tq
2500rpms 40psi boost and 48psi ebp
3500rpms 44psi boost and 73psi ebp
.
So the 73mm LP added a lot of power from about 2500hp and up. At 2500rpms the stock turbos start running out of air and drop boost all the way to redline.
.
Peak HP gains was 38hp
But at 3500rpm redline in gained 100hp
.
So what is the green graph? Well this is how we like to test spool up. The Blue graph would be more of a representation of a boosted launch at the track with a lot of load. The Green graph is just rolling into the throttle at 2000rpms with very little load.
.
Now that we are not switching tuning platforms, there willl be much better before/after graphs and will be able to start stacking them for data sake.
Vgt compounds vs t4 non-vgt single turbo with REAL data. S364.5/73/91 vs 73mm LP with stock HP. More turbo data! YES!!! My favorite.
.
We had the guys down from One Stop Truck Shop LLC today. They brought a 6.4 with s364.5, s2 cam, fass fuel system, and EZ Lynk tuning. We will be comparing it to our shop truck with basically the exact same setup... except turbos. I will break down the pluses and minuses of each setup. Just spouting off peak numbers really does not do a good job of describing the 2 setups.
.
1st graph is a loaded dyno run. This would simulate a boost launch or hard run at the track.
.
s364.5
633hp
1224tq
.
73mm LP with stock HP
621hp
1253tq
.
.
But lets break it down a little more. The s364.5 made 8hp more starting at about 2800rpms and carried to redline where it was making about 11hp more.
.
The stock compounds brought peak tq on about 300-400rpms sooner. The s364.5 was completely useless under 2000rpms. It would just smoke and downshift so we had to start it much later in the rpms. So it is hard to describe how much more power it makes under 2000rpms. That is why I love doing "non-loaded 2000rpms pulls".
.
Lets take a look at the 2nd graph. This is a good way to test spool up difference between 2 turbos and represent max hp under less load like blowing through 1st and 2nd gear without the tq converter locked in higher gears. Or rolling into the throttle at lower rpms in OD. You can see the compounds come right to life with ease... where the s364.5 really struggles. The compounds come to life about 500-600rpms quicker.
.
At 2500rpms the compounds make almost 600 ft/lbs of tq more... if you could get the s364.5 to not downshift at 1500rpms that gap would be even greater. The compounds make more peak HP, but even under light load the s364.5 makes a little more top end power starting at 3200rpms.
.
Now the boost/ebp numbers that I know everyone is wondering about.
At 2000rpms
s364.5 7psi boost and 9psi ebp
compounds 31psi boost and 45psi ebp
.
At 2500rpms
s364.5 34psi boost and 38ebp
compounds 40psi boost and 48ebp
.
At 3000rpms
s364.5 39psi boost and 52ebp
compounds 42psi boost and 66ebp
.
at 3500rpms
s364.5 34psi boost and 60 ebp
Compounds 44psi boost and 73 ebp
.
.
So the s364.5 obviously spooled much slower, WAY SLOWER. Those who say they spool just like stock are CRAZY... but the s364.5 was able to make more top power with less boost and less ebp. So it is "more efficient" and "safer" for top end power.
.
If you like lugging the motor and cruising around 1500-2500rpms then it is no contest and will enjoy upwards of 600 more ft/lbs of tq. 73/stock Compounds are for you. But with a higher stall converter and some tuning to keep the rpms up and easier to downshift... then the s364.5 is gonna make more top end power efficiently... 8-10hp.
Neither truck has a working EGT gauge... wish I had the data to compare. Sorry.
.
NOTE: The weird dip on the loaded s364.5 graph seems to be a common issue we see with some peoples EZ Lynk tuning. It happened on every run but did not affect any of the peak numbers or data we posted. It was after peak tq and before peak hp. We were not working on the tunes for that truck... just wanted dyno numbers.
.
We had the guys down from One Stop Truck Shop LLC today. They brought a 6.4 with s364.5, s2 cam, fass fuel system, and EZ Lynk tuning. We will be comparing it to our shop truck with basically the exact same setup... except turbos. I will break down the pluses and minuses of each setup. Just spouting off peak numbers really does not do a good job of describing the 2 setups.
.
1st graph is a loaded dyno run. This would simulate a boost launch or hard run at the track.
.
s364.5
633hp
1224tq
.
73mm LP with stock HP
621hp
1253tq
.
.
But lets break it down a little more. The s364.5 made 8hp more starting at about 2800rpms and carried to redline where it was making about 11hp more.
.
The stock compounds brought peak tq on about 300-400rpms sooner. The s364.5 was completely useless under 2000rpms. It would just smoke and downshift so we had to start it much later in the rpms. So it is hard to describe how much more power it makes under 2000rpms. That is why I love doing "non-loaded 2000rpms pulls".
.
Lets take a look at the 2nd graph. This is a good way to test spool up difference between 2 turbos and represent max hp under less load like blowing through 1st and 2nd gear without the tq converter locked in higher gears. Or rolling into the throttle at lower rpms in OD. You can see the compounds come right to life with ease... where the s364.5 really struggles. The compounds come to life about 500-600rpms quicker.
.
At 2500rpms the compounds make almost 600 ft/lbs of tq more... if you could get the s364.5 to not downshift at 1500rpms that gap would be even greater. The compounds make more peak HP, but even under light load the s364.5 makes a little more top end power starting at 3200rpms.
.
Now the boost/ebp numbers that I know everyone is wondering about.
At 2000rpms
s364.5 7psi boost and 9psi ebp
compounds 31psi boost and 45psi ebp
.
At 2500rpms
s364.5 34psi boost and 38ebp
compounds 40psi boost and 48ebp
.
At 3000rpms
s364.5 39psi boost and 52ebp
compounds 42psi boost and 66ebp
.
at 3500rpms
s364.5 34psi boost and 60 ebp
Compounds 44psi boost and 73 ebp
.
.
So the s364.5 obviously spooled much slower, WAY SLOWER. Those who say they spool just like stock are CRAZY... but the s364.5 was able to make more top power with less boost and less ebp. So it is "more efficient" and "safer" for top end power.
.
If you like lugging the motor and cruising around 1500-2500rpms then it is no contest and will enjoy upwards of 600 more ft/lbs of tq. 73/stock Compounds are for you. But with a higher stall converter and some tuning to keep the rpms up and easier to downshift... then the s364.5 is gonna make more top end power efficiently... 8-10hp.
Neither truck has a working EGT gauge... wish I had the data to compare. Sorry.
.
NOTE: The weird dip on the loaded s364.5 graph seems to be a common issue we see with some peoples EZ Lynk tuning. It happened on every run but did not affect any of the peak numbers or data we posted. It was after peak tq and before peak hp. We were not working on the tunes for that truck... just wanted dyno numbers.
Alright, now we are at the fun part. Taking something that already works great and seeing what we can do to improve upon it.
.
.
Last setup we ran was simply a 73mm comp wheel, rest of the turbo was stock. It was a standard flank mill style compressor wheel that most people use. For this test we dropped down to a 71mm point mill wheel and used a 4” ported cover with anti-surge ring. Stock turbine wheel. Stock HP turbo Pics are attached of this work of art.
.
.
Not huge gains, but we were extremely impressed with the results considering it is a smaller wheel. During the loaded dyno test we gained a peak of 17hp 53tq. It held those power gains throughout the whole power band.
.
.
The smaller 71mm also came on quicker and at 2000rpms it made 75hp and 150tq more.
.
.
During the non-loaded 2000rpms test there was virtually no difference at all.
.
.
Last setup we ran was simply a 73mm comp wheel, rest of the turbo was stock. It was a standard flank mill style compressor wheel that most people use. For this test we dropped down to a 71mm point mill wheel and used a 4” ported cover with anti-surge ring. Stock turbine wheel. Stock HP turbo Pics are attached of this work of art.
.
.
Not huge gains, but we were extremely impressed with the results considering it is a smaller wheel. During the loaded dyno test we gained a peak of 17hp 53tq. It held those power gains throughout the whole power band.
.
.
The smaller 71mm also came on quicker and at 2000rpms it made 75hp and 150tq more.
.
.
During the non-loaded 2000rpms test there was virtually no difference at all.
We are running out of fuel… and have not even touched the HP turbo yet. We tried a couple different 71mm compressor wheels, then jumped up to a 75mm compressor wheel. Made some descent gains, but I think we are starting to get diminishing returns, I think we need more fuel? We are running new injectors, new fuel system, new fuel rails, all new sensors, ad4g, new hpfp, 2200us and not holding 24k… usually 21.5-23k. I just don’t think they make the pumps like they used to.
.
.
What do you guys think? Throw on dual pumps and keep the same tune so we are only running fueling that a stock truck typically sees? Or see if we can squeeze any more out of this fuel system knowing we are dropping rail pressure? Or would that be an “unrealistic” test for stock injectors? 1st picture is showing how much fuel we have left over, that was WOT at Peak hp during the dyno run.
.
.
1st graph is the loaded dyno run. No noticeable lag at all from the 75 vs 71mm. Carried basically the same power band, but 22hp and 33tq more
.
75mm
662hp and 1329tq
.
50psi boost and maxing out the EBP sensor at 73psi… we are working on getting a higher reading EBP sensor to keep the data going.
.
.
2nd graph is the “non-loaded” 2000rpm roll. You can see a little bit of lag this time, not enough to really matter, but it is there. On the streets and driving there is no noticeable difference in lag.
.
.
3rd graph is just for reference, another 6.4 we had on the dyno recently with an s364.5. The 75mm drop in low pressure spools WAY faster, making 700ft/lbs more than the s364.5 at 2100rpms and makes 29hp more all throughout the rpm band to redline. Now the compounds are making 10-15psi more of boost/ebp all across rpm band. That is going to add a lot of heat/pressure in the motor. I would like to get an s369 to see how it compares in power to the drop in 75mm atmo.
.
.
What do you guys think? Throw on dual pumps and keep the same tune so we are only running fueling that a stock truck typically sees? Or see if we can squeeze any more out of this fuel system knowing we are dropping rail pressure? Or would that be an “unrealistic” test for stock injectors? 1st picture is showing how much fuel we have left over, that was WOT at Peak hp during the dyno run.
.
.
1st graph is the loaded dyno run. No noticeable lag at all from the 75 vs 71mm. Carried basically the same power band, but 22hp and 33tq more
.
75mm
662hp and 1329tq
.
50psi boost and maxing out the EBP sensor at 73psi… we are working on getting a higher reading EBP sensor to keep the data going.
.
.
2nd graph is the “non-loaded” 2000rpm roll. You can see a little bit of lag this time, not enough to really matter, but it is there. On the streets and driving there is no noticeable difference in lag.
.
.
3rd graph is just for reference, another 6.4 we had on the dyno recently with an s364.5. The 75mm drop in low pressure spools WAY faster, making 700ft/lbs more than the s364.5 at 2100rpms and makes 29hp more all throughout the rpm band to redline. Now the compounds are making 10-15psi more of boost/ebp all across rpm band. That is going to add a lot of heat/pressure in the motor. I would like to get an s369 to see how it compares in power to the drop in 75mm atmo.
Latest posts
-
-
Will a 1996 F6TZ-9A451-F engine wiring harness work on a 1997 f250 HD ?
- Latest: 6.7powersmoke
-
-
-
Members online
No members online now.