which turbo 66 or gt4094

[FX4 F2-Fifty]

FI 66/73/.91 ETR-HO

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

 

[SEABEE08FX4]

I sense a Garrett vs BW shoot out coming up.

 

[powerstrokedkid87]

il test them both...if the turbos get donated :naughty:

 

[BlueWaffle]

I don't know why it's even an issue really.....6.0's don't have the cam profile to spool a big single "fast" anyways. One is probably going to light at around 1750 and the other one at about 1850-1900. if you want to do something different go for it! it's your money. but is an additional 2+ k worth 100-150 rpm to spin it?

 

[Pizza pig]

Wheres the proof that says a garrett dual ball bearing out spools a borg charger? Just pulling 15% faster spoolup out of your hole where the sun dont shine? JJ what happened to your dedicated love to Bill @ Bullseye and his crapmowheel? LOL

 

[Pizza pig]

I don't know why it's even an issue really.....6.0's don't have the cam profile to spool a big single "fast" anyways. One is probably going to light at around 1750 and the other one at about 1850-1900. if you want to do something different go for it! it's your money. but is an additional 2+ k worth 100-150 rpm to spin it?

The 62/68/83 with divided up pipes we did on a buddies truck spools like 50rpm sooner than mine.

 

[faster6.0]

And when did you run a .91 ? Now that everyone is questioning you ? Just last week you said the only turbo you ran had a .88 open

when did you run a 4094r on a 6.0? I did run a .91 divided s366 cast for a while but weston (dieselcraft)'s bullseye crapped out on him, just like mark Vanadias crapmowheel, both grenaded within 40k miles, and I pulled it to send to weston as a get by charger until his was fixed, since you asked...

oh, and that s366 cast .91 crapped out on him shortly after....

but thats right you tried 1 garret gtx turbo, didnt like it and it obviously reflects the entire brand for you, across every motor ever.....

 

[faster6.0]

Wheres the proof that says a garrett dual ball bearing out spools a borg charger? Just pulling 15% faster spoolup out of your hole where the sun dont shine? JJ what happened to your dedicated love to Bill @ Bullseye and his crapmowheel? LOL

What happened? I tried new products and found better results. more drivable, easier to spool, more power. Also... the above mentioned products are not standing the test of time that I need to see on a daily driver setup IMO. I cannot and will not sell a 1800+ Dollar journal bearing turbo when for the same money I can put a customer into a water cooled, ball bearing feature unit that will spool and drive better, and perhaps last longer with cooler operating temps.

Ball bearing chargers have been out spooling journal bearing chargers for years Greg...

 

[BlueWaffle]

The 62/68/83 with divided up pipes we did on a buddies truck spools like 50rpm sooner than mine.

right but a 62 is not a "big single" though...

 

[FaSSt9602]

The 62/68/83 with divided up pipes we did on a buddies truck spools like 50rpm sooner than mine.

[flamesuit]

So if the 62/68/83 with divided only spools 50rpm sooner than your 66, how does that make the 62 a towable charger? Considering that when I tow I will be anywhere from pretty much sea level all the way up to 7000+ feet, uphill, downhill, and everything in between...Arizona isn't a flat baron land like many might think...

I guess this is where the definition of "streetable" and "towable" is worthless. You said yours is "streetable" but you have to watch your gauges, right foot, and use your head. Obviously I get using your head, but to me, true "streetable" is set it and forget it..."towable" I get having to watch things and be smart.

Not trying to start a pissing match here. I have a 62/68 sitting on my workbench with both a 70 t3 open and an 83 divided t4 housing, so I really am trying to figure out which way I go...either way I am getting a set of up pipes with either a better flowing collector or divided t4, but I REALLY don't want to spend money twice...or the PITA of replacing the up pipes twice! Either way the end result is a goal of compounds, but if they come, it will be later on down the road.

[/flamesuit]

 

[powerstrokedkid87]

when did you run a 4094r on a 6.0? I did run a .91 divided s366 cast for a while but weston (dieselcraft)'s bullseye crapped out on him, just like mark Vanadias crapmowheel, both grenaded within 40k miles, and I pulled it to send to weston as a get by charger until his was fixed, since you asked...

oh, and that s366 cast .91 crapped out on him shortly after....

but thats right you tried 1 garret gtx turbo, didnt like it and it obviously reflects the entire brand for you, across every motor ever.....

shoooot...mine was sooner than that..less than 1K

 

[Pizza pig]

right but a 62 is not a "big single" though...

Precisely, just agreeing with your statement of 6.0's and their bore/stroke and cam profile arent fit so much to spooling larger chargers. That setup is significantly smaller than mine and doesn't spool noticeably faster. What a lot of people also are forgetting, is stall speed of the converter. 90% of the people out there run a tighter converter, just because thats what they offer. Tighter converter = slower spool up.

What happened? I tried new products and found better results. more drivable, easier to spool, more power. Also... the above mentioned products are not standing the test of time that I need to see on a daily driver setup IMO. I cannot and will not sell a 1800+ Dollar journal bearing turbo when for the same money I can put a customer into a water cooled, ball bearing feature unit that will spool and drive better, and perhaps last longer with cooler operating temps.

Ball bearing chargers have been out spooling journal bearing chargers for years Greg...

On diesels? News to me. Cant really go comparing a 72mm compressor to a 66mm compressor and and say you found better performance, the wheel size is enough to rule out any comparison. Put your setup against a 472 to really compare.

 

[faster6.0]

Precisely, just agreeing with your statement of 6.0's and their bore/stroke and cam profile arent fit so much to spooling larger chargers. That setup is significantly smaller than mine and doesn't spool noticeably faster. What a lot of people also are forgetting, is stall speed of the converter. 90% of the people out there run a tighter converter, just because thats what they offer. Tighter converter = slower spool up.



On diesels? News to me. Cant really go comparing a 72mm compressor to a 66mm compressor and and say you found better performance, the wheel size is enough to rule out any comparison. Put your setup against a 472 to really compare.

the 72 lights better, and drives better, than a journal bearing 66. It literally whistles its booty off soon as youre in the throttle, sounds vgt almost. more like a BB 38r in a 7.3. that alone speaks volumes for ball bearing to me, even with the smaller turbine. I like it better for 6.0s around town and i know mark will like it better than that laggy 66 hes had.

 

[Cutting-Edge Diesel]

(just providing info here)
this is one of my trucks im running a s366/73/.91 with 195cc injectors with stock nozzles. Runs great and hardly any smoke. If I have time today I will make a go pro video from the outside. I think It runs pretty good for no more fuel than it has.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNMLifIBNG8&feature=g-upl

 

[Skinny]

so with these set-ups will he be able to pull 600+hp with the size of his truck?.. i know he is close at 575

 

[Super08Duty]

Well this escalated quickly...Garrett DBB takes the cake

 

[faster6.0]

Well this escalated quickly...Garrett DBB takes the cake

fo sho. headed to the strip in the AM.

 

[Mike@MPD]

Lets do a race, first turbo to the 10's fuel only wins.........o wait nevermind lol

 

[Skinny]

put them both on 6.0s with the same mods and ok

 

[powerstrokedkid87]

skinny-

im thinking that either set up will get me there, its a determination of what will get me there with the better spool time. Hence my ever ending headache with this...