PTE 6870 CEA GEN2 Test Results by Sound Performance

+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Results 176 to 192 of 192

Thread: PTE 6870 CEA GEN2 Test Results by Sound Performance

  1. #176
    Boost Junkie 1A1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Indiana
    Age
    43
    Posts
    11,416
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by RogueM3 View Post
    I love my QSV. Curve is great, power comes in early and holds nicely! You can see my graph that Reid posted in my build thread (or maybe searching my name).
    Yeupers. Already saw it!

    Steve
    Click here to enlarge

    1993.5 Anthracite 6 SPD//PRO EFI//PTE6766//3-Row//E-85Fuel Sys//PHR I/M//GSC//IP 10/1 motor//Manley//RPS C/C//CCW C14//Brembo BBK//TRD LSD//930WHP/38PSI
    2006 Lexus LS430 UL Package

  2. Remove Advertisements
    SupraForums.com
    Advertisements

  3. #177
    SupraForums Member nazbr7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    IL
    Posts
    1,273
    Quote Originally Posted by 1A1 View Post
    Thanks guys. It's crazy how the numbers are all over the place for the 6870. My car made 900whp with the 6766 on SP's dyno, same dyno cam made 900whp with the 6870 at 43psi dropping to 33psi. The other car nearly made 1000whp. I may just keep the 6766 and switch the exhaust housing out for the divided so I can use the QSV. It seems like my 6766 is sort of a freak.

    Steve K.

    i did forget to mention I had my car tuned on the hottest day of the summer lol Larry made sure to tell me hahaha. Im thinking of upgrading to 7675 for more power. I really wanted to hit that 1000whp mark!
    1994 Red 6spd Supra Turbo
    1998 Quicksilver 6spd Supra turbo


    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by grandporschegt Click here to enlarge
    clearly your teacher has never run 35 psi on 2.75 a gallon gas.

  4. #178
    SF Contributing Member mkivmatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Tampa
    Age
    31
    Posts
    916
    Another turbo you guys might be overlooking is the 7275 CEA. We've made right under 1,100whp and then 1,200whp with a small dry shot of nitrous with that turbo. Spool isn't too much different either. Here's a graph showing four different runs from three different cars/setups for comparison's sake.

    RunFile003 -- PTE 7275, 3.0L, 10:1, S2 cams, Hypertune, no nitrous
    RunFile016 -- Same setup as above with 100 shot jets, single fogger dry kit
    RunFile010 -- PTE 7275, 3.0L, 10:1, S2 cams, Sleeper Designs intake
    RunFile018 -- PTE 6766, 1.32 a/r, stock block, S2 cams, stock intake



    You can see the 7275 with nitrous spools almost identically to a 6766 but makes nearly 400 more wheel horsepower. And the two all-boost 7275 setups aren't THAT far behind in terms of spool in comparison. None of these setups had a QSV nor VVTI head. With those two in place and/or a 3.4L bottom end, the 7275 is definitely a viable option that won't sacrifice a ton of spool for some serious horsepower gains. Even without, it's a good compromise to pick up 200+ whp over a 6766 while not sacrificing drivability.

    If you're already maxing out a 6766, moving up to a 6870 doesn't make a ton of sense to me.
    Click here to enlarge
    The Turd -- Stock Block Six Speed -- 9.90 at 151 mph

    Click here to enlarge

    * ProEFI * MoTec * AEM * Haltech * GSC Power Division * Brian Crower * AMS/Alpha Performance
    * CP/Carrillo * ARP * Pro-Gram * Injector Dynamics * Fuel Injector Clinic * HKS * GReddy * Precision Turbo
    * Garrett * Extreme Turbo Systems * Driveshaft Shop * Kelford * Clutch Masters * Manley and many more product lines in stock!

    Contact us directly for the best pricing and service!
    Matt@Inductionperformance.com
    (813) 443-5064 ext. 104
    www.inductionperformance.com

  5. Remove Advertisements
    SupraForums.com
    Advertisements

  6. #179
    Boost Junkie 1A1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Indiana
    Age
    43
    Posts
    11,416
    Blog Entries
    1
    Thanks for chiming in Matt. That is an interesting comparison.

    Steve K.

  7. #180
    Supra Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The Eagle has landed
    Posts
    2,077
    Matt what housing is on the 7275?
    Can u post those dynos in spd. Thanks.
    4 digits on pump&meth is not impossible (low boost)
    Real hp is measured at the wheels.

  8. #181
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Age
    45
    Posts
    6,001
    My car (3.4L, 10:1, e85, qsv), did 960whp/970wtq with the 6766, and 1115/1100 (iirc) with the 7275 (no other changes but turbo swap).
    Government cannot give anything to anybody that it doesn't first take from somebody else. Whenever somebody receives something without working for it, somebody else has to work for it without receiving. The worst thing that can happen to a nation is for half of the people to get the idea they don't have to work because somebody else will work for them, and the other half to get the idea that it does no good to work because they don't get to enjoy the fruits of their labor.
    - Adrian Rogers

  9. #182
    Boost Junkie 1A1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Indiana
    Age
    43
    Posts
    11,416
    Blog Entries
    1
    Yea, thinking I'll stick to the 6766 and switch to the divided housing. After speaking to several friends that experienced main cap failures with turbos bigger than the 6766, I don't want to risk it. I do have a built motor, but I didn't use billet mains. I think the QSV will give me the more broad power curve I am after.

    Steve K.

  10. #183
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Austin tx
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by 1A1 View Post
    Yea, thinking I'll stick to the 6766 and switch to the divided housing. After speaking to several friends that experienced main cap failures with turbos bigger than the 6766, I don't want to risk it. I do have a built motor, but I didn't use billet mains. I think the QSV will give me the more broad power curve I am after.

    Steve K.
    Wouldn't the qsv having the tq come on earlier still cause issues to the main caps? That's the main reason I'm going with billet main caps as I want to make as much tq as early as possible.
    * Disclaimer: All posts by this user will be filled with spelling and grammar mistakes. I am too lazy to spell check, proofread and can not look at the screen and type at the same time. Read at your own risk.

    *Most of my girlfriends had problems with the amount of time I spent on the cars. Thus, I had a problem with them. Sc300 Vs. G/F??? Sc300 FTW lol

  11. #184
    SupraForums Member siddal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    ri
    Posts
    66
    Will a stud girdle hold the early torque?

  12. #185
    SupraForums Member Jdmsup's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Age
    35
    Posts
    1,224
    Quote Originally Posted by Craig Bush View Post
    My car (3.4L, 10:1, e85, qsv), did 960whp/970wtq with the 6766, and 1115/1100 (iirc) with the 7275 (no other changes but turbo swap).
    Did you seriously make 1100wtq on a 7275? DAMN...

    Quote Originally Posted by 1A1 View Post
    Yea, thinking I'll stick to the 6766 and switch to the divided housing. After speaking to several friends that experienced main cap failures with turbos bigger than the 6766, I don't want to risk it. I do have a built motor, but I didn't use billet mains. I think the QSV will give me the more broad power curve I am after.

    Steve K.
    Steve, i also have that fear to crack a main cap due to low end tq. I thought it was worse when you have a smaller turbo and better when its bigger. Isn't that the case?

    Ryan
    1996 JDM Supra RZ - FSR cast manifold / PTE 6466 / Pro-EFI 128 / CP 10:1 pistons / BC HD rods / FID2000 / BC 272 cams / CM FX850 race twin disc / DSS 9 inch kit / ETS fmic / Kakimoto Regu 06&R 3 inch exhaust / Ignite E90 Red / 909whp 837wtq
    Pics of my car here - http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho......&highlight=
    Instagram - @sammutrz
    Dyno thread http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...7#post12803777
    Build thread - http://www.supraforums.com/forum/sho...w#post12669345

  13. #186
    Boost Junkie 1A1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Indiana
    Age
    43
    Posts
    11,416
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by blackdude View Post
    Wouldn't the qsv having the tq come on earlier still cause issues to the main caps? That's the main reason I'm going with billet main caps as I want to make as much tq as early as possible.
    That's a good point. I've heard of issues with a 6266 coming on too early with a QSV and some experiencing issues. The 6766 is a little lazier.

    Steve K.

  14. #187
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Age
    45
    Posts
    6,001
    Quote Originally Posted by Jdmsup View Post
    Did you seriously make 1100wtq on a 7275? DAMN...


    Ryan

    Ryan, notice I said "iirc". I know it was in that neighborhood. I remember remarking at the time that although tq wasn't greater than hp as with the 67, it was very close. and the hp was 1115 for sure.

    it also made 1005 ft-lbs with the 86, and that was probably 1500-2k rpm higher.

  15. #188
    Reid@SP Reid@SP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Dekalb, IL
    Age
    28
    Posts
    7,070
    Quote Originally Posted by blackdude View Post
    Wouldn't the qsv having the tq come on earlier still cause issues to the main caps? That's the main reason I'm going with billet main caps as I want to make as much tq as early as possible.
    If you're going to build something with killer torque (torque monster kit, QSV, ethanol, stroker and/or high compression, etc.) and plan on being hard on it, billet main caps are a good choice.

    For most everyone else, the QSV doesn't create a prerequisite for billet main caps. Think of it as running one size smaller turbo than you're really running (that's a little bit unfair because it also tweaks the curve as well but you get the idea). Tuning also becomes very important in this aspect as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1A1 View Post
    That's a good point. I've heard of issues with a 6266 coming on too early with a QSV and some experiencing issues. The 6766 is a little lazier.

    Steve K.
    I've only seen this in extreme cases where the driver had limited "self-control" with all of the added torque. This is true for any small turbo, high-torque setups though. It's a standard discussion I have with every car that leaves the shop especially on a stock motor.

    Quote Originally Posted by Craig Bush View Post
    Ryan, notice I said "iirc". I know it was in that neighborhood. I remember remarking at the time that although tq wasn't greater than hp as with the 67, it was very close. and the hp was 1115 for sure.

    it also made 1005 ft-lbs with the 86, and that was probably 1500-2k rpm higher.
    Yes! 1100whp GT42-7275 with the Bubba G-Force! That was one of my favorite iterations of your car for sure. Well, that and the 6766/3.4L/Nitrous/V160

  16. #189
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Age
    45
    Posts
    6,001
    Quote Originally Posted by Reid@SP View Post
    ... Yes! 1100whp GT42-7275 with the Bubba G-Force! That was one of my favorite iterations of your car for sure. Well, that and the 6766/3.4L/Nitrous/V160
    Lol at "Bubba GForce". good times brother!

  17. #190
    Reid@SP Reid@SP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Dekalb, IL
    Age
    28
    Posts
    7,070
    Quote Originally Posted by Craig Bush View Post
    Lol at "Bubba GForce". good times brother!
    I thought you'd like that. Way too good of times!


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCVmeUO5lho


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DNR0kuZxSoI

  18. #191
    Boost Junkie 1A1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Indiana
    Age
    43
    Posts
    11,416
    Blog Entries
    1
    Can't believe it's been 4 years. Most of those Supras have bone through several builds since then lol.

    Steve

  19. #192
    SupraForums Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Age
    45
    Posts
    6,001
    Awesome memories.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Quick Reply Quick Reply

  • Decrease Size
    Increase Size
  • Remove Text Formatting
  • Insert LinkInsert ImageInsert Video
  • Wrap [QUOTE] tags around selected text

Similar Threads

  1. Expected Release for the PTE 6870
    By steamer412 in forum General Supra Forum
    Replies: 128
    Last Post: 12-05-2014, 03:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts