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.
The Turd -- Stock Block Six Speed -- 9.90 at 151 mph
* 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!
(813) 443-5064 ext. 104
Thanks for chiming in Matt. That is an interesting comparison.
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.
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
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.
* 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
Will a stud girdle hold the early torque?
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 / ETS fmic / Kakimoto Regu 06&R 3 inch exhaust / Ignite E90 Red / 902whp 748wtq
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
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.