XGTRX

Not if there is that much back pressure that it cracks the gate open. But anyway we will see I suppose. Based on everything that has been said it points to the turbo IMHO. But who knows. But most of the time these issue seem to get solved with a bigger turbo. We all have theories, if I am wrong then I have learned something.

Similar set up or exactly the same.

That because they are basically autos, you know, so the launch doesn't rely on driver skill. He he. Would rather have a skyline auto, big stall with a trans-brake.

Good luck mate looks awesome

Type in 'PT6262 graphs' in Google images, click on the sites and you will see for yourself what the results are. From supra forums to bimmer to evo forums your turbo does the same thing, that is it peaks at 5k to 6k and then loses 5+ psi when it goes beyond its VE. Actually all turbos will. That's why they go from a 6262 to a 6266 or 6466 with less restrictive turbine side where their VE limit is not tested and they hold boost to higher rpm. Invest 2 hours in doing this and you will never ask 'why' again. Just for the record, for someone that wants low end torque I think your setup is awesome, but you are just getting sucked into the peak HP, chest beating, dyno queen head space, do yoirself a favour and forget about it. Just drive the thing for a year. Don't worry about the numbers.

He already knows the answer. He is just ignoring it. An engine is just an air pump. His results are on par with a majority of other results using the same turbo on 3l+ capacity but somehow he believes it should be different. Maybe some fairy dust and a happy dyno is what he needs.

The 3.2l is no miracle worker. You won't get n/a response doesn't matter what you do. You can't get linear torque nor power with an low compression rb at the power you want. It just won't happen. As I have said previously your turbine is to small to make any significant power in excess of what you have now. To tell you the truth I recon CRD did a pretty good job trying to tune that turbo on your setup it must have been a nightmare. In a nutshell, you either need to decide on higher power or better response, you can't have both. People have been telling you this all along.

Ummmm not necessarily.

T04z! Now we're talking

Whats wrong with the tune? I thought it was all sorted

That's good and fine to work it all out on compressor maps, but on a 3.2 you have a shit load more volume through the turbine. if the the rear AR is too small then you get back pressure prior to the turbine which not only slows down gas velocity but creates all sorts of issues with cylinder pressure and combustion events. That's why you have to cut boost. In a 4 cylinder you can run big boost because you haven't got the volume of gas, so exhaust gas speed dosen't suffer and you can run a lot more boost (compessor) through the same turbo because the exhaust gas volume is a lot less, so no back pressure issues therefore high gas speed through the turbine. In Pete's senario he wants response so who cares about top end power, its really all over by 7000rpm ish and that's where he wants it. Good turbo for response from lower rpm, crap turbo from 5500ish rpm and up.

Sorry I meant that torque curve would be different

Because the turbo has enough flow to make the power at the same rpm with a 2.6. The torque would be different though. And 2.6s rule the world, but that discussion is for another day... He he

Turbo is too small. Turbine housing too small which restricts flow and chokes the engine. In this scenario you have no choice but to cut boost. It will be interesting to see what an e85 tune does because if it makes no significant difference then the turbo selection is the problem.

Mmmmmm, some falsely say it is the case. Never had to do it myself. I think people talk a lot of shit really, or just don't know how to drive.

Old wives tale........ You can always use it..... He he ....... Always.

When you get bored just put a bigger turbo on it. Response gets boring quickly. I will look out for your next thread, titled ' I love my car BUT its missing something' ha ha

Congratulations Pete. Glad everything seems sorted. Just in regards to your above comment, big HP you mean 750+ and yes I agree there would be trade offs. But selecting a turbo for 600 HP would not have sacrificed lower end that much on a 3.2. Hardly noticeable.

The Glimmer belt always drains a bit of power.... But sounds tough cuz.

Booooooooooooooo

Looks awesome Mick.