Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Get rid of existing and get braided from the turbo to the block. Personally I would get something custom made from somewhere like Enzed (well actually I make my own lines using Speedflow gear, but I assume you're not game to try that?). But plenty of people on here seem to be using the Kando lines with no problems.

FYI both 6262 and 6266 are rated as 700HP items. I'd be chasing that 66 CEA item, better tech is where its at.

The 6262 is 700hp and 6266 is 735hp.

Don't be fooled by the CEA crap, the wheel sizes have an influence over response, and the 6262 is more responsive.

It might be that the 62mm wheel is more responsive, but by how much? You can see that the CEA wheel has better blade design and would be an overall lighter rotating assembly. Im also confident the 66mm wheel would flow a metric shit load more.

If you were going 3L down the track I can see that the 66 mil would make for an intensely fast car.. but yeah I can accept 4mm in turbine exducer isn't anything to scoff at.

Thanks hanaldo, I will look at the lines a bit, sorry for the spam on the Precision thread but did you end up re-tuning your G3 again/ killawasps?

Edited by rondofj

On my car I have had a 6265, 6765,6766 and 7175. I have witnessed a 150rpm difference between a 6262 and 6265, hardly noticable, but there was also a couple of hundred revs between the 65 and 66 turbine wheels on my own car.

Yes it picked up 30hp atw but the point I was trying to make was, PTE marketed the same if not better response between the CEA wheel replacement wheels of the 65. Maybe that is the case with identical sized wheels, but from my experience not a bigger CEA vs smaller wheel. You can physically see the difference in the thickness of the older wheels.

On my car I have had a 6265, 6765,6766 and 7175. I have witnessed a 150rpm difference between a 6262 and 6265, hardly noticable, but there was also a couple of hundred revs between the 65 and 66 turbine wheels on my own car.

Yes it picked up 30hp atw but the point I was trying to make was, PTE marketed the same if not better response between the CEA wheel replacement wheels of the 65. Maybe that is the case with identical sized wheels, but from my experience not a bigger CEA vs smaller wheel. You can physically see the difference in the thickness of the older wheels.

It's funny that a 3 mm larger wheel with a 62 mm front was only 150 but 1 extra mm on a 67 was alot more noticable. Hmm.

got to remember that its 1mm on the exducer but they dont tell us what they have changed on the inducer. Could be a way larger wheel in a smaller trim... or could be a smaller wheel in a larger trim. Who knows..

PJ did you ever dismantle yours to measure the inducer on the turbine side? I have always wondered why PT dont farking advertise those figures. With the smaller stuff I had a feeling they kept it to themselves because the numbers would match up to older tech T3/T4 based things. Bad for business when your marketing 'new tech'. Obviously we know overall measurements are not the be all and end all, but it would certainly raise the question.

Yes we did, and you could be onto something there :whistling: either way they worked and worked well!

It would be interesting to back to back a CEA of the same size, but after spending 10 grand of my own money on Precision turbo's, I might leave it for one of you boys to step up :)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Have a look at that (shitty) pic I posted. You can see AN -4 braided line coming to a -4 to 1/8 BSPT adapter, into a 1/8 BSPT T piece. The Haltech pressure sender is screwed into the long arm of the sender and factory sender (pre your pic) into the T side. You can also see the cable tie holding the whole contraption in place. Is it better than mounting the sender direct to your engine fitting......yes because it removes that vibration as the engine revs out 50 times every lap and that factory sender is pretty big. Is it necessary for you......well I've got no idea, I just don't like something important failing twice so over-engineer it to the moon!
    • Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
×
×
  • Create New...