Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

what would be the closest equivalent to a gt35r with 1.06 rear?

TD06H 25G 12cm

For people unaware this is being suggested because he is used a 4.5L motor, it is not the all out performance replacement to the 35R.

You would want this if you are after a kando:

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Kinugawa-Turbocharger-3-Anti-Surge-TD06H-25G-T3-12cm-/270807644010?pt=AU_Car_Parts_Accessories&hash=item3f0d64b76a

Or this may be a lot better for your application:

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Turbocharger-HINO-JO8C-24100-3251-GARRETT-GT3576-479016-/290609084681?pt=AU_Car_Parts_Accessories&hash=item43a9a6b909

Better spread of torque, not so much 'performance' based. Will do more of the heavy work that a 4by would normally do.

TD06H 25G 12cm

For people unaware this is being suggested because he is used a 4.5L motor, it is not the all out performance replacement to the 35R.

You would want this if you are after a kando:

http://www.ebay.com....=item3f0d64b76a

Or this may be a lot better for your application:

http://www.ebay.com....=item43a9a6b909

Better spread of torque, not so much 'performance' based. Will do more of the heavy work that a 4by would normally do.

Thanks for your help. I've been looking at this-

http://www.ebay.com....=item3f0d202c19

What do you think? I'd prefer IWG

Edited by O2 Autosports

ok , so theese are dimentialy the same, just not actually made in japan using quality materials. but are one of the better "bing whoa" coppies?

I hear they are made in dirty backyard toilet labs by unsavoury types using battery acid and horse tranquilizers .. :whistling:

Thanks for your help. I've been looking at this-

http://www.ebay.com....=item3f0d202c19

What do you think? I'd prefer IWG

The IW housing they have is very similar to the Trust 12cm item. Try to stick to both 12cm or bigger and the TD06H wheel.

Incase you havent read the whole thread, the following are the TD06 wheels in size and flow:

TD06S 65mm OD - lowest flow

TD06SL2 61mm OD - high flow good balance with spool

TD06SH 67mm - highest flow

They all have the designation 'S' whether it says it or not. Do not confuse a TD06Sh or TD06H as two different items, they are the same. Some tend to drop the S as its not needed.

You have a giant engine so I encourage you to stick to the biggest parts you can.

Try look for a TD06H 25G with 12cm rear housing and 24v front cover. Maybe email them to ask if they can make this and for under $800....

how would these kando turbos compare to a hypergear turbo, reliability and performance wise? or is that a how long is a piece of "insert very long material" question?

Yes, how long is a piece of string fits well. The better question is what do you want...... Kando has got a lot of cars covered, Evos, Subys, SR20s and generic.

The skyline stuff falls into the generic catagory, which need custom everything that touches the turbo. Custom manifold, custom wastegate, custom dump pipe. Even the internal wastegate turbos kando do will need custom dumps and spacers off the stock manifold.

If you like what you see from the T67, get one and get the bits mentioned necessary to make it work.

If you want it to bolt on and fit easily, have a look at Hypergears current turbos and pick the one which makes the power u want.

At the end of the day its power and method. Some of us would prefer a 20g over the HG SS turbos, fast spool and up to 300kw. There is likely to be little benefit at the end of the day... And it will need a manifold and gate whereas the HG will not.

Answer: if you want less than 300kw just get a HG. If you want 300+ get the T67. If your not sure, also get the HG because the Kandos will need some serious effort applied.

how would these kando turbos compare to a hypergear turbo, reliability and performance wise? or is that a how long is a piece of "insert very long material" question?

For under 300kw I would go the HG every time, fitment wise it bolts on with very little drama, internal gate so looks stock, great response and power, they are also cheap. Kandos are cheaper but you need manifold, dump and gate, so by the time you are finish they will cost more most of the time, however if you already have this stuff it is a no brainer.

Reliability wise from what I've seen and read both the turbos are as reliable as anything else, probably don't have the same quality control as a garret, but you don't see random failures like cheap generic china stuff that has very porous casting and other average stuff.

how so?

have you tried one yourself?

The only T3 IWG they do is a 12cm, which is a little lazzier than I most of us seem to want.

It also has a 3 bolt outlet which blocks the WG path... There is also an open version (same thing with the rear cut off) which I think fixes the problem bar that of the 12cm.

Keep in mind MHI seem to like smaller housings, 12cm is more 3L suitable. If they were TS evo housings that is a different game all together.

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

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...