Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

3540 shaft snapped in half and the Kando cost less than just a core for the garrett.

essencially the same engine apart from new injectors, rochester 1000's and a the T67, it is spooling up heaps earlier than the 3540, around 1000-1500 rpm earlier which makes me think its the housing.

thats quite early but i think the 8cm would be even earlier.

take a few photos of the rear housing, i am fairly confident i can tell the difference. Take pics from around the flange area.

im fairly certain that a 10cm housing has more of a taper on the exit side of the T3 flange than it does on the CHRA side, whereas an 8cm has the same amount of taper from the flange on both sides and the snail shell is a little thinner.

This is my observation but im not honestly sure this is correct!

The genuine garrett .82 will be better suited. The .73 (10cm) kando housing is a tiny thing.

There are also better options available for that sort of power when talking 'responsive' and 400kw on a dirty thirty. Bare in mind a 35R is similar in size to a precision 6262.

A bush bearing PT can be had for roughly 1k delivered, and would be a hands down winner if you went for the T4 TS option. Single gate to keep costs low will still work a treat.

Finally here is a couple of pics of my turbo housing, i think it is a 10cm but it is just too small for my 25/26 with cams. We ended up getting 275RWKW out of it at 20psi on BP ultimate. It spools up to full song at 3500 and starts to drop off around 6000. It is very good to drive but we were pretty disappointed at the power output.

post-2388-0-18249500-1353379281_thumb.jpg

post-2388-0-39146500-1353379290_thumb.jpg

Simon, i suggest waiting to see how i go before getting the T67.

Finally here is a couple of pics of my turbo housing, i think it is a 10cm but it is just too small for my 25/26 with cams. We ended up getting 275RWKW out of it at 20psi on BP ultimate. It spools up to full song at 3500 and starts to drop off around 6000. It is very good to drive but we were pretty disappointed at the power output.

post-2388-0-18249500-1353379281_thumb.jpg

post-2388-0-39146500-1353379290_thumb.jpg

Simon, i suggest waiting to see how i go before getting the T67.

Worst pictures ever haha But I think it's a 10cm by the looks

In that case I can almost guarantee you something is wrong with your set up and not the turbo... These things don't drop off at high revs, we went well past 8000rpm with mine and power was still going north.

You are about 50rwkw down on where you should be... Got a graph?

Looking for a Kando for my 26/30. Has anyone got any thoughts on this? Basically a 3582r with .73 rear housing. Want to make a responsive 400 rwkw http://item.mobileweb.ebay.com.au/viewitem?itemId=120892863434

Hey Simon, I got a Kando TD06H-25g with the biggest houseing they make on my neo 25/30. It's not tuned above 5000rpm cos I need to replace my wastegate ( I'm not doing it untill my new 4wd arrives). To compare I had a Hypergear Gt3576 that made about 370rwhp on Ultimate 98 on Hyperdrive's dyno (In WA). With my rev limit set at 4500rpm I think I could safely say that the new kando turbo is massivly more powerful and massively more responsive.

I have herd of people running T67's on 3L's but I honestly reckon that it would be happier with the slightly bigger TD06H-25G.

But that all being said my car isn't fully tuned so I ahve no idea when it will stop making power.

The genuine garrett .82 will be better suited. The .73 (10cm) kando housing is a tiny thing.

There are also better options available for that sort of power when talking 'responsive' and 400kw on a dirty thirty. Bare in mind a 35R is similar in size to a precision 6262.

A bush bearing PT can be had for roughly 1k delivered, and would be a hands down winner if you went for the T4 TS option. Single gate to keep costs low will still work a treat.

i know nothing about the PT turbos.. just did some reading up on them.. looks to be the goods! might go with a 6262 i reckon

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

    • Version 1 aluminium airbox is.......not acceptable No pics as I "didn't like the look.....alot" Even after all my "CAD", and measurements, the leg near the fusebox just didn't sit right as it ended up about 10mm long and made the angle of the dangle look wrong, the height was a little short as well, meh, I wasn't that confident that Version 1 was going to be an instant winner I might give Version 2 another go, there's plenty of aluminium at work, but, after having in on and off a few times, and laying in the old OEM airbox without the new pod filter and MAF, there may be an option to modify the OEM air box and still use the Autoexe front cover and filter.... maybe This >  Needs to fit in here, but using the panel, and not the pod, the MAF will need to fit in the airbox though> I'm thinking as the old OEM box and Autoexe cover that is sitting in the shed is just sitting around doing nothing, and they are relatively abundant and cheap to replace if I mess it up and need another, it may well fit with some modifications to how the Autoexe brackets mounts to the rad support, and some dremiling to move it get in there, should give me some more room for activities, as I don't want to move the MAF and affect the tune Sealing the hole it requires to stick it in the air box is simple, a tight fit and some pinch weld will seal it up tight  I am calling this a later problem though
    • and it ends up being already priced in as though you're just on 91RON without any ethanol. Car will lose a bit of economy as the short and long term fuel trims bring down the AFR back to stoich or whatever it is for cruise/idle for the engine.  
    • Oh, you are right. But, in Australia E10 is based on 91RON fuel and ends up being 94RON. Hence it being the cheaper option for economy cars. The more performance oriented cars go for the 98RON fuel that has no ethanol mixed in. The only step up we have left then at some petrol stations is E85.
    • There is a warning that "this thread is super old" but they ignore that anyway...
    • With 10% Ethanol, we're talking 2-3% fuel consumption difference. The emissions reductions and octane boost in my opinion far outweigh this almost non existent loss.    My tanks sitting at 80%. Luckily that should go down fast as I'm on vacation again for the next two weeks. 
×
×
  • Create New...