Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

It depends on how often and how hard the car's been driven and how much boost they run.

Those products was not developed through R&D and perfected through time, instead a copy of a matured product. just like their response to a better performing HTA item was "send one in and we make a copy." In which they are missing the foundation, that is the information of engine and turbo behavior at given condition and situations, of any turbochargers should be developed on. Just like some of their huge 700HP Precision copy compressor with TD06L2 turbines, then anti surge that compressor. Well that is just very wrong.

The most commonly seen turbochargers sent in for repair are the T67, and new billet wheeled T67 in 8 / 10cm on Rb25dets. Very few 8cm T67 in SR, and 1x TD05 16G from SR. All same problem as photo graphed earlier.

The common denominator seems to be turbo:engine match, and also compressor:turbine match.

Stao you indicated that your 360 degree thrust bearing cures the issues, but is the T67 10cm unit on RB25 in your view just a mismatch of the above factors?

The photo shown earlier is Kando's 360 degree thrust bearing setup which is again an identical copy of Greddy's large shoulder thrust collar.

The collar and bearing that I make for the L2 turbine ended is larger overall and different. By enlarging collar and improving oil delivery within can only do so far, The best solution is having matched flow between both turbo ends. A good example would be the SLSS2 turbocharger, yet running a 73mm compressor maxed out more power then the 78mm 25G, with much better response and reliability.

Ok, so I'm about to purchase a T67 from kando and have seen these comments saying there failure rate has gone up.

Can someone recommend an option I could take if I purchase one of these, such as sending it too hypergear for Stao to fix up or should I find an alternative turbo?

I really want to run one of these t67's so hopefully I can take preventative measures to stop it from failing.

Cheers guys

Ok, so I'm about to purchase a T67 from kando and have seen these comments saying there failure rate has gone up.

Can someone recommend an option I could take if I purchase one of these, such as sending it too hypergear for Stao to fix up or should I find an alternative turbo?

I really want to run one of these t67's so hopefully I can take preventative measures to stop it from failing.

Cheers guys

For the same power range I recommend our ATR43 SS2 The externally gated version is $150 more then what the T67 is, Extremely reliable with 0 failure up to date and faster response.

Or buy their new massive billet T67 , I can upgrade the rear end and make it flow about 430rwkws mark reliably.

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...

So had a heated discussion with kando and they sent me a brand new turbo no extra charge which is fantastic and have stated a fresh warranty

So if anyone wants a t67 non antisurge billet 10cm rear v band made 377rwkw on unopened rb25 on e85 I'm selling selling this brand new one

I get to work on them often, the shaft and bearing below came off a Kando T67 sent in last week, like I've mentioned earlier. This issue happens to T67 or those larger billet L2 based cores working with Rb25det engines on high boost. When compressor out flows turbine creating way too much back pressure.

bearings.JPG

any chance this could just be caused by incorrect oil choices ?

If it is oil related, the bush bearing would be worn before the thrust. The bushes are fine, there are no bearing take off on the shaft. This is caused by back pressure.

The 25G's wheel size is about same size as the SS4 wheel that made 435rwkws, This compressor end should have no issues making 400rwkws+ on a larger turbine.

I have another T67 sending in to be looked at next week, will post some more photos. if the customer's happy to pay for repair, I will replace the TD06L2 turbine with a SS4 turbine wheel. That will be good enough to sort out this back pressure issue and make the most of what the 25G compressor is capable of making.

ahh ok I see....I was just curious after reading a thing on low grade oils damaging thrust bearings on high HP applications..

My old turbo has ended up on an Rb20 drifter anyway...hopefully it holds up good for him and back pressure isn't an issue

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

    • Yea, that is what I was getting at in my ramblings too. The nismo one actually is a 1.5 way and a 1 way. They don't do a *2* way because a true *2* way would have equal ramp angles. Or is that a true 1.5 way? Realistically I think a "1.5 way" does not actually exist. A diff can either lock in two directions or one. It also doesn't help that a LOT of people in Australia speak about 1.5 way diffs are referring to their 1 way diff.
    • Well, the trouble with that ^^ is: The configuration shown is absolutely a 1-way, not a 1.5-way. There is no way that a 1.5-way can be said to offer LSD action only on acceleration. If Nismo cannot get that right, then it is impossible to believe their documentation. That ^ is not a 1.5 way setup. That is a 1-way.   And so now I have allowed all doubts to flourish and have gone back to look at the MotoIQ video. I originally made the mistake of believing him when he said "this is a 1.5-way" at the ~6:10 mark. Because what he did was take the gear assembly out of the 2-way opening and just rotate it one place to the left to drop it into the 1-way opening. When he dropped it in there, the cam was "backwards" compared to the correct orientation shown in all other photos of that config. The flat shold have been facing the 1° ramp side of the opening, not the 55° ramp side. And I thought, "gee that's cute", but I was concerned at the time, when he put the other ring back on, that the gap between the rings looked like it was wider then in the 2-way config. And then I said a lot of things in my long post on Tuesday that could only make sense if the guy from MotoIQ was correct about what he'd done. BUT... I have now done my homework. I grabbed a frame of the video with the 2-way config, and then grabbed another with the "1.5-way" config, snipped out the cam and opening of that frame and just pasted it direct on top of the 2-way config. I scaled it so that the triangular opening was almost exactly the same height in both. AND.... the gap between the plates is wider with the cam installed in the triangualr opening backwards. That is.... it cannot go together that way. There would be massive force on the plates all the time, if you could even reassemble it.  So, My statement on the matter? The Nismo diff is actually only a 2-way and 1-way. There is no 1.5-way option in it, regardless of what they say. Here's a photo of a real 1.5-way ramp opening from Cusco (along with the 1 way option). And the full set of 1 through 2 way options from their racing diff, which is not same-same as what we'd typically be using, but...the cams work the same. A little blurry, but it comes from this Cusco doc, which is quite helpful. AND.... Cusco do in fact do what I suggested would be sensible, which is to have rings that do 1 and 1.5, and 1.5 and 2. Separately.  
    • Welcome Adam. Car looks great!
    • "With a 1.5-WAY, the LSD is effective only during acceleration."
    • Well it wasn't as easy as I thought.... and it also wasn't in my original manual which I did end up finding. They discuss the process in the Nismo catalogue though and it requires slight machining. Page 145.  NISMO PARTS CATALOGUE 2020
×
×
  • Create New...