Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

PTE just upgraded their 6266 with their gen2 billet wheel and the turbo is now rated 800hp.. Personally, I prefer PTE because raw manifold dont need relocation and cost about 500$ less than the EFR kit.

However I heard great thing about the transient response of the EFR lines so I'm ready to shed more money if it's THE turbo to buy.

Goal: Quickest spool for a RB26 driven mainly downtown.

Power: AT LEAST similar to a properly -5s setup (575-600whp), but ideally, 600-650whp. No need for +700whp really... I mean, if both turbos could end up with 675whp, I will take it.. but as long as I have about 600whp, I wish to have the quickest one.

I got all the other supportive mods :)

I don't want to comment between the differences as I have not directly compared the two, hopefully Lithium has some data he can share with you.

However bare in mind that the EFR can be had IWG and has been done on an RB26 by Full-Race themselves. To my knowledge boost control was sweet and the package worked well. If you are comparing apples to apples (BB to BB) the additional on the EFR is absorbed by the gates and additional plumbing.

Food for thought.

  • 4 weeks later...

As much as Precision aren't my favourite turbo manufacturers - at a glance there is a reasonable amount of dubious in there. Comparing their own turbo with something that doesn't come from Garrett for a start (since when did GT3076Rs come with T60-1 compressors!?!), the Precision 6262 etc no long run the same turbines as they did back then, the smaller hub area etc is a common billet wheel design - partly of the attraction for forming a compressor wheel using billet machining instead of casting is you end up with a stronger product, so you can use less structure without increasing burst risk.

I totally prefer the EFR8374 over the PT6266 though, and don't know of any recent EFR failures where things have been installed and used properly. There was a bad area way back when but now the only issue I am aware of is the turbine wheels don't like overspeeding, but that's easy enough to avoid by simple matching the turbo correctly and not being an animal.

I've got a 6262 and I think the EFR would provide better response... In saying that I would say that a 6262 is on par if not better than -5s

But the trade off are that they are too big, too ugly, too expensive and don't come in good external gate housing options for me

I've got a 6262 and I think the EFR would provide better response... In saying that I would say that a 6262 is on par if not better than -5s

But the trade off are that they are too big, too ugly, too expensive and don't come in good external gate housing options for me

I don't think they are that bad, a 1.05a/r TS seems like a good option :D But if you want T3, fair enough.

I think this looks pretty cool personally: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=657790024292267&set=vb.217004505037490&type=2&theater

I don't think they are that bad, a 1.05a/r TS seems like a good option :D But if you want T3, fair enough.

I think this looks pretty cool personally: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=657790024292267&set=vb.217004505037490&type=2&theater

I would probably want one size down than the 1.05 in T4, actually if I could get my hands on one to see if it would fit I'd probably give one a go, but I'm not keen in spending over $2k to find out that I need to spend another $1500 getting a new manifold and plumbing

Saying it looks cool is the same as saying a Thai Ladyboy looks hot :P

  • 4 months later...

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

    • I have no hard data to report, but I have to say, having driven it to work and back all week, mostly on wet roads (and therefore mostly not able to contemplate anything too outrageous anywhere)..... it is real good. I turned the boost controller on, with duty cycle set to 10% (which may not be enough to actually increase the boost), and the start boost set to 15 psi. That should keep the gate unpressurised until at least 15 psi. And rolling at 80 in 5th, which is <2k rpm, going to WOT sees the MAP go +ve even before it crosses 2k and it has >5 psi by the time it hits 90 km/h. That's still <<2.5k rpm, so I think it's actually doing really well. Because of all the not-quite-ideal things that have been in place since the turbo first went on, it felt laggy. It's actually not. The response appears to be as good as you could hope for with a highflow.
    • Or just put in a 1JZ, and sell me the NEO head 😎
    • Oh, it's been done. You just run a wire out there and back. But they have been known to do coolant temp sensors, MAP sensors, etc. They're not silly (at Regency Park) and know what's what with all the different cars.
    • Please ignore I found the right way of installing it thanks
    • There are advantages, and disadvantages to remapping the factory.   The factory runs billions of different maps, to account for sooooo many variables, especially when you bring in things like constantly variable cams etc. By remapping all those maps appropriately, you can get the car to drive so damn nicely, and very much so like it does from the factory. This means it can utilise a LOT of weird things in the maps, to alter how it drives in situations like cruise on a freeway, and how that will get your fuel economy right down.   I haven't seen an aftermarket ECU that truly has THAT MANY adjustable parameters. EG, the VAG ECUs are somewhere around 2,000 different tables for it to work out what to do at any one point in time. So for a vehicle being daily driven etc, I see this as a great advantage, but it does mean spending a bit more time, and with a tuner who really knows that ECU.   On the flip side, an aftermarket ECU, in something like a weekender, or a proper race car, torque based tuning IMO doesn't make that much sense. In those scenarios you're not out there hunting down stuff like "the best way to minimise fuel usage at minor power so that we can go from 8L/100km to 7.3L/100km. You're more worried about it being ready to make as much freaking power as possible when you step back on the loud pedal as you come out of turn 2, not waiting the extra 100ms for all the cams to adjust etc. So in this scenario, realistically you tune the motor to make power, based on the load. People will then play with things like throttle response, and drive by wire mapping to get it more "driveable".   Funnily enough, I was watching something Finnegans Garage, and he has a huge blown Hemi in a 9 second 1955 Chev that is road registered. To make it more driveable on the road recently, they started testing blocking up the intake with kids footballs, to effectively reduce air flow when they're on the road, and make the throttle less touchy and more driveable. Plus some other weird shit the yankee aftermarket ECUs do. Made me think of Kinks R34...
×
×
  • Create New...