Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Has anyone done a back to back dyno comparison on changing the rear housing over, i have had a good trawl of the forums and can't find anything within the last 10 years. 

Currently have a .84 on RB28 doing 800whpish at 30psi however it has hit a bit of a wall, looking at going to 1.0 or 1.15 to make slightly more top end.  

Current graph below don't mind loosing a small amount of that midrange ?

IMG-20190329-WA0024.jpg

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/476580-rb28-6466-ar-change/
Share on other sites

On 4/9/2019 at 6:17 AM, GTScotT said:

Firstly, do your cams and head allow for more?

By my eye I think the nose over is more mechanical than it is in the turbine housing.

Winding more boost in just resulted in it dropping off in the top end, leading to believe back pressure is the issue from the rear housing. 

Cams are HKS 272's minor touch up work in the head to accommodate the new cams. 

 

Really keen to follow the rear housing comparison as the turbo needs to be rebuilt in anycase, so is cheap top end power but I want to see at what cost of the bottom end in rpm terms. 

A chap I know has tried all of them, actually just tuned a car running a 6466 with a 1.00 and is looking at going 1.15 - said the difference in flow between .84 and 1.00 is significant in itself, picked up a LOT of power "pound for pound" when going north of 20psi and only lost about 200rpm on a stock stroke RB26.  It's holding peak power at around 8000rpm with the RB26 at ~650awkw on a Dynapack on E85.   He is pretty certain the 1.00 is a better balance of response versus power than the .84 even on an RB26.

 

 

  • Like 2

My setup has the same issue with the 1.00 6466 choking the 3.4lt.  705whp at 5500 rpm till redline.  It seemed the hot side was just completely maxed out, at 30psi.

I've got 1.3 housing here to go on the car which should really liven it up in top end and make it a little less savage in mid range.

  • Like 2
On 4/11/2019 at 4:21 AM, Lithium said:

A chap I know has tried all of them, actually just tuned a car running a 6466 with a 1.00 and is looking at going 1.15 - said the difference in flow between .84 and 1.00 is significant in itself, picked up a LOT of power "pound for pound" when going north of 20psi and only lost about 200rpm on a stock stroke RB26.  It's holding peak power at around 8000rpm with the RB26 at ~650awkw on a Dynapack on E85.   He is pretty certain the 1.00 is a better balance of response versus power than the .84 even on an RB26.

 

 

would love to see some graphs if available 

  • 2 weeks later...
1 hour ago, 33GTRV said:

I have a 2.8 with a .84, it's a f**king weapon on the street mate, are you racing the car? I have a conservative 500awkw and I regularly get turfed from the track even on a roll through. 

car has gone 9.6 @ 146mph 

In terms of goals it is pretty much done, however it looks like we are leaving some power on the table. 

 

car gets used for everything from circuit / drags / runway racing and streeted so is an allrounder. I don't mind loosing a small amount of bottom end for top end gain, however just trying to quantify the impact. Sending the turbo off for rebuild shortly, will more than likely just do it.  

 

 

149 mate. 140 to 144 with street suspension, 149 and as high as 151 with bone stock suspension and a good wheel alignment. The track here is very very very good to the 1/8th, one of the fastest in the southern hemisphere, which suits the datsun well. What suspension are you using? 

  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/22/2019 at 10:48 AM, 33GTRV said:

149 mate. 140 to 144 with street suspension, 149 and as high as 151 with bone stock suspension and a good wheel alignment. The track here is very very very good to the 1/8th, one of the fastest in the southern hemisphere, which suits the datsun well. What suspension are you using? 

interesting what times did you trap also? do you have the slip? keen for more details on your car to compare notes, do you have a build thread? 

  • 3 years later...

Bringing this bad boy thread back from the dead. I'm just about to purchase a 6466 and I'm also stuck between ordering a .84 or a 1.0. 

I was leaning towards a 1.0ar but being that I'll be running on pump gas + meth as opposed to E85, I'm worried about spool. This is on a 2.8 with VCT, 272 cams and a fair bit of porting. Goal is 600wkw on a mainline dyno.

The .84 rear on my stock bottom end 2.6 with vcam and e85 was all in at 4,100 and was an absolute weapon on the street, I only used the high boost twice and once it tried to kill me (turned out to be a transfer issue) 

  • Like 1
On 23/9/2022 at 9:17 AM, TurboTapin said:

Bringing this bad boy thread back from the dead. I'm just about to purchase a 6466 and I'm also stuck between ordering a .84 or a 1.0. 

I was leaning towards a 1.0ar but being that I'll be running on pump gas + meth as opposed to E85, I'm worried about spool. This is on a 2.8 with VCT, 272 cams and a fair bit of porting. Goal is 600wkw on a mainline dyno.

1.00 or 1.15.

 

  • Like 1

No smaller than 1.00 on 6466. Dont worry the 1.00 a/r is not too big, I'm  running on both the 32s. Stock cams and 2.6 or the 2.8 and big cams are both great to drive as it's just such a flexible turbo.

  • Like 1

I lost nothing going to a 1.15 and did just over 600kw on E85 so you should be fine

 

I am actually moving to a smaller 6062 turbo shortly if you want to buy my 6466 with a .84 and 1.15 housing, it was rebuilt by precision in america in feb this year, been used about twice since.

I am going smaller as i am doing more rallysprint style stuff these days, and can get alot more down low and 500kw from a 6062 which is what we need for rallysprint.

 

  • Like 1
22 hours ago, hattori hanzo said:

I lost nothing going to a 1.15 and did just over 600kw on E85 so you should be fine

 

I am actually moving to a smaller 6062 turbo shortly if you want to buy my 6466 with a .84 and 1.15 housing, it was rebuilt by precision in america in feb this year, been used about twice since.

I am going smaller as i am doing more rallysprint style stuff these days, and can get alot more down low and 500kw from a 6062 which is what we need for rallysprint.

 

Thanks for the info. I would buy it from you but I'm presuming you're not anywhere close to Canada and shipping would put your price into new turbo territory. 6466's are had here for 2650$CDN new to the door. Let me know, thanks. 

  • Like 1

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

    • Power is fed to the ECU when the ignition switch is switched to IGN, at terminal 58. That same wire also connects to the ECCS relay to provide both the coil power and the contact side. When the ECU sees power at 58 it switches 16 to earth, which pulls the ECCS relay on, which feeds main power into the ECU and also to a bunch of other things. None of this is directly involved in the fuel pump - it just has to happen first. The ECU will pull terminal 18 to earth when it wants the fuel pump to run. This allows the fuel pump relay to pull in, which switches power on into the rest of the fuel pump control equipment. The fuel pump control regulator is controlled from terminal 104 on the ECU and is switched high or low depending on whether the ECU thinks the pump needs to run high or low. (I don't know which way around that is, and it really doesn't matter right now). The fuel pump control reg is really just a resistor that controls how the power through the pump goes to earth. Either straight to earth, or via the resistor. This part doesn't matter much to us today. The power to the fuel pump relay comes from one of the switched wires from the IGN switch and fusebox that is not shown off to the left of this page. That power runs the fuel pump relay coil and a number of other engine peripherals. Those peripherals don't really matter. All that matters is that there should be power available at the relay when the key is in the right position. At least - I think it's switched. If it's not switched, then power will be there all the time. Either way, if you don't have power there when you need it (ie, key on) then it won't work. The input-output switching side of the relay gains its power from a line similar (but not the same as) the one that feeds the ECU. SO I presume that is switched. Again, if there is not power there when you need it, then you have to look upstream. And... the upshot of all that? There is no "ground" at the fuel pump relay. Where you say: and say that pin 1 Black/Pink is ground, that is not true. The ECU trigger is AF73, is black/pink, and is the "ground". When the ECU says it is. The Blue/White wire is the "constant" 12V to power the relay's coil. And when I say "constant", I mean it may well only be on when the key is on. As I said above. So, when the ECU says not to be running the pump (which is any time after about 3s of switching on, with no crank signal or engine speed yet), then you should see 12V at both 1 and 2. Because the 12V will be all the way up to the ECU terminal 18, waiting to be switched to ground. When the ECU switches the fuel pump on, then AF73 should go to ~0V, having been switched to ground and the voltage drop now occurring over the relay coil. 3 & 5 are easy. 5 is the other "constant" 12V, that may or may not be constant but will very much want to be there when the key is on. Same as above. 3 goes to the pump. There should never be 12V visible at 3 unless the relay is pulled in. As to where the immobiliser might have been spliced into all this.... It will either have to be on wire AF70 or AF71, whichever is most accessible near the alarm. Given that all those wires run from the engine bay fusebox or the ECU, via the driver's area to the rear of the car, it could really be either. AF70 will be the same colour from the appropriate fuse all the way to the pump. If it has been cut and is dangling, you should be able to see that  in that area somewhere. Same with AF71.   You really should be able to force the pump to run. Just jump 12V onto AF72 and it should go. That will prove that the pump itself is willing to go along with you when you sort out the upstream. You really should be able to force the fuel pump relay on. Just short AF73 to earth when the key is on. If the pump runs, then the relay is fine, and all the power up to both inputs on the relay is fine. If it doesn't run (and given that you checked the relay itself actually works) then one or both of AF70 and AF71 are not bringing power to the game.
    • @PranK can you elaborate further on the Colorlock Dye? The website has a lot of options. I'm sure you've done all the research. I have old genuine leather seats that I have bought various refurbing creams and such, but never a dye. Any info on how long it lasts? Does it wash out? Is it a hassle? What product do I actually need? Am I just buying this kit and following the steps the page advises or something else? https://www.colourlockaustralia.com.au/colourlock-leather-repair-kit-dye.html
    • These going to fit over the big brakes? I'd be reeeeeeeeaaaall hesitant to believe so.
    • The leather work properly stunned me. Again, I am thankful that the leather was in such good condition. I'm not sure what the indent is at the top of the passenger seat. Like somebody was sitting in it with a golf ball between their shoulders. The wheels are more grey than silver now and missing a lot of gloss.  Here's one with nice silver wheels.
    • It's amazing how well the works on the leather seats. Looks mint. Looking forward to see how you go with the wheels. They do suit the car! Gutter rash is easy to fix, but I'm curious about getting the colour done.
×
×
  • Create New...