Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I’ve done a search but haven’t been able to find anything. Is there anyone on here who understands turbos who would be able to explain the difference in how these turbos would behave / respond compared to one another. 
obviously housings can affect this so let’s compare 

1. 6870 gen 2, 1.0ar T4 divided rear 

2. 6875 gen 2, .96ar T4 rear 

now I know the 6875 is rated a little higher, will it actually make more power and how much will you sacrifice in lag? 

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, r32-25t said:

Wouldn’t the compressor maps be the same for the fact they’re the same compressor wheel and housing 

Not sure, on their website says the 68/75 is a more modern design turbine

 

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944123
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, SiR_RB said:

68mm comp wheel will max out well before the 75 rear 

 

So there would be no reason to go 6875 over 6870? 
this is what I’m trying to find out, I’d like to actually talk to someone who is really switched on with turbos and not tied to any one brand. When I sell my motor I’ll probably let it go with the entire hot side. As my new motor is a 2.7, I’d like a turbo that is responsive, but can still make decent power and give a decent push when turned up. 

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944315
Share on other sites

Why not the 6466 then ? I tossed up going the 6870, then I thought why ? People are making 500 - 600rwkw with them and it will always be more responsive than the 6870, so I went the 1.00a/r 6466.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944320
Share on other sites

As Bk said, seriously consider the 6466

 

if you have a full house head and a decent rear (1.00+ in size) I have seen the 6466 push 580ish kw and would be an absolute rocket on the street with amazing response with the 2.7

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944326
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BK said:

Why not the 6466 then ? I tossed up going the 6870, then I thought why ? People are making 500 - 600rwkw with them and it will always be more responsive than the 6870, so I went the 1.00a/r 6466.

This is what I’m thinking, but I’m also not a Precesion fan boy, so I’d like to know all my options, I’ve heard good things about the Garrett 3584rs, mixed reviews on the new G series, good things about Borg Warner, I’ve also looked at Xona rotor? 

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944327
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, SiR_RB said:

As Bk said, seriously consider the 6466

 

if you have a full house head and a decent rear (1.00+ in size) I have seen the 6466 push 580ish kw and would be an absolute rocket on the street with amazing response with the 2.7

Did 146mph on the 580kw blue line dyno graph

 

have not been back since the tweaking of exhaust setup, also going a CNC Shimless head at the moment and redoing the pipework etc.

 

Keen too see how far we can push the 6466

 

dyno.thumb.jpg.9ff39030b8dd4f21abf51a2759c27089.jpg

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944332
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, hattori hanzo said:

Did 146mph on the 580kw blue line dyno graph

 

have not been back since the tweaking of exhaust setup, also going a CNC Shimless head at the moment and redoing the pipework etc.

 

Keen too see how far we can push the 6466

 

dyno.thumb.jpg.9ff39030b8dd4f21abf51a2759c27089.jpg

 

 

What size engine is that on?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944333
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Old man 32 GTR said:

This is what I’m thinking, but I’m also not a Precesion fan boy, so I’d like to know all my options, I’ve heard good things about the Garrett 3584rs, mixed reviews on the new G series, good things about Borg Warner, I’ve also looked at Xona rotor? 

My problem with the new Garrett turbos is there’s currently no twin scroll option

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944334
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, SiR_RB said:

What rear is on the 64 mate 

it was .84 with the 146mph

Have since gone 1.15 but did not get any massive changes, have since gone to 4" dump and CNC head to assist unlocking a few more ponies.

goal is 150mph on a 6466

 

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944360
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, hattori hanzo said:

it was .84 with the 146mph

Have since gone 1.15 but did not get any massive changes, have since gone to 4" dump and CNC head to assist unlocking a few more ponies.

goal is 150mph on a 6466

 

What gearbox?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944366
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, hattori hanzo said:

it was .84 with the 146mph

Have since gone 1.15 but did not get any massive changes, have since gone to 4" dump and CNC head to assist unlocking a few more ponies.

goal is 150mph on a 6466

 

What boost was that at mate?

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944368
Share on other sites

Had a chat with the guy from Garrett turbos yesterday about turbo options, he recommended the G30 900hp or G35 900, said they would offer good response and solid top end, another option is the G35 1050hp, this turbo is to supersede the 3584rs and will be released in a T4 divided rear housing option in the 1st quarter of 2021. 

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/481617-6870-vs-6875/#findComment-7944382
Share on other sites

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



  • 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...