MrLith

That was my reasoning too - I have been long wondering about the 6870 vs Super99 and my current theory is the 6870 might really show its worth on bigger motors, but on 4G63s wasn't sure if the extra turbine would do much more than make it better pound for pound up to a point but then when it reaches a point where you just need lots of psi to crack 1000whp on a 4G anyway the smaller turbine sacrifice may be outweighed by the FP's bigger pump... if you are keen to push that hard. Will be interesting to see how it goes in practice.

The thing I didn't expect is how well the 6870 seems to spool, definitely seems like it'd outclass the Super99 in terms of spool - guess it depends how much, if any extra power capability the Super99 might have is worth it?

Yes, +1 on that - always bring quality info with your threads... love it

droppinbottom

iTrader: (5)

Should probably look into making a shaft speed sensor standard on these builds also. I wish I had that data for mine.

JohnBradley

iTrader: (30)

I still consider shaft speed to be an option, here is why-

On compressor covers that dont have the option it adds more cost compared to one like the EFR. Not having a compressor map or max rpm rating for a given turbo as part of its sales information makes shaft speed cool but not very useful. If I had the info for max shaft speed or backpressure vs max hp, of the 2 options I only need backpressure to know when the turbo is done or needs a larger housing.

If Precision shared more information then shaft speed would be more relevant, but alas they chose to keep those to themselves. It's like tuning a car by AFR/IDC only and guessing when the fuel pressure drops. I can see when my map is okay and when it starts to go weird. Its nice to know exactly where it is but I dont have to see the data to know I am out of pump.

mitsubeastlee

iTrader: (3)

just because, can we see a 2.2l 6466 overlay with this..im sure im not the only one wondering. why do I feel that these will spool very close with the 6870 making MUCH more per lb.

MrLith

Also out of curiosity - is the "plenty to go" likely to be explored anytime soon?

JohnBradley

iTrader: (30)

We are waiting on E98 to arrive, right now the car is only on E85. Its not much octane difference but having the extra is important when you are at that level.

JohnBradley

iTrader: (30)

I'll see what I can do.

mrfred

iTrader: (50)

nice results and interesting discussion. powerband is reminiscent of martin's 9180 setup, but iirc, his was at 40 psi for 850 whp. granted that his motor is a 2.4L along with a few other differences, but can't help but wonder how these two turbos would compare for overall "asskicking" potential.

thestig0711

iTrader: (1)

Depending on the longevity of this turbo from your results this may stop my from jumping into a super 94. Great results Guys keep up the good work.

MrLith

Ahh yes, makes sense - cheers Will be very interesting to see how it goes when you get to lean on it!

I am a bit more of a FP than Precision fanboi, but I am still an eternal realist and the majority of the results seem to suggest the 6870 will have the overall balance in it's favour - though I don't know of anyone YET testing the Super94 HTZ so there could be something in that.

way2qik

iTrader: (5)

Yeah, we already knew this, but at least you're admitting it. LOL

MrLith

Haha, you say "admitting" like it's a bad thing At least I don't let my personal preferences affect my objectivity

khmerpimpin

iTrader: (20)

Aaron can you overlay 6870 pte vs 9180 efr?

mitsubeastlee

iTrader: (3)

2.2l 6466 vs 2.2l 6870 FIRST then the

6870 vs 9180

Thanks in advance I know English Racing wont let us down.

droppinbottom

iTrader: (5)

They may be able to post a comp of Akash's old car vs Daniel's car depending on which gear each car was done in.

They don't have a log of my car in 4th. Only 3rd gear of mine and my car spools faster than Akash's old car.