Why no SC61?

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

Search this Thread

Jun 16, 2006 | 03:04 AM

#31

damianhindley

Evolving Member

iTrader: (4)

Joined: Jul 2005

Posts: 271

Likes: 0

From: NC

I had this turbo on my sr20det spool was great made tons of power too.

Jun 16, 2006 | 05:50 AM

#32

06wwrs

Thread Starter

Newbie

Joined: Sep 2005

Posts: 63

Likes: 0

From: jax, fl

Quote:

Originally Posted by evolved4g63

SCM61 is not for a twin scroll mani.

My mistake. Again, I'm not that familiar with the 4g63 variants. I guess that kinda kills the bolt on idea. Still, I would think some would consider this turbo more often when shooting for mid-higher hp as a cheaper alternative. Seems like a 35r FRENZY around here. lol. I guess if you're going out, go all out right?

Jun 16, 2006 | 10:55 AM

#33

bolsen

Evolved Member

iTrader: (2)

Joined: Apr 2004

Posts: 1,940

Likes: 1

From: Milwaukee, WI

The reason the R series turbos are in a frenzy is big turbo and small displacement, why wouldn't you want the dual BB?

Jun 16, 2006 | 04:00 PM

#34

Ted B

EvoM Guru

iTrader: (6)

Joined: Aug 2004

Posts: 6,334

Likes: 63

From: Birmingham, AL

I recall a dyno chart posted here some months ago that demonstrated the SC61 to be laggier than a GT35R, but with the same power potential. IMO, considering the cost of fitting a GT35R and all the supporting hardware to make it worthwhile, the $600 one saves by going to the cheaper SC61 isn't very significant.

Just my $0.02