Originally Posted by twkdcd595

I should elaborate and say that I am not trying to discount the HTA35r's performance as we all know what it can do, rather I dont like the method in which we are being fed the test results only on the 6265 Precision by a rival manufacturer/ biased party refusing to give any more test data. As I said it is a larger unit than the HTA35r so I expected the difference in lag.

I just dont like the with-holding of information someone would need to properly understand the testing conditions... what compressor housing was on each unit, iats during the runs, sae, std, or uncorrected, etc?

sorry to railroad your thread, this is just my 2 cents. I did not see the 6262 testing you speak of, but that shows the 6262 is a more evently matched viable alternative to the HTA.

I am betting as more units get out and testing done, the 6262 or maybe a variant will become more proven.

Originally Posted by Mike@AwdMotorsports

Steve how can the 6262 be equivalent to the standard garrett 35r?? its a billet wheel turbo and slightly larger compressor wheel i beleive.. the 6162 is supposed to be the 35r equivalent i thought..

Originally Posted by ForcedPerformance

I was sure plenty of people would be suspect of our testing, but to me that was not a good enough reason to not test it anyway.

I did say the PTE turbo had the typical bulet hole cover on it, a HTA35R only comes with one cover on it, I said they both had .82 housings, and correction was used but the CF was the same for both runs becasue they were done within a few hours of each other. It doenst matter if the ambient temps were 80F or 100F they were the same in both cases. I'll go check that thread in case this wasnt obvious in my existing posts and clarify.

You are correct however, as more 6265 and 6265 turbos get out there more and more people will see how it works.

Originally Posted by Steve@NrgTech

damn Now i have to edit like 15 posts, lol