3582HTA vs 6265 Dyno Comparo
Jan 9, 2009, 10:15 PM
#121
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Midwest
Posts: 707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you ordered the 6765 yet? Im getting one to try on a Supra
Im guessing they will destroy the standard 67mm its replacing, just like the 6262 vs 35R.
Jan 10, 2009, 04:51 AM
#122
Account Disabled
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: SO. CO.
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Biased testing anyone!!!
Dyno's are only half truth, you could have loaded the dyno differently to make it read differently and appear like the hta makes more than the 6265. If the 6262 is a smaller turbo than the 6265 and the 6262 just went 8's. Where is the hta that has gone 8's before it? Doesnt bushcur run hta stuff?
Dyno's are only half truth, you could have loaded the dyno differently to make it read differently and appear like the hta makes more than the 6265. If the 6262 is a smaller turbo than the 6265 and the 6262 just went 8's. Where is the hta that has gone 8's before it? Doesnt bushcur run hta stuff?
Jan 10, 2009, 07:37 AM
#123
Evolving Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In front of a Catia screen
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
82HTA vs the 6265 turbo on the dyno, my results.
The 82HTA compressor is a 59mm inducer, while the 6265 is larger at 62mm. Both wheels are billet, but not equal. The HTA wheels are made in 2000 series aluminum while the PTE ones are only 6061 aluminum. Grab your material science text book and look how different the strengths of these two materials are at a typical operating temp of about 400F.
The 82HTA compressor is a 59mm inducer, while the 6265 is larger at 62mm. Both wheels are billet, but not equal. The HTA wheels are made in 2000 series aluminum while the PTE ones are only 6061 aluminum. Grab your material science text book and look how different the strengths of these two materials are at a typical operating temp of about 400F.
6061?? are you kidding? at speeds that turbo's spin,, 100,000 + rpm, I'm surprised a 6061 series al would last more than 5 min!
scary...
2000 series must be a pricey chunk of billet, but damn worth it!
Jan 10, 2009, 08:36 AM
#127
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Midwest
Posts: 707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Biased testing anyone!!!
Dyno's are only half truth, you could have loaded the dyno differently to make it read differently and appear like the hta makes more than the 6265. If the 6262 is a smaller turbo than the 6265 and the 6262 just went 8's. Where is the hta that has gone 8's before it? Doesnt bushcur run hta stuff?
Dyno's are only half truth, you could have loaded the dyno differently to make it read differently and appear like the hta makes more than the 6265. If the 6262 is a smaller turbo than the 6265 and the 6262 just went 8's. Where is the hta that has gone 8's before it? Doesnt bushcur run hta stuff?
I understand the reference of 6000 series aluminum to 2000 series, but Ive used Precision 71mm before, and I know tons of guys that run them and no problems so far. These are also Supra guys who run high boost and race fuel all the time.
Jan 10, 2009, 08:58 AM
#128
There are lots of reasons that two dyno tests done on different dynos, with different cars, at different times with four different turbos could reach results that would confuse someone who assumes performance characteristics between different turbos in the FP and PT families and then extrapolates that different results should have happened. Why you'd ASSume that the FP dyno results were changed, but accept the Mike AWD dyno tests as gospel is beyond me...
Ted B. is dead on. When you read these results, ask yourself how much they tell you about what a turbo would do for you on your own car. How many of us are going to be running 40 PSI ever, much less on a regular basis? Find the turbo that works well in the parameters you'll use. For the vast majority of people, I bet that a turbo like the 82HTA seems to be very well documented as a winner...
Ted B. is dead on. When you read these results, ask yourself how much they tell you about what a turbo would do for you on your own car. How many of us are going to be running 40 PSI ever, much less on a regular basis? Find the turbo that works well in the parameters you'll use. For the vast majority of people, I bet that a turbo like the 82HTA seems to be very well documented as a winner...
Jan 10, 2009, 10:05 AM
#129
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Midwest
Posts: 707
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are lots of reasons that two dyno tests done on different dynos, with different cars, at different times with four different turbos could reach results that would confuse someone who assumes performance characteristics between different turbos in the FP and PT families and then extrapolates that different results should have happened. Why you'd ASSume that the FP dyno results were changed, but accept the Mike AWD dyno tests as gospel is beyond me...
Ted B. is dead on. When you read these results, ask yourself how much they tell you about what a turbo would do for you on your own car. How many of us are going to be running 40 PSI ever, much less on a regular basis? Find the turbo that works well in the parameters you'll use. For the vast majority of people, I bet that a turbo like the 82HTA seems to be very well documented as a winner...
Ted B. is dead on. When you read these results, ask yourself how much they tell you about what a turbo would do for you on your own car. How many of us are going to be running 40 PSI ever, much less on a regular basis? Find the turbo that works well in the parameters you'll use. For the vast majority of people, I bet that a turbo like the 82HTA seems to be very well documented as a winner...
I also agree with Ted, pick the turbo for your application, thats what I always tell people. Im all for using the best products, so Im always on the hunt for the newest and best thing. I just dont see the validity of testing a 6265 and an 82HTA back to back, lag will be much different. The PTE unit is larger, and the 6062 is a much better comparison.
I want to see unbiased comparisons with comparable turbos. The FP spooled quicker, but its a smaller turbo, so I would expect those results. I want to see 6062 vs 82HTA, and 6262 vs 86HTA. If the FP shows to be a better turbo, thats what I will be using.
Jan 10, 2009, 10:17 AM
#130
Evolving Member
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True, but not all planning revolves around where the compressor ultimately chokes.
A sound plan is one that involves defining a power target and choosing a turbo that is capable of attaining that figure with available fuel, with the least amount of compromise in the way of low speed power and spool characteristics. This maximizes average power, and it is average power (not peak) that delivers real world performance. If 600whp were the power target in this case, the HTA3582R outperforms the 6265 because it delivers greater average power. Even if the 6265 had something left beyond the HTA unit, it would have to deliver significantly more peak power to make up for the greater average power of the HTA turbo.
With the HTA3582R being capable of over 700whp, there seems to be nothing around that gives greater power potential without giving up something.
A sound plan is one that involves defining a power target and choosing a turbo that is capable of attaining that figure with available fuel, with the least amount of compromise in the way of low speed power and spool characteristics. This maximizes average power, and it is average power (not peak) that delivers real world performance. If 600whp were the power target in this case, the HTA3582R outperforms the 6265 because it delivers greater average power. Even if the 6265 had something left beyond the HTA unit, it would have to deliver significantly more peak power to make up for the greater average power of the HTA turbo.
With the HTA3582R being capable of over 700whp, there seems to be nothing around that gives greater power potential without giving up something.
Also, I am pretty sure everyone and their grandma knows you give up low end to gain high end, which makes this test seem even more like marketing. I am sure Robert knew which one would spool sooner
Jan 10, 2009, 12:14 PM
#132
'Everyone and their grandma' knows getting something costs something else, but that is true only in a broad sense. Advances in technology defy that rule, and in this case, it comes as a result of swapping a more efficient compressor onto an already efficient turbine.
Jan 10, 2009, 12:59 PM
#133
Evolving Member
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: San German,Puerto Rico
Posts: 399
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, so the HTA GT3586R will make more power @ lets say 35psi than a Precision 6262 @ that boost level ?
Last edited by EVO8_PR; Jan 10, 2009 at 01:12 PM.
Jan 10, 2009, 01:48 PM
#135
Account Disabled
iTrader: (81)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 612
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
900hp cabable in a t3, dam technogly has come along way big time.
Cant tell you what the 6262 at 35 psi makes but at 49psi it holds boost pretty decent only dropping to 46psi and makes near 800whp in hot florida heat.. My opinion is its the superior t3 turbo to date.. just wait til the 6765 billet wheel is released.. near 900whp on a t3 has never been done.. I think it will do it..