Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

AMS GT35R Kit. Is there ANYWAY to get a .82 Housing???

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 10:13 AM
  #106  
4kinboost's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,055
Likes: 0
From: long island,ny
Originally Posted by 94AWDcoupe
Your question was stupid and not worth aswering. Were did you read I went the time in my sig with my latest HP numbers? The last track time was done with 120 less HP hitting the brakes to avoid being booted for the third time. Cant you also read the third line my sig? This is exactly what makes your posting a waste of time. You have been shown to be quite wrong about your observations on the p63 vs g82 by myself, steve, and Eric, yet you still rant like you are right and have superior knowledge.
Amazing how defensive people get when you ask a simple question.

Still no proof as to why I'm 'wrong' on my observations between a 5-bolt .63 and the gt-turbine with 3" outlet.
No pictures.
No dynosheets.
No logs.
No proof.

Just a few angry little boys typing away at the keyboard with no supporting evidence to support their opinions.

This is a forum, so I guess we can all expect the good with the bad. I will not lower myself to your levels of name calling and ignorance. I will just wait for you to post logs,sheets, and track times/mph showing NO positive results with this upgrade on a well breathing 4g63.

It's starting to feel like the civic forums in here.
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 10:14 AM
  #107  
4kinboost's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,055
Likes: 0
From: long island,ny
Originally Posted by crcain
Look we can all believe 94AWDCoupe that a GT35R spools 34 psi at 4100 rpm on a 2 litre.

Or we can believe every other dyno chart or datalog ever posted on this site.
I'll go with your second option.
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 10:40 AM
  #108  
90GSXDan's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 671
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, New York
Originally Posted by 4kinboost
Still no proof as to why I'm 'wrong' on my observations between a 5-bolt .63 and the gt-turbine with 3" outlet.
No pictures.
No dynosheets.
No logs.
No proof.
Im pretty sure AMS has proved this over and over again.... But whatever.

Originally Posted by 4kinboost
I will not lower myself to your levels of name calling and ignorance.
Originally Posted by 4kinboost
Just a few angry little boys typing away at the keyboard with no supporting evidence to support their opinions.
Not to mention, you already proved that with the verbal confrontation we had.

Originally Posted by 4kinboost
This is a forum, so I guess we can all expect the good with the bad. I will not lower myself to your levels of name calling and ignorance. I will just wait for you to post logs,sheets, and track times/mph showing NO positive results with this upgrade on a well breathing 4g63.

It's starting to feel like the civic forums in here.
He already did back it up with a video..... Seemed to be very quick on spooling if you ask me!

Dan
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 10:51 AM
  #109  
4kinboost's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,055
Likes: 0
From: long island,ny
Originally Posted by 90GSXDan
Im pretty sure AMS has proved this over and over again.... But whatever.



Not to mention, you already proved that with the verbal confrontation we had.



He already did back it up with a video..... Seemed to be very quick on spooling if you ask me!

Dan

I didn't ask you.
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 11:00 AM
  #110  
Johnboy1065's Avatar
Thread Starter
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,275
Likes: 0
From: Knoxville Tennessee
I called precision yesterday and asked about the 5 bolt precision housing.

I asked them if enough people were interested (as in a big group buy) if they'd be willing to make a .82 5 bolt housing. They said no, because the 5 bolt .82 would not be as efficient as the 4 bolt .82 housings and they wouldnt want to make a product that doesnt preform well. He also said that any 5 bolt design wont be quite as efficient as a 4 bolt in the same A/R.

I have no idea why he said that, I'm just telling ya'll what I was told
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 11:05 AM
  #111  
4kinboost's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,055
Likes: 0
From: long island,ny
Originally Posted by Johnboy1065
I called precision yesterday and asked about the 5 bolt precision housing.

I asked them if enough people were interested (as in a big group buy) if they'd be willing to make a .82 5 bolt housing. They said no, because the 5 bolt .82 would not be as efficient as the 4 bolt .82 housings and they wouldnt want to make a product that doesnt preform well. He also said that any 5 bolt design wont be quite as efficient as a 4 bolt in the same A/R.

I have no idea why he said that, I'm just telling ya'll what I was told


I can't wait to hear the arguement for that one.
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 11:28 AM
  #112  
94AWDcoupe's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (125)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,837
Likes: 30
From: Tampa
Originally Posted by 94AWDcoupe
He hits full boost at 4100rpm on regular 35r on a 2.0, which was 33-34psi (max boost). Here is the video. My car is hitting 34psi (max boost) at 4400 in third, but I do have 2.3.

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/S...odyno_3791.htm

AMS has been minting money

Oh and by the way, this was a dynojet. Street spool would come on even harder.
I made a mistake saying this car was 2.0. Sorry guys that car had a 2.3. But I still believe it was the fastest spooling 35r built
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 11:33 AM
  #113  
DDATuned's Avatar
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (49)
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
From: New York
Originally Posted by 4kinboost
I didn't ask you.



You guys are way to local to be argueing.
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 11:40 AM
  #114  
4kinboost's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,055
Likes: 0
From: long island,ny
Originally Posted by 94AWDcoupe
I made a mistake saying this car was 2.0. Sorry guys that car had a 2.3. But I still believe it was the fastest spooling 35r built

It was big of you to admit the error.

2 things though;
A- faster spool doesn't equal more hp/tq, or a quicker et. ( Or else we would never buy BT's)

B- I wonder how the 12.8-13.1 afr's played a roll? I don't think many of us tune that lean.

Do you have a dynosheet of that pull?
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 11:54 AM
  #115  
94AWDcoupe's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (125)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,837
Likes: 30
From: Tampa
The a/f ratio was brought up when the original post was made. The owner of the car said his wideband was reading a point leaner than the dyno wideband.

Last edited by 94AWDcoupe; Sep 18, 2008 at 03:12 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 02:35 PM
  #116  
4kinboost's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,055
Likes: 0
From: long island,ny
Originally Posted by Johnboy1065
I called precision yesterday and asked about the 5 bolt precision housing.

I asked them if enough people were interested (as in a big group buy) if they'd be willing to make a .82 5 bolt housing. They said no, because the 5 bolt .82 would not be as efficient as the 4 bolt .82 housings and they wouldnt want to make a product that doesnt preform well. He also said that any 5 bolt design wont be quite as efficient as a 4 bolt in the same A/R.

I have no idea why he said that, I'm just telling ya'll what I was told

All I hear is crickets now about this topic. I guess we can put this debate to rest and be buddies again??..
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 02:49 PM
  #117  
90GSXDan's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 671
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, New York
Originally Posted by 4kinboost
All I hear is crickets now about this topic. I guess we can put this debate to rest and be buddies again??..
Ok? Precision themselves said that they dont want to make a platform that wouldnt perform well... Yet they made a 5-bolt .63ar..... So I guess that means what?

Clear cut, the precision .63ar performs and it still continues to do so... If it wouldn't and didn't, well as Precision said it themselves.... They wouldnt make a platform that wouldnt perform well!

Dan
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 02:51 PM
  #118  
SRT-TO-EVO's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,404
Likes: 0
From: Westchester, NY
I always heard 4 bolt housings were more efficient as well. I thought that was old news?
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 02:59 PM
  #119  
90GSXDan's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 671
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, New York
Is is more effecient, most likely. But like Precision themselves said, they will not create a platform that will not perform...

Dan
Reply
Old Sep 18, 2008 | 03:10 PM
  #120  
94AWDcoupe's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (125)
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,837
Likes: 30
From: Tampa
Originally Posted by SRT-TO-EVO
I always heard 4 bolt housings were more efficient as well. I thought that was old news?
The bad reputation 5 bolts have come from turbonetics housings from years ago. When you bought a turbo from them with stage 3 or stage 5 exhaust the turbine housing was a bored out version of the stage 1 wheel. Yes stage 1, stage 3 and stage 5 were all using the same 48, 63, 82 housings original cast for the stage 1 wheel. These were the housings that gave 5 bolts a bad name. The volutes were undersized for the a/r ratings. They performed poorly against the garret 4 bolt housings. The internet became swamped with posts of people picked up power switching to 4 bolts. These posts continued for years and I still see posts today. The thing is not all 5 bolts were cast like those original poor performing ones. There are some that work as well as and better than 4 bolt equivalents. You just cant label all 5 bolts inferior, but as it turns out people do exactly that without knowing all the facts.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:56 AM.