6768 dbb BILLET turbo is on time

[Darkcyde]

2nd that a te45a is nada compared to a billet 67

 

[V6POWER]

Looks like I spent way too much money on my motor and I have to run mid-high 20# boost to run what it runs. If I had known that all I needed was a 6768DBB turbo at only 18#, I could have saved a lot of money.

I agree with the other posters...your boost gauge is not reading correctly.

 

[John Wilde]

I can believe it.
Especially with the amount of airflow this new Billet 67 compressor wheel has combined with the flow of the HPQ turbine wheel.

Patrick

Patrick,

What injectors would you recommend with this turbo on a 231 inch motor?

 

[Bent6]

I didn't say they didn't work across the board.... let me clarify.....I said there are several people that have found after swapping to these new billet wheel turbos.... 62mm and 67mm...... that they found they now have major boost control issues.... lots of boost creep......where they didn't have any before the swap....... do a search Grumpy..... :wink:

I had issues with a 6765 and ended up gating it off the header with a 44mm. These new billet wheels move a lot of CFM - not saying it won't work with an internal gate but it ain't going to be easy.

Patrick,

What injectors would you recommend with this turbo on a 231 inch motor?

I'm running 75s with a 6765 at about 70% DC on a 235CID.

I can buy the 10 sec run but not the 18psi - maybe more like 21 or so. My street car went 10.80 at 21# and a soft 60ft time with a 6765.

 

[Blazer406]

........snip......
I can buy the 10 sec run but not the 18psi - maybe more like 21 or so. My street car went 10.80 at 21# and a soft 60ft time with a 6765.

Yea.... but you weren't running stock heads..... and stock cam..... and stock intake...... etc..... that is where I am (as well as several others) are questioning the actual boost it took to run that time at that weight..... with an otherwise stock motor......

 

[Bent6]

Yea.... but you weren't running stock heads..... and stock cam..... and stock intake...... etc..... that is where I am (as well as several others) are questioning the actual boost it took to run that time at that weight..... with an otherwise stock motor......

True - but I did it on a SOFT run - 1.61 short time, 21#, and short shifting @ 5k. A lot more potential in mine still.

I understand why you are questioning the boost level. He mentioned somewhere about having a broken boost line to the guage he was going to fix - line could still be partially clogged or kinked and/or a faulty boost gauge. I have seen boost gauges that were inaccurate brand new out of the box.

Another point is 18# with a stock wg actuator setup - I ported the #@%^ out of my 6765 and still couldn't hold the boost anywhere near that low with an external gate off the turbine thus my decision to go to the gate off the header. I think he was more than likely running WAY more than his gauge showed which could explain the timeslip as well as the blown headgasket in the process.

Regardless - congrats on the timeslip and check your lines as well as that gauge!:biggrin:

 

[John Wilde]

Yea.... but you weren't running stock heads..... and stock cam..... and stock intake...... etc..... that is where I am (as well as several others) are questioning the actual boost it took to run that time at that weight..... with an otherwise stock motor......

Will was also not running the 68/HPQ Turbine wheel, which is rumored to make
huge power differences over the smaller wheel. Not apples to apples for sure.
I say send the turbo to will and let him make some passes!!!

 

[Blazer406]

I agree Will....... the stock heads are a coffee stirring straw you are trying to blow thru.....the size of the air compressor you put on one end at low boost (18 psi) isn't going to make a hundred hp difference at that boost level..... that's all.

Ported GN1's..... 18 psi..... high 10's are quite possible IMHO.....with one of these bad boy turbos.....

 

[Bent6]

Will was also not running the 68/HPQ Turbine wheel, which is rumored to make
huge power differences over the smaller wheel. Not apples to apples for sure.
I say send the turbo to will and let him make some passes!!!

The HPQ wheel is only "rated - and I use that term loosely" at 55 HP more than the 65 wheel. He doesn't mention what housing he's using. I don't think there's much more to be had with the HPQ wheel on a stock cube motor anyway - JMO.

My next "street" engine will have a billet 71 at the minimum - winter is starting to set in!:biggrin:

 

[John Wilde]

The HPQ wheel is only "rated - and I use that term loosely" at 55 HP more than the 65 wheel. He doesn't mention what housing he's using. I don't think there's much more to be had with the HPQ wheel on a stock cube motor anyway - JMO.

My next "street" engine will have a billet 71 at the minimum - winter is starting to set in!:biggrin:

OMG, what are you doing now???!!!

 

[Bent6]

OMG, what are you doing now???!!!

I'm not telllin'...........at least not yet............let's just say I'm starting to enjoy this 275DR street stuff! :biggrin:

 

[bison]

I agree Will....... the stock heads are a coffee stirring straw you are trying to blow thru.....the size of the air compressor you put on one end at low boost (18 psi) isn't going to make a hundred hp difference at that boost level..... that's all.

Ported GN1's..... 18 psi..... high 10's are quite possible IMHO.....with one of these bad boy turbos.....

Exactly. There is no doubt in my mind i can easily run 10.90's at as low as 15-16psi off the foot brake with my combo. Turbobitt ran 10.0's with lazy 60's and 16psi on his 8:1stage 2. I could put a tiny dinosaur TE44 on mine and click off high tens all day at 18-19psi. The thing is the turbo and every component surrounding the combo is a mismatch in a low boost application like that. This thread is useless without datalogged numbers. I found my auto meter boost gauges to read higher than the number from the AEM MAP i use. I dont see any stock headed unopened engine running anywhere near 10.90 at 18psi without N2O if the car weighs anywhere near 3500. What a turbo can "potentially" flow doesnt mean chit if the engine cant flow the air. I see all these guys posting that they cant control the boost levels with these newer turbos. Well if they had picked a turbo with a rating that was closer to their actual engine target hp id bet it would be a lot easier. Think about it. Putting a turbo on an 231ci engine that will support 1000hp while making about 600hp. If you ran the boost required to make even 70-80% of the rated hp id put money on it that you would hit backpressure pushing the gate open unless you are holding it shut with CO2 before you get close to the rated hp. TSM uses a lot of pressure on the top of the gate to keep the boost from falling off. I hit the backpressure problem and i have an old cast compressor wheel. 114mph@3600+lbs in the eighth backpressure limited to 26psi. Id also bet the ex wheel on my little 3 bolt turbo flows more than a 65 trim in a 3bolt. All you do is put the compressor on the left side of the surge line trying to run the over sized compressor on a small engine and narrow the power band to chit.

 

[2QUICK2B6]

The HPQ wheel is only "rated - and I use that term loosely" at 55 HP more than the 65 wheel. He doesn't mention what housing he's using. I don't think there's much more to be had with the HPQ wheel on a stock cube motor anyway - JMO.

This turbo has the H cover..... Who knows I might be lying abt that too!

Here is the video

YouTube - tta299's Channel

 

[John Wilde]

This turbo has the H cover..... Who knows I might be lying abt that too!

Here is the video

YouTube - tta299's Channel

Scott,

I think Will is talking about your turbine housing.

 

[Bent6]

This turbo has the H cover..... Who knows I might be lying abt that too!

Here is the video

YouTube - tta299's Channel

Please don't take offense to anything I've said Scott. I don't doubt that you ran the time and I'm sure your gauge did say 18#. I was refering to the aspect ratio (A/R) of your exhaust housing.

I do have to agree with Bison that with no data to validate, it simply defys the laws of physics here as far as the car weight, CID, airflow potential, etc. Regardless - you ran the number with a stock longblock which was your goal. I would just advise you to get that gauge as well as the vac/boost source and lines checked before you drop another slug in it. Good luck!

 

[2QUICK2B6]

Please don't take offense to anything I've said Scott. I don't doubt that you ran the time and I'm sure your gauge did say 18#. I was refering to the aspect ratio (A/R) of your exhaust housing.

I do have to agree with Bison that with no data to validate, it simply defys the laws of physics here as far as the car weight, CID, airflow potential, etc. Regardless - you ran the number with a stock longblock which was your goal. I would just advise you to get that gauge as well as the vac/boost source and lines checked before you drop another slug in it. Good luck!

That comment wasnt directed directly at you ... I know you an Bison are good people.
.63 I think i know its not the big 1. Anyone know anyone else with this turbo ?
I would like to see more results. I know of a car in NC but I dont think its been to the track yet. Thanks for all the replies from everyone good an bad

 

[John Wilde]

I hope I am not a bad person...
Anyway are you lying if what you saying you believe to be true?

 

[2QUICK2B6]

I hope I am not a bad person...
Anyway are you lying if what you saying you believe to be true?

john I dont think your a bad person either. If you think its true no its not a lie imo unless u have proof that its untrue. I listen to everyone an sort out the information. I know alot of people on this site have forgot more than i will ever learn abt these cars.

 

[brian]

This turbo has the H cover..... Who knows I might be lying abt that too!

Here is the video

YouTube - tta299's Channel

I claim BS! Now send me that turbo so I can test it!

No.. seriously... That is awesome. Good work man...

Brian

 

[TTipe]

Show Me I'm from Missery

Stockwell went 10.80's with a stock (unopened) longblock on a hurt motor trapping 123 mph.He used 009's and a seventh stocker.42 gals/hr + 28/6 gals/hr=48 gals per hour.How can you be running lean with 60's & alky unless your fuel pumps are going south.I'm glad you ran the number but the imfo you are forwarding makes no sense.I hope its just some display parameter with your laptop.