TS T4 1.06a/r HTA3586
Oct 1, 2010, 01:15 AM
#46
The 4088 is a turd.
Tym Switzer did make 750 on his DJ on a 3582 and the Tial Vband header I built.
Evodan2004 speaks the truth about his car and numbers, I've had his car on my dyno.
I see a lot of cars in here making a lot of power with no boost, I guess I have to keep in mind the dyno differences. I don't see near the power on our dyno at those low boost levels but do know we have a LONG list of 9 second EVO's with high traps speeds out there.
HTA3586 is the best T3 turbo I've ever used/tested.
I've got a twin scroll T4 header with an HTA86 on Matt's car. He has the first twin scroll GT42 header we built for our old black car on his car. He got tired of the lag but couldn't swing an entire new turbo kit. I put the TS HTA on the old GT42 header, his car works very good. 9.6's and it's heavy. It has a FULL NHRA certified cage that's good to 7.50's I believe, power windows, door beams etc,.
Where's Calvin he needs to **** on a 40888.
Tym Switzer did make 750 on his DJ on a 3582 and the Tial Vband header I built.
Evodan2004 speaks the truth about his car and numbers, I've had his car on my dyno.
I see a lot of cars in here making a lot of power with no boost, I guess I have to keep in mind the dyno differences. I don't see near the power on our dyno at those low boost levels but do know we have a LONG list of 9 second EVO's with high traps speeds out there.
HTA3586 is the best T3 turbo I've ever used/tested.
I've got a twin scroll T4 header with an HTA86 on Matt's car. He has the first twin scroll GT42 header we built for our old black car on his car. He got tired of the lag but couldn't swing an entire new turbo kit. I put the TS HTA on the old GT42 header, his car works very good. 9.6's and it's heavy. It has a FULL NHRA certified cage that's good to 7.50's I believe, power windows, door beams etc,.
Where's Calvin he needs to **** on a 40888.
Oct 1, 2010, 07:00 AM
#47
The 4088 is a turd.
Tym Switzer did make 750 on his DJ on a 3582 and the Tial Vband header I built.
Evodan2004 speaks the truth about his car and numbers, I've had his car on my dyno.
I see a lot of cars in here making a lot of power with no boost, I guess I have to keep in mind the dyno differences. I don't see near the power on our dyno at those low boost levels but do know we have a LONG list of 9 second EVO's with high traps speeds out there.
HTA3586 is the best T3 turbo I've ever used/tested.
I've got a twin scroll T4 header with an HTA86 on Matt's car. He has the first twin scroll GT42 header we built for our old black car on his car. He got tired of the lag but couldn't swing an entire new turbo kit. I put the TS HTA on the old GT42 header, his car works very good. 9.6's and it's heavy. It has a FULL NHRA certified cage that's good to 7.50's I believe, power windows, door beams etc,.
Where's Calvin he needs to **** on a 40888.
Tym Switzer did make 750 on his DJ on a 3582 and the Tial Vband header I built.
Evodan2004 speaks the truth about his car and numbers, I've had his car on my dyno.
I see a lot of cars in here making a lot of power with no boost, I guess I have to keep in mind the dyno differences. I don't see near the power on our dyno at those low boost levels but do know we have a LONG list of 9 second EVO's with high traps speeds out there.
HTA3586 is the best T3 turbo I've ever used/tested.
I've got a twin scroll T4 header with an HTA86 on Matt's car. He has the first twin scroll GT42 header we built for our old black car on his car. He got tired of the lag but couldn't swing an entire new turbo kit. I put the TS HTA on the old GT42 header, his car works very good. 9.6's and it's heavy. It has a FULL NHRA certified cage that's good to 7.50's I believe, power windows, door beams etc,.
Where's Calvin he needs to **** on a 40888.
Thanks guys. Means alot to here it from both of you. As much as I love the dyno game I choose not to play it. I rather see my results at the track. Sean got my car where it is today and the 86 is the best Turbo I have ever used. I'm sure my car could make more with other parts and stuff but that's how we learn what works and does not.
The 4088 is a good Turbo IMO but with the 86 making the same HP but much better mid curve it does not make sense to run a 4088.
Oct 1, 2010, 09:39 AM
#48
We are building this exact kit for another customer right now. 1.5" runners, works with A/C and P/S - I would run this setup in a heart beat!
We have built a few of them
More Pictures: http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...5982763&page=2
Thanks!
Michael
We have built a few of them
More Pictures: http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...5982763&page=2
Thanks!
Michael
Last edited by ETS Michael; Oct 1, 2010 at 09:46 AM.
Oct 1, 2010, 10:55 AM
#53
Here are a few more pictures of turbo kits we have built.
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...d=169525982763
I need to upload more pics.
Michael
http://www.facebook.com/album.php?ai...d=169525982763
I need to upload more pics.
Michael
Oct 1, 2010, 12:14 PM
#56
I hate to be a newb jumping into a thread with so many great contributors, but I was in the same boat as you Mikey in terms of goal, choices, and even digging into the possibility of a gtx4088r..although I'll be running a BR 2.1; and for what it's worth, I pulled the trigger on an ETS TST4 HTA86 (heck, Michael may very well be talking about mine, sure hope so! 
) because I feel it'll be capable of breaking into 700's with the best powerband possible out of the options we've currently got available in divided setups. So if nothing else, you might see an e85 2.1 graph in the next couple weeks... (edited for e85 clarification, since there are already two dynos posted of tst4 hta86's, one 2.1 and one 2.0, both sitting at 590's on pump gas).
Although, I would like to say that I'm planning on getting my turbine housing ported and extrude honed. I might catch crap for doing it, but from everything I've read the biggest con about the t4 1.06 a/r divided housings seems to be hit or miss quality, so hopefully that process will improve airflow via the larger effective a/r and smoothed surfaces to let the hta3586 stretch its legs a bit better up top.. the gurus may add more, just tossing that out there as something to consider.
Off-topic comment: ETS and Force-Fed Performance have been awesome to deal with concerning all of the ups and downs of our previous turbo layout options, thanks guys!
) because I feel it'll be capable of breaking into 700's with the best powerband possible out of the options we've currently got available in divided setups. So if nothing else, you might see an e85 2.1 graph in the next couple weeks... (edited for e85 clarification, since there are already two dynos posted of tst4 hta86's, one 2.1 and one 2.0, both sitting at 590's on pump gas).Although, I would like to say that I'm planning on getting my turbine housing ported and extrude honed. I might catch crap for doing it, but from everything I've read the biggest con about the t4 1.06 a/r divided housings seems to be hit or miss quality, so hopefully that process will improve airflow via the larger effective a/r and smoothed surfaces to let the hta3586 stretch its legs a bit better up top.. the gurus may add more, just tossing that out there as something to consider.
Off-topic comment: ETS and Force-Fed Performance have been awesome to deal with concerning all of the ups and downs of our previous turbo layout options, thanks guys!
Last edited by Hudson; Oct 1, 2010 at 12:24 PM.
Oct 1, 2010, 12:22 PM
#57
I hate to be a newb jumping into a thread with so many great contributors, but I was in the same boat as you Mikey in terms of goal, choices, and even digging into the possibility of a gtx4088r..although I'll be running a BR 2.1; and for what it's worth, I pulled the trigger on an ETS TST4 HTA86 (heck, Michael may very well be talking about mine, sure hope so! ) because I feel it'll be capable of breaking into 700's with the best powerband possible out of the options we've currently got available in divided setups. So if nothing else, you might see a 2.1 graph in the next couple weeks.
Although, I would like to say that I'm planning on getting my turbine housing ported and extrude honed. I might catch crap for doing it, but from everything I've read the biggest con about the t4 1.06 a/r divided housings seems to be hit or miss quality, so hopefully that process will improve airflow via the larger effective a/r and smoothed surfaces to let the hta3586 stretch its legs a bit better up top.. the gurus may add more, just tossing that out there as something to consider.
Off-topic comment: ETS and Force-Fed Performance have been awesome to deal with concerning all of the ups and downs of our previous turbo layout options, thanks guys!
) because I feel it'll be capable of breaking into 700's with the best powerband possible out of the options we've currently got available in divided setups. So if nothing else, you might see a 2.1 graph in the next couple weeks.Although, I would like to say that I'm planning on getting my turbine housing ported and extrude honed. I might catch crap for doing it, but from everything I've read the biggest con about the t4 1.06 a/r divided housings seems to be hit or miss quality, so hopefully that process will improve airflow via the larger effective a/r and smoothed surfaces to let the hta3586 stretch its legs a bit better up top.. the gurus may add more, just tossing that out there as something to consider.
Off-topic comment: ETS and Force-Fed Performance have been awesome to deal with concerning all of the ups and downs of our previous turbo layout options, thanks guys!
I had to send one of my housings back it was so bad. I refused to us it. As for the extrude hone process I also was going to do it but I didn't do it because I was not sure if it would actually hurt the divided part on the housing or round the tip of it off where its close to the turbine wheel. What info have you gathered on this?
Oct 1, 2010, 12:34 PM
#58
Just inquiry references and digging around on forums at this point, although I could always try to snag an unmolested housing as well to do a back-to-back test for comparison purposes that way the community could have some hard data to chew on if anyone would be interested and FFP would be game to do it. I'm planning on just skipping any sort of port work on the divider wall to minimize loss there after accounting for the extrude honing, but I'll know for certain how it turns out soon enough. Worst case expected scenario is I'm down a few hundred dollars to replace the housing, so it's worth it to try for me.
Oct 1, 2010, 12:48 PM
#59
Just inquiry references and digging around on forums at this point, although I could always try to snag an unmolested housing as well to do a back-to-back test for comparison purposes that way the community could have some hard data to chew on if anyone would be interested and FFP would be game to do it. I'm planning on just skipping any sort of port work on the divider wall to minimize loss there after accounting for the extrude honing, but I'll know for certain how it turns out soon enough. Worst case expected scenario is I'm down a few hundred dollars to replace the housing, so it's worth it to try for me.
Oct 1, 2010, 12:52 PM
#60
Yea, it'll be be ported before extrude honing, I was just talking about not taking much material off of the divider wall. To my understanding the rest of the volute's fair game. :P