6.7 daily/dyno contest what turbo

CHDiesel said:
I've heard good about Silver Bullet 465, but is that just a billet blade 64 or a feasible option for me. Is the compressor wheight and turbine OD much different than a 66 or 67?

I have a Suncoast dealer only 90 miles away, and I'm looking at an 800hp unit, since any 800hp+ will only be used on the rollers, so I'm not worried about my 68rfe holding up



No I haven't been around any tuned 6.7s at all, other than the occasional 500-600hp ones that show up to the Dyno contests for fun. I am taking your advice into count, but without my own personal experience or a wider sample size, forgive me if I'm don't jump right on your ideas at first. But they are being weighed.



I figured. I might as well focus on turbo sizes and specs before worrying about something as arbitrary as wheel designs.
Click to expand...

That statement was geared toward dangerous06 when he recommended the 464/465.

Hey Smokem...... long time no banter!

How are all those test stand turbos on those imaginary real world trucks doing these days?

You been testing turbos on Racindualies jackstands again?:poke::hehe:

He loves him some mirror bling under the hood!

It's pretty awesome what happens when you actually come from behind the X/Y graphs, you know where real data is found.
 
blackmega3500 said:
They make boost faster due to more available volume, but loose top end efficiency. Theres a reason other builders don't use a 5 blade, and even went back to the 7 blade design from the 6 blades.
Click to expand...

Where do you get these ideas from? Or do you just make these things up in your head?
 
1stgensleeper said:
Where do you get these ideas from? Or do you just make these things up in your head?
Click to expand...

It's called volume mi amigo. Greater volume faster equates to better response down low, yet will peak faster than one of equal size with more blades which will sustain and peak later/harder with more efficiency.

Which would push more water faster with less effort, a canoe paddle or a paddleboat wheel....

Hydrodynamics and air are very similar with how volume is moved.
 
blackmega3500 said:
It's called volume mi amigo. Greater volume faster equates to better response down low, yet will peak faster than one of equal size with more blades which will sustain and peak later/harder with more efficiency.

Which would push more water faster with less effort, a canoe paddle or a paddleboat wheel....

Hydrodynamics and air are very similar with how volume is moved.
Click to expand...

It all sounds great, but it’s not correct. Comparing paddling a canoe and a paddle boat wheel are not the same as a compressor wheel. You need to look at the speed a compressor wheel is spinning compared to a canoe paddle and a paddle boat wheel, nowhere near the same.
 
And as Weston said, blade count plays a much lesser role compared to other things, such as the sharpness of the leading edge of the blade.
 
1stgensleeper said:
Where do you get these ideas from? Or do you just make these things up in your head?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't concern yourself too much with someone's comments that clearly has no concept of the basic fundamental properties of a radial compressor.

CHDiesel said:
Thanks for the specifics. Towing isn't a huge priority, but it's still more important than cleaning up the smoke on the rollers. 467 still seems like the better option.
Click to expand...

The S467 isn't a poor choice, but do realize it's original application was for a much larger cubic inch John Deere engine, hence the larger AR cover on such a small compressor.

That being said there are better options out there depending on how much you are looking to spend, if you are interested feel free to message me as I do not frequent the forums.
 
1stgensleeper said:
Where do you get these ideas from? Or do you just make these things up in your head?
Click to expand...

blackmega3500 said:
It's called volume mi amigo. Greater volume faster equates to better response down low, yet will peak faster than one of equal size with more blades which will sustain and peak later/harder with more efficiency.

Which would push more water faster with less effort, a canoe paddle or a paddleboat wheel....

Hydrodynamics and air are very similar with how volume is moved.
Click to expand...

Smokem said:
I wouldn't concern yourself too much with someone's comments that clearly has no concept of the basic fundamental properties of a radial compressor.
Click to expand...

LOL
 
I should probably release my 2 blade 69mm compressor wheel. Much volume at low RPM and 69mm so you know it makes power.
 
Smokem said:
I wouldn't concern yourself too much with someone's comments that clearly has no concept of the basic fundamental properties of a radial compressor.
Click to expand...

:hehe:

Says the guy that's been proven publicly wrong on multiple instances! #pittythefool
 
zfaylor said:
I should probably release my 2 blade 69mm compressor wheel. Much volume at low RPM and 69mm so you know it makes power.
Click to expand...

Cobra attack copters beat you to it.....

hgZ8a.jpg


But considering size does matter with regard to volume the compressor housing will be your biggest hurdle! :hehe:

Now let's have some flavors of volume it multiple counts!

propeller.png


rudder-propeller-on-new-boat-260nw-1056871964.jpg


images


So what's your pick? And which freighter do you think will max out output potential the fastest.
 
Last edited:
bracker8040 said:
You talking about yourself, fool?
Click to expand...

And you are?........

Speak when spoken to, and don't play fan boy so much!:kick:

Weston knows he gives more advice based $$$$ than actual facts. He's in it to make money after all, being honest often isn't profitable.

Hints his bait to the OP for the sale in his last post.

If you can't see it, lol on you.
 
Last edited:
blackmega3500 said:
And you are?........

Speak when spoken to, and don't play fan boy so much!:kick:

Weston knows he gives more advice based $$$$ than actual facts. He's in it to make money after all, being honest often isn't profitable.

Hints his bait to the OP for the sale in his last post.

If you can't see it, lol on you.
Click to expand...

It doesn’t matter who I am.
I read enough on here to have a pretty good idea who is a fool, and who isn’t. And to call Weston dishonest is simply not true. Puts the joke back on you.
 
blackmega3500 said:
Cobra attack copters beat you to it.....

hgZ8a.jpg


But considering size does matter with regard to volume the compressor housing will be your biggest hurdle! :hehe:

Now let's have some flavors of volume it multiple counts!

propeller.png


rudder-propeller-on-new-boat-260nw-1056871964.jpg


images


So what's your pick? And which freighter do you think will max out output potential the fastest.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you compare propulsion to compression, but whatever.

You are stating thing backwards. An 11 blade compressor will typically move more air at a lower rpm, but fall off in the higher pressure ratios. Say on a 5 blade, there's more area for each blade to grab air at high rpm, but at low rpm it's more difficult for the compressor to hold air back on the discharge side.

But I'm an idiot, sooo...
 
blackmega3500 said:
Weston knows he gives more advice based $$$$ than actual facts. He's in it to make money after all, being honest often isn't profitable.

Hints his bait to the OP for the sale in his last post.
Click to expand...

Of which I sent him actual back to back dyno comparison info, you know the object you have no experience with.

The fact you are showing a Kaplan turbine to argue your point shows just how completely clueless you are.
 
Smokem said:
Of which I sent him actual back to back dyno comparison info, you know the object you have no experience with.

The fact you are showing a Kaplan turbine to argue your point shows just how completely clueless you are.
Click to expand...

Yet your evading the premise of volume across the surface and in front of the blade area.

Listen guy....

You remind me of the entire science community and how when last year that 12yr old found an alternate to Einsteins famed theory of relativity, they're was so much confusion and hysteria how that 12yr old was right lol

Yet you live behind your graphs of incomparable setups with very little real world applications outside of a dyno, and amazingly ironic is how often you're unable to explain when others have experiences that contradict your graphs lol.

You're such a joke it cracks me up.
 
JWhite said:
I'm not sure how you compare propulsion to compression, but whatever.

You are stating thing backwards. An 11 blade compressor will typically move more air at a lower rpm, but fall off in the higher pressure ratios. Say on a 5 blade, there's more area for each blade to grab air at high rpm, but at low rpm it's more difficult for the compressor to hold air back on the discharge side.

But I'm an idiot, sooo...
Click to expand...

Blades are blades, and surface area is surface area. Regardless of direction of flow, the premise of pockets of matter (gas or liquid) being "trapped" remain constant. Greater volume trapped between blades and accelerated quicker will peak much faster.

Turbos are rated in CFM for a reason..... and theres a reason the major producers DON'T often go less than 7 blades anymore.

Having personally ran 3 different 6 blade designs and sizes in an s400 (466x 2, 475, and 478) frame, they all peaked boost faster and fell off in upper rpms compared to a greater blade variant. But what do I know, these were just on a daily driven 6.7 that met all the criteria of the OP lol.

I mean good lord, I remember hitting 800 on my old truck with a 6 blade 466/83/1.0 with race cover, 150s, dual cp3s, ad2, and ****ty h&s tuning back in 2010.:hehe:

Guess the physics of air have changed since then!:bang
 
So you ARE saying blade count is the only determining factor here? Your take on blade count being back asswards to the entire turbo community aside of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top