BW S366, Comp 6767, PT 6766...
Thread Starter
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
BW S366, Comp 6767, PT 6766... Is there really any that shines above the other ?
BW get rave reviews, they seem well priced. But turbine options are limited and physically they are massive.
Precision, Ive used a few and never had an issue, always performed great. They can get mixed reviews online though.
Comp, relatively new, albeit past experience with ITS, which Ive also used and were great units. At least with Precision or Comp, there are loads of turbine housing options, and they are relatively compact units. So for a 382ci twin built, aiming for around 1300rwhp but must have good spool for a manual trans car when using less boost on street and road course type racing. Would any brand shine above the others ?
Some have suggested the Precision may not be robust enough for hard standing mile work. So that has me steered towards BW....although finding room for them will be a nightmare. Comp....just dont know enough about them.
Would prefer oil journal, no water. Purely for cost reasons only. All thoughts welcome
Low mounted twin setup, using truck manifolds.
BW get rave reviews, they seem well priced. But turbine options are limited and physically they are massive.
Precision, Ive used a few and never had an issue, always performed great. They can get mixed reviews online though.
Comp, relatively new, albeit past experience with ITS, which Ive also used and were great units. At least with Precision or Comp, there are loads of turbine housing options, and they are relatively compact units. So for a 382ci twin built, aiming for around 1300rwhp but must have good spool for a manual trans car when using less boost on street and road course type racing. Would any brand shine above the others ?
Some have suggested the Precision may not be robust enough for hard standing mile work. So that has me steered towards BW....although finding room for them will be a nightmare. Comp....just dont know enough about them.
Would prefer oil journal, no water. Purely for cost reasons only. All thoughts welcome
Low mounted twin setup, using truck manifolds.
I would give the Comp a try. We are a dealer for all 3 so I will be as unbiased as any. You really can't beat the quality and what you get for the money with Comp, along with as you mentioned the loads of options to choose from or change to. You can also get a nice billet, 3BB unit from Comp for nearly the same cost as a journal unit from Precision as something to keep in mind as well. All 3 make great units however! 
__________________
Featuring 6 different turbo kits for your F-body!
Check us out on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/HuronSpeed
Featuring 6 different turbo kits for your F-body!
Check us out on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/HuronSpeed
I think you answered your own question. I would rather find a way to fit BW366's and them be reliable and make big power then have a precision take a **** on you or run comps that have zero data on their reliability.
Is there really any that shines above the other ?
BW get rave reviews, they seem well priced. But turbine options are limited and physically they are massive.
Precision, Ive used a few and never had an issue, always performed great. They can get mixed reviews online though.
Comp, relatively new, albeit past experience with ITS, which Ive also used and were great units. At least with Precision or Comp, there are loads of turbine housing options, and they are relatively compact units. So for a 382ci twin built, aiming for around 1300rwhp but must have good spool for a manual trans car when using less boost on street and road course type racing. Would any brand shine above the others ?
Some have suggested the Precision may not be robust enough for hard standing mile work. So that has me steered towards BW....although finding room for them will be a nightmare. Comp....just dont know enough about them.
Would prefer oil journal, no water. Purely for cost reasons only. All thoughts welcome
Low mounted twin setup, using truck manifolds.
BW get rave reviews, they seem well priced. But turbine options are limited and physically they are massive.
Precision, Ive used a few and never had an issue, always performed great. They can get mixed reviews online though.
Comp, relatively new, albeit past experience with ITS, which Ive also used and were great units. At least with Precision or Comp, there are loads of turbine housing options, and they are relatively compact units. So for a 382ci twin built, aiming for around 1300rwhp but must have good spool for a manual trans car when using less boost on street and road course type racing. Would any brand shine above the others ?
Some have suggested the Precision may not be robust enough for hard standing mile work. So that has me steered towards BW....although finding room for them will be a nightmare. Comp....just dont know enough about them.
Would prefer oil journal, no water. Purely for cost reasons only. All thoughts welcome
Low mounted twin setup, using truck manifolds.
I'm on the same boat but slightly bigger engine 408ci looking for 1300-1400rwhp
We're running PTE CEA 6766 Turbos on a car I build 454ci LSX Tall Deck C6 ZO6 We're making 1085rwhp 1055rwtq 16psi 91octane shooting for 1400+rwhp those turbos are sick.
I'm thinking about PTE7275 CEA But the
the BW is huge compared to PT or other brands.
We're running PTE CEA 6766 Turbos on a car I build 454ci LSX Tall Deck C6 ZO6 We're making 1085rwhp 1055rwtq 16psi 91octane shooting for 1400+rwhp those turbos are sick.
I'm thinking about PTE7275 CEA But the
the BW is huge compared to PT or other brands. Thread Starter
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
I'm on the same boat but slightly bigger engine 408ci looking for 1300-1400rwhp
We're running PTE CEA 6766 Turbos on a car I build 454ci LSX Tall Deck C6 ZO6 We're making 1085rwhp 1055rwtq 16psi 91octane shooting for 1400+rwhp those turbos are sick.
I'm thinking about PTE7275 CEA But the the BW is huge compared to PT or other brands.
We're running PTE CEA 6766 Turbos on a car I build 454ci LSX Tall Deck C6 ZO6 We're making 1085rwhp 1055rwtq 16psi 91octane shooting for 1400+rwhp those turbos are sick.
I'm thinking about PTE7275 CEA But the
the BW is huge compared to PT or other brands.I'd have thought the BW units would have a comparable size compressor cover to the larger 70mm+ PT units though ?
ie those with a 4"/3" cover ?
Or are they even bigger than that again ?
From pictures, I think I estimate the BW to have approx 8" diameter cover ?
Ive a GT4094R here which I think is a similar size, although it's cover looks to have more depth than any pictures Ive seen of a BW.
Just so hard to tell from a photo or drawing though.
The precisions make some killer power, but their reliability just isn't there. I tried that earlier this year despite knowing they don't have the best history, the main shaft in them is small and I had issues. I ended up switching to turbonetics tc76's as I'm not class limited.
Trending Topics
Thread Starter
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
For as long as Turbonetics have been about, I havent read as many reports of people using them.
They do have quite a range too. Although it's so big, it's difficult to actually tell what the difference is between them all, as to which is most suitable.
They seem to offer quite large inducer models in a small frame, but quoted power seems very low too.
So presume a large impeller like that would also be very sluggish in transient response
They do have quite a range too. Although it's so big, it's difficult to actually tell what the difference is between them all, as to which is most suitable.
They seem to offer quite large inducer models in a small frame, but quoted power seems very low too.
So presume a large impeller like that would also be very sluggish in transient response
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Gas Monkey Built a 6-Wheel Ferrari Testarossa With a Corvette LT4 Engine
Verdad Gallardo
7 Most Reliable High-Performance Engines GM Has Ever Built
Verdad Gallardo
Amazing '71 Camaro Restomod Is Modern Muscle Car Under the Skin
Verdad Gallardo
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
My precision unit lasted all of about 700 miles before the compressor wheel had too much wobble for my liking. Some street, mostly 1/2 mile racing. They didn't warranty it and said I needed a bigger oil feed line. Lovely!
Thread Starter
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
Whilst I'd like to try, I've seen no pre-turbine pressure numbers to suggest the 68mm is in any way a restriction
If and when actually racing, I have no issue with power delivery. Yes there are times the 64's could spool faster...but I've a 6.2 V8 pushing the car anyway, so it really doesnt make much difference.
In a high gear nailing the throttle from low rpm, I can easily see 15psi by 3500rpm....not that I'd ever actually drive that way, so not really representative
Driving in a more normal manner, revving the engine boost threshold certainly in lower gears is at a higher rpm. But because it's still accelerating hard with lower boost...again it just isnt a big deal.
Other things to consider are vehicle weight, gearing etc. Lighter the car, the less load against any engine to help it spool at lower rpms....but then it'll still be accelerating anyway...so will it matter ?
What are your power goals ? expected rpm range ? where will rpm drop during a shift etc ?
The BW turbos will hold up in diesel applications where the others won't. Less than half the price compared to the Precision(S364.5 sxe w/.91 versus precision 6466) seems like a good option.
On The Tree
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 103
Likes: 8
Power levels is a moving target the more I flick though this forum (Can you have to much ).... Well the 996 gearbox is probably best kept under 900lbs and 1100bhp so that's my target for now. To keep the torque down below the Hp my thinking was to push the RPM limit up to 8000 - 8500rpm. So I went short stroke LS7. Cam was ground to push Peak power above 7500 with not to much drop off into 8K. ( Well that's the plan anyway )
Last edited by lm1clive; Jan 1, 2016 at 02:47 PM.
Thread Starter
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
I'm not suggesting to go this small with turbos...but you can see they're generating good numbers.
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=434244
Err'ing ever so slightly on the large side for a larger motor, higher rpm and 1100hp...I'm sure these will easily get you there and spool faster than the 66's
They're bound to spool a bit better than the 66's with their much smaller impeller but they still have the 73mm turbine.
http://www.agpturbo.com/borg-warner-...3-13009097047/
You'll easily be able to manage torque by controlling boost by rpm or some other parameters if it did get too excessive.
http://www.camaro5.com/forums/showthread.php?t=434244
Err'ing ever so slightly on the large side for a larger motor, higher rpm and 1100hp...I'm sure these will easily get you there and spool faster than the 66's
They're bound to spool a bit better than the 66's with their much smaller impeller but they still have the 73mm turbine.
http://www.agpturbo.com/borg-warner-...3-13009097047/
You'll easily be able to manage torque by controlling boost by rpm or some other parameters if it did get too excessive.
