Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

You have to wonder - its quite a lot of effort to go to though! They do mention the flow/restriction issue (though potentially understate, or underestimate it) of having a divided turbine housing and an open manifold - so maybe it was just a case of the units being on hand to try out. Regardless of their reasoning or motivation I'd take it with a grain of salt :)

The HTA3794 and PT6766 have been tested "all in" on a properly built 2litre in the past and the PT6766 had slightly better spool, the HTA3794 made more power at every boost level until ~54psi where the gap closed - but the HTA3794 still had the edge by around 20whp from memory (at ~930whp!!!). The HTA Super94 is being tested and so far its meant to spool better than and make more power than both, I will definitely update the thread when that is made public.

I have heard some historical stories about that kind of thing, I wonder if they are trying to improve that image? They got Mat his turbo within a week and had a bit of reasonable input (I think?) and recently posted on their Facebook page that people could send requests regarding sponsorship based on a few requirements. They have also been seeking input and providing Q&A on the US EvolutionM forum. Hard to say though.

The housing options are just what is posted on the site, unlike Precision the universal FPs are mostly Garrett based which means you can essentially use off the shelf Garrett (or 3rd party) GT28/GT30/GT35/whatever turbine housings with them - they will probably also do hybrids or a preferred turbine housing per request. I would hope so, but I guess I can't speak for them - though seeing as they have made people HTA4094s, HTA3073s, HTA2868s etc I am guessing it is true.

I don't know what they have planned but it was a similar story with Precision, they had website that hadn't been touched since 2006 or so, seemed a few newer turbos with very little information and a team that didn't seem like it was going to expand. They really went back to the drawing board and stepped up their game to make them what they are today.

Although they seem to be a smaller scale company there's no reason why FP couldn't if they pumped some funds into some making their operation more efficient. They must have sold thousands of Red and Greens for EVO's!

just caught wind of this ridiculous result from Boostin Performance in the US, a FP68HTA bolt on turbo (so basically a high flow TD05 turbo using a compressor with the same size exducer as the stock 16G) making 501whp on E85 on Boostin's Mustang Dyno which is not a ultra happy dyno like most consider the US dynos to be. This is a crazy power level from a turbo this size on a Mustang dyno, no doubt the quality of the setup used has a lot to do with with it but it's pretty amazing nonetheless.


Check out the power band - I had mentioned that this compressor on a BB StageII T3 turbine would be an insane response alternative to the HKS GTRS guys which would be way better suited to an RB25 over the GTRS, I definitely do not take that back after seeing this:

post-11136-0-60084300-1371007986_thumb.png

Have seen that, it's one of the most flawed comparisons ever - it kind of sucks that people can put that kind of data out there to confuse research people may be doing.

Cmon now Lithium, you're smarter than this. You make yourself sound like a FP fanboy.

At least post your source from the dyno you just posted. who's providing poor data now?

Edited by black bnr32

Cmon now Lithium, you're smarter than this. You make yourself sound like a FP fanboy.

At least post your source from the dyno you just posted. who's providing incomplete data now?

Well i think my dyno sheet was a pretty fair comparison dont you? Was 100% back to back... Lithium has researched these more than most and i am pretty sure i trust his data ;)

Cmon now Lithium, you're smarter than this. You make yourself sound like a FP fanboy.

At least post your source from the dyno you just posted. who's providing poor data now?

I wasn't accusing you of deliberately doing it - you may have not read the detail. I came to like the FP turbos after experiencing some myself, and reading lots of other peoples experiences and results from them... including the one you shared. I would say EXACTLY the same thing about if it were a Garrett, Borg Warner, Precision or whatever turbo if that happened and disregard the result altogether from that point (as I did there). Ignoring that result definitely does not make me a fanboy, you accusing me of being a fanboy for disregarding it says worse things about the subjectivity of your approach than mine... you must have gone to some effort to find a seemingly poor result for an HTA, and pulled one up that may as well have had a restrictor in the intake. If anything - that result frustrates me that good efforts were done with good turbos and part of the test makes the results all but worthless and would have been more interesting to have seen it done better and if it HAD been done more scientifically and shown results like that then I'd most definitely have taken it on board, and the odds are I'd not mention the HTA3794 with the fondness I do.

My source for the 68HTA (which I didn't post because it was on Facebook), but since you ask: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=475658035842768&set=a.117337135008195.21587.115529075189001&type=1&theater

So the new Super94 HTA dyno testing results have been posted, initial driving impressions (that it was more responsive than the 6766 and 3794) don't match up with the dyno results - though the dyno results are still very impressive. This is with a .85a/r T3 turbine housing!

*UPDATE*

Tested the 3794 Vs. the new Super94 (FPXX94R), and the results are very promising. The Super94 made around 60 WHP more then the 3794 with minimal spool difference . With my setup, I never even noticed the extra lag but the extra power is very noticeable!! In my opinion, the Super94 almost makes the 3794 obsolete - 60 more WHJP without almost any noticeable spool difference.
Can't really beat that. {thumbup}
With this Super94 on the car I've gone 8.4 @ 177 MPH with a not so good 1.55 60 ft time. When I get the Red Demon back out, with a good 60 ft time I'm hoping to go low 8.20's or 8-teens. Also competed in a standing 1/2 mile event with the Super94 on the car. The Red Demon went 213 MPH which is within 4 mph of the world record (held by a 1800+ HP Lambo). It was tricky to get the car to hook up on the street radials, but I used boost by gear with lower boost levels in 1st and 2nd gear to get the job done. :mitsu: The car ended up running great on the radial tires.
"Like" our Facebook page to get the latest dyno/track results!!
Video of Devin's 177.49 mph pass - https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=628506815926
Video of Devin's 213+mph pass at the Chicago 1/2 Mile event - https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=629866980146
RedDemon-FPSuper94turbo-40psi.jpg
RedDemon-FPSuper94turbo-42psi.jpg
RedDemon-FPSuper94turbo-46psi.jpg
RedDemon-FPSuper94turbo-48psi.jpg
RedDemon-FPSuper94turbo-49psi.jpg

does it have a mad whistle to it when spooling up?

None at all compared to the GT3037-56T, it is ultra silent which is kind of what i needed as the boys in blue do not like noisy cars and you could hear the old whistle from miles away!

  • Like 1

Thats the one thing that makes me sad about that turbo... minimal antisurge whistle! it can be overlooked considering the results LOL.

Looks stunning in that engine bay tucked in there :)

Yes it can haha!

And thanks, pretty happy with the way it all looks! Got more to tidy up yet :D

Yeah i guess in a world where everything needs to be somewhat hidden, the less attention you draw the better.

Its pretty tidy now! I like the black stealthyness. My next move was a dark grey cam cover in matt. But when i decided to shift to Perth i gave up on any detailing and just enjoyed driving the thing.

FFP makes it look soooo much cleaner. Makes mine look tragic!

EngineBayRadiator.png

Bar the 4inch intake.. Stealthy little GT30 tucked away though.

Edited by gotRICE?

Yeah i guess in a world where everything needs to be somewhat hidden, the less attention you draw the better.

Correct, hence the black theme :) Car is now clean with no stickers or anything!

gotRICE I gather thats a Neo in an R33 ?

Damn I wish I'd known the differences in Neo and R33 heads and inlet manifolds before I got into porting and Tomeis .

A .

He's a tinny bastard and got one of the mutant late model R33s with strange bits on it haha

Anyone know of any low mount twin results? That would be very interesting!

Nope, though I personally wouldn't go for the HTA2868 twins that are available - I doubt the combination would match up overly well to an RB... especially when squeezed into those little housings. Owen Developments sell them though, and someone installed a pair on his GTR but then had an engine failure which set him back something fierce so not sure if or when that will be back together. It seems folly to me to try and push past the "-5s" flow at this stage in those housings, I guess the closest to a setup like that which I would like to see would be more like upgrading low mount T517Zs to use the 68HTA wheels, probably less likely to surge and generally be a better match.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Lucky man, who owns it in the family? Any pics? 
    • The engine stuff is Greg Autism to the Max. I contacted Tony Mamo previously from AFR who went off to make his own company to further refine AFR heads. He is a wizard in US LS world. Pretty much the best person on earth who will sell you things he's done weird wizard magic to. The cam spec is not too different. I have a 232/234 .600/603 lift, 114LSA cam currently. The new one is 227/233 .638 .634. The 1.8 ratio roller rockers will effectively push this cam into the ~.670 range. These also get Mamo'ified to be drilled out and tapped to use a 10mm bolt over an 8mm for better stability. This is what lead to the cam being specced. The plan is to run it to 6800. (6600 currently). The Johnson lifters are to maintain proper lift at heavy use which is something the LS7's supposedly fail at and lose a bit of pressure, robbing you of lift at higher RPM. Hollow stem valves for better, well everything, Valve train control. I dunno. Hollow is better. The valves are also not on a standard valve angle. Compression ratio is going from 10.6 to 11.3. The cam is smaller, but also not really... The cam was specced when I generated a chart where I counted the frames of a lap video I had and noted how much of the time in % I spent at what RPM while on track at Sandown. The current cam/heads are a bit mismatched, the standard LS1 heads are the restriction to power, which is why everyone CNC's them to get a pretty solid improvement. Most of the difference between LS1->LS2->LS3 is really just better stock heads. The current cam is falling over about 600rpm earlier than it 'should' given the rest of my current setup. CNC'ing heads closes the gap with regards to heads. Aftermarket heads eliminate the gap and go further. The MMS heads go even further than that, and the heads I have in the box could quite easily be bolted to a 7.0 427ci or 454 and not be any restriction at all. Tony Mamo previously worked with AFR, designed new heads from scratch then eventually founded his own business. There he takes the AFR items and performs further wizardry, CNC'ing them and then manually porting the result. He also ports the FAST102 composite manifold: Before and after There's also an improved racing crank scraper and windage tray. Helps to keep oil in the pan. Supposedly gains 2% power. Tony also ports Melling oil pumps, so you get more oil pressure down low at idle, and the same as what you want up top thanks to a suitable relief spring. There's also the timing chain kit with a Torrington bearing to make sure the cam doesn't have any thrust. Yes I'll post a before and after when it all eventually goes together. It'll probably make 2kw more than a setup that would be $15,000 cheaper :p
    • Because the cars wheels are on blocks, you slide under the car.   Pretty much all the bolts you touched should have been put in, but not fully torque up.   Back them off a turn or two, and then tighten them up from under the car with the wheels sitting on the blocks holding car up in the air.
    • Yes. Imagine you have the car on the ground, and you mine away all the ground under and around it, except for the area directly under each individual wheel. That's exactly how it'd look, except the ground will be what ever you make the bit under each wheel from
    • Yes, if you set the "height" right so that it's basically where it would be when sitting on the wheel. It's actually exactly how I tighten bolts that need to be done that way. However....urethane bushes do NOT need to be done that way. The bush slides on both the inner and outer. It's only rubber bushes that are bonded to the outer that need to be clamped to the crush tube in the "home" position. And my car is so full of sphericals now that I have very few that I need to do properly and I sometimes forget and have to go back and fix it afterwards!
×
×
  • Create New...