M
Any real world comments on the characteristics of these two turbos in the mountains. Top end, lag etc etc. The 2554 has to go. How about the 2871. This is for a midmount RX1.
M5
M5
GT2860 .64 A/R vs .86 A/R Mountain riding
- Thread starter M5-
- Start date
2871 , .64 A/R , 3 inch downpipe , I started of with a 2871 with the .86A/R and a single 2 or 2.25 inch downpipe ( Alpine ) , changed over to a powderlites double down pipe , did notice some differents , but still had to much back pressure ( heat ) so had a 3 inch downpipe made up , what a differents , alot more flow , less back pressure and heat , and then went to the .64 A/R more responce and better top end .
M
So you're saying you got better top end with the .64 A/R? I thought it was supposed to be the other way around, the response part I get.
M5
M5
M
I'm convinced that the majority of issues I've had have been related to back pressure and heat cause from back pressure. ie cracking headers.
M5
M5
X
theres this new 2868 im hearing about, supposed to have more top end then a 2871, how im not sure and is supposed to spool faster then a 2860. again i dont know anything about it......am curious myself though as i want to upgrade from my 2860.
Z
The smaller ar well become a restriction at some point, but that depends in how much boost your going to run and your set up. Imo if your running under 17 psi or so and are lookin g for more response go small. Over 17psi and more long pulls big ar.
X
im looking for (at times) 18+ psi, and definitly long pulls. so you figure 2871 is bigger for that scenario ? does the .64 exhaust housing affect that, or is that what are you talking about..
Z
I was speaking about a/r. I think a 2871 or 2868 would both be great turbos for 18 plus psi depending on elevation.
Similar threads
- 144
