Turbo Monk3y said:

I want to see results/facts that are worth someone ditching the proven race turbo's for an OEM turbo that supposedly are THAT much better for cheaper. Thats the only true reason I'm in here. He did post a few. But I guess these turbos really don't have a crowd that want's to push them to the limits.

Click to expand...

I really don't what you want. There are several on this post and all over DSMTuners. He much more redundant do you want the facts to be? I mean clearly the best way to compare facts is by the dyno numbers. There are way to many variable on track times like how good the drivers is, conditions, etc...

From what I can tell you're just having trouble accepting the fact that Holset is at the same caliber as PTE. I sure as hell don't care if you cannot accept it.

1fastlaser said:

"........."

Click to expand...

you can't chime in, your turbo is bigger than your ego! JK MAN, how have yo been dude!? how the laser bro?

they made some gt35r bolt on turbos and i nevery seen them making over 600hp.

some of these sponsored shop cars are running higher comp motors to begin with. Light weight rotating assemblies? motorcycle brakes? ceramic wheel bearings?

Ill have my motor done in a month or two its 8.5:1 2.0 with a billet wheel t3 hx40. I am guessing I wont be done with the car till the end of the year though with all the wiring and drive train work it will take. Never the less I can say I am shooting for the high 600hp range and dont see why I wont achieve it unless something goes terribly bad.

1gDSM4g63 said:

I really don't what you want. There are several on this post and all over DSMTuners. He much more redundant do you want the facts to be? I mean clearly the best way to compare facts is by the dyno numbers. There are way to many variable on track times like how good the drivers is, conditions, etc...

From what I can tell you're just having trouble accepting the fact that Holset is at the same caliber as PTE. I sure as hell don't care if you cannot accept it.

Click to expand...

I think you have that the other way around. Dyno numbers are meaningless on the most part when comparing one car's performance against another car's. Track numbers are more definitive for performance comparison as long as you know the cars weights. Case and point, the so called '685 whp' HX40 car only mustered 134mph traps while another HX40 car dyno'd more than 100whp less while trapping 5mph more. This sort of inconsistency is the sole reason why dyno numbers are useless. Different dynos, different run/test modes, conditions and nefarious manipulation of data by dyno shops being reasons to not trust these data. A track timeslip is a better credible witness.

Now, we PTE/Garrett guys have no quarrel when you Holset guys say they make power. We have a problem when some of you guys say the Holsets out-perform PTE/Garrett turbos while costing much less, and at the same time, not producing evidence to support these specious claims. When challenged, there's the tendency of these folks to fall behind a curtain of conjecture, hypothesis and downright bench racing guesses. If so and so did this...he might run this... That is all bull. DO it or shut up. (HTA)GT35r and 6262/3586 setups on DSMs/EVOs have trapped 150mph+. This is a fact. HX40 setups have not - as far as I'm concerned. Correct me if I'm mistaken. The fastest HX-anything is a HX52 which has gone 10.0@142 according to DSMTimes. So if you want me or anyone, an objective subject to decide between the performance potential of a 6262 and that of a HX40 setup (the subject of the thread at hand,) it really should not be a big surprise why they chose the former. Those are results difficult to ignore. No offense should be taken by it.

This is the argument Turbo Monk3y is making.

diambo4life said:

I think you have that the other way around. Dyno numbers are meaningless on the most part when comparing one car's performance against another car's. Track numbers are more definitive for performance comparison as long as you know the cars weights. Case and point, the so called '685 whp' HX40 car only mustered 134mph traps while another HX40 car dyno'd more than 100whp less while trapping 5mph more. This sort of inconsistency is the sole reason why dyno numbers are useless. Different dynos, different run/test modes, conditions and nefarious manipulation of data by dyno shops being reasons to not trust these data. A track timeslip is a better credible witness.

Now, we PTE/Garrett guys have no quarrel when you Holset guys say they make power. We have a problem when some of you guys say the Holsets out-perform PTE/Garrett turbos while costing much less, and at the same time, not producing evidence to support these specious claims. When challenged, there's the tendency of these folks to fall behind a curtain of conjecture, hypothesis and downright bench racing guesses. If so and so did this...he might run this... That is all bull. DO it or shut up. (HTA)GT35r and 6262/3586 setups on DSMs/EVOs have trapped 150mph+. This is a fact. HX40 setups have not - as far as I'm concerned. Correct me if I'm mistaken. The fastest HX-anything is a HX52 which has gone 10.0@142 according to DSMTimes. So if you want me or anyone, an objective subject to decide between the performance potential of a 6262 and that of a HX40 setup (the subject of the thread at hand,) it really should not be a big surprise why they chose the former. Those are results difficult to ignore. No offense should be taken by it.

This is the argument Turbo Monk3y is making.

Click to expand...

Thank you Mike. I had this in my head I just could not put in in words. 100% agree. Excellent word usage.

diambo4life said:

I think you have that the other way around. Dyno numbers are meaningless on the most part when comparing one car's performance against another car's. Track numbers are more definitive for performance comparison as long as you know the cars weights. Case and point, the so called '685 whp' HX40 car only mustered 134mph traps while another HX40 car dyno'd more than 100whp less while trapping 5mph more. This sort of inconsistency is the sole reason why dyno numbers are useless. Different dynos, different run/test modes, conditions and nefarious manipulation of data by dyno shops being reasons to not trust these data. A track timeslip is a better credible witness.

Click to expand...

So basically reading into your argument, and applying it to other real world situations, when people post dyno sheets of different power gains from switching cams from BC to kelfords or what ever brand X, HP differences in different intake manifolds, comparing different data from dynos is completely invalid data and shops and other users should stop posting this data because it's completely invalid and doesn't mean dick? Shops should stop using slogans like "Dyno proven for XXXHP" because its all a lie because a dyno is not a valid tool for gathering data. I feel that if you try to argue that point in other places your going to find a lot of people that are not going to agree with you at all.

Another epic fail of a Holset thread... I guess others are growing tired of them as well...

Turbo Monk3y said:

He did post a few. But I guess these turbos really don't have a crowd that want's to push them to the limits.

Click to expand...

There u go again. This turbo has a big following in Europe,Sweden,and many parts of the world. Here in the US it's big with the Disesel racing crowd. Ford,Dodge Chevy ,Saab,Volvo and BMW owners have been racing with these turbo's for yrs here and abroad. Perhaps in Japan you dont here much about it hence the reason why you perhaps have not heard about them being used much on Japanese cars. However they are starting to become big and widely used now on S13 S14,Nissan 180,200-240sx's.
I would not assume that this turbo does not have a big following. Im only stating the facts from browsing the internet and also seeing these Turbos being used by ICS performance here in Connecticut who uses these turbos and Garrets to turbo charge BMW M3s and other E36 I-6 bmw's.

diambo4life said:

I think you have that the other way around. Dyno numbers are meaningless on the most part when comparing one car's performance against another car's. Track numbers are more definitive for performance comparison as long as you know the cars weights. Case and point, the so called '685 whp' HX40 car only mustered 134mph traps while another HX40 car dyno'd more than 100whp less while trapping 5mph more. This sort of inconsistency is the sole reason why dyno numbers are useless. Different dynos, different run/test modes, conditions and nefarious manipulation of data by dyno shops being reasons to not trust these data. A track timeslip is a better credible witness.

Now, we PTE/Garrett guys have no quarrel when you Holset guys say they make power. We have a problem when some of you guys say the Holsets out-perform PTE/Garrett turbos while costing much less, and at the same time, not producing evidence to support these specious claims. When challenged, there's the tendency of these folks to fall behind a curtain of conjecture, hypothesis and downright bench racing guesses. If so and so did this...he might run this... That is all bull. DO it or shut up. (HTA)GT35r and 6262/3586 setups on DSMs/EVOs have trapped 150mph+. This is a fact. HX40 setups have not - as far as I'm concerned. Correct me if I'm mistaken. The fastest HX-anything is a HX52 which has gone 10.0@142 according to DSMTimes. So if you want me or anyone, an objective subject to decide between the performance potential of a 6262 and that of a HX40 setup (the subject of the thread at hand,) it really should not be a big surprise why they chose the former. Those are results difficult to ignore. No offense should be taken by it.

This is the argument Turbo Monk3y is making.

Click to expand...

Diambo, or Turbo monk3y or whoever. . . badman21 was running 4psi less boost than when he dynoed. . . This is the kind of garbage that's irritating. Don't know if you consciously refrained from looking through the thread, or subconsciously; but you didn't see it. While someone less biased pointed it out a long time ago. Turbo monk3y and I agree at this level and especially considering this is a 2.3 motor and great flowing manifolds, 1 psi could account for 20whp or more. So sure he only net 134.78mph at 3278lb race weight, which is 626whp. . . add 4psi and he is certainly over 650whp and lagitimizes his 685whp number.

Now, I don't really think you just made a rash judgement of his results instead of reading because you have some sh!t against holset. You just overlooked it. But there are those here posting now that didn't bother to look at the thread and results in it's entirety yet are quick to say what the turbo can't do. No ifs or conjecture, badman21 ran a 626whp MPH at the track and with more boost ran a 685whp dynojet.

So all these dyno number ARE infact coming out to be accurate referencing their MPH/weight. And again, looks like the hx40 DOES fit the bill. What ever the OP chooses he will have plenty of turbo to do more than he's wanting to see.

You can't imagine that the hx40 doesn't have so many results because so few guys run them and even less push them? Regardless, they DO work when you want over 600whp (the OPs goal). It's not like someone said I'm going to make a 600whp carandrun the hx40, but it fell short.

TSimage said:

Another epic fail of a Holset thread... I guess others are growing tired of them as well...

Click to expand...

Fortunately for you, you don't need to talk with your foot in your mouth, you can type . We've brought dyno numbers backed by MPH/weight to varify that the hx40 is more than enough for his goal.

The only failure here is your attempt to "debunk" these turbos as baing capable of surpassing the OPs goal. One person made 685whp then dropped the boost 4psi and net a 626whp MPH based on weight. And then further 3 others with much less build have put out 600whp dynos backed by MPH/weight. Further, there's even MORE than I posted in the results thread of users netting 600whp trap speeds based on weight with setups not nearly as complete as the badman21's.

diambo4life said:

I think you have that the other way around. Dyno numbers are meaningless on the most part when comparing one car's performance against another car's. Track numbers are more definitive for performance comparison as long as you know the cars weights. Case and point, the so called '685 whp' HX40 car only mustered 134mph traps while another HX40 car dyno'd more than 100whp less while trapping 5mph more. This sort of inconsistency is the sole reason why dyno numbers are useless. Different dynos, different run/test modes, conditions and nefarious manipulation of data by dyno shops being reasons to not trust these data. A track timeslip is a better credible witness.

.

Click to expand...

doesitonall4rs said:

So basically reading into your argument, and applying it to other real world situations, when people post dyno sheets of different power gains from switching cams from BC to kelfords or what ever brand X, HP differences in different intake manifolds, comparing different data from dynos is completely invalid data and shops and other users should stop posting this data because it's completely invalid and doesn't mean dick? Shops should stop using slogans like "Dyno proven for XXXHP" because its all a lie because a dyno is not a valid tool for gathering data. I feel that if you try to argue that point in other places your going to find a lot of people that are not going to agree with you at all.

Click to expand...

Touche!!! Took the words right outta my mouth!

Crazy isn't it. The dyno numbers are backed by MPH at lower boost . . . In diambos defense, I feel he doesn't do as much research. Not that he's blind. And I think he was trying to word someone elses arguement for them to help them contribute what they were thinking.

But it's a real strange phenomenon to behold something taking a place in a "culture" and watch all the bucking and disbelief even to the point of saying 'it does not exist', yet as it is being beheld.

Frankly, 1fastlaser said it best. No one here ever said that the bolton hx40 will outperform the 6262. The only thing said is that it spools faster and costs less while proven entirely capable of making more power than what the op is looking. It's about enjoying the build and doing something different for those who chose to run the holset to meet the OP's goal that's all. Either turbo has done this at a high percentage of the users running each.

tim4g63fast said:

they made some gt35r bolt on turbos and i nevery seen them making over 600hp.

some of these sponsored shop cars are running higher comp motors to begin with. Light weight rotating assemblies? motorcycle brakes? ceramic wheel bearings?

Ill have my motor done in a month or two its 8.5:1 2.0 with a billet wheel t3 hx40. I am guessing I wont be done with the car till the end of the year though with all the wiring and drive train work it will take. Never the less I can say I am shooting for the high 600hp range and dont see why I wont achieve it unless something goes terribly bad.

Click to expand...

Hey,even if you have a dyno number and a trap speed and a video and even take some for a ride, the above still will apparently happen. Some people would rather look foolish than accept varified results. It's not that they feel there's truely no results. It's something far different and a bit deeper.


. . . If it helps you sleep at night turbo monk3y (just messing here), we don't think you should trade your turbo for a holset . . . You're bringing up the question of why one would trade their 56-trim garrett based turbo for a holset hx40 frame, but no one said that you should do it. You already own it. It's working for you. I don't know why you're questioning your choice. We arn't. We're saying that, as proven, it is just ONE choice for this level. But you're bringing it up as if something is making you wonder and you're demanding proof to change your choice. But you're choice is working for you just like other's choices are working for them.

doesitonall4rs said:

So basically reading into your argument, and applying it to other real world situations, when people post dyno sheets of different power gains from switching cams from BC to kelfords or what ever brand X, HP differences in different intake manifolds, comparing different data from dynos is completely invalid data and shops and other users should stop posting this data because it's completely invalid and doesn't mean dick? Shops should stop using slogans like "Dyno proven for XXXHP" because its all a lie because a dyno is not a valid tool for gathering data. I feel that if you try to argue that point in other places your going to find a lot of people that are not going to agree with you at all.

Click to expand...

In doing those tests they are attempting to show that the item they are testing (e.g. intake manifold, cams, etc) are causing the difference in the dyno reading. That is what a dyno is after all--a tuning tool, to show difference in performance on ONE setup. What is being argued here is dyno numbers generated from various setups, under various conditions, and even on various dynos (Mustang vs. DynoJet). With these issues not controlled, you can't even begin trying to compare results.

The point Mike was trying to make is that there is still no empirical evidence of a Holset outperforming the turbos he mentioned--he did not mention anything about the Holsets being a bad "price/performance" or anything like that.

Right! the dynos numbers are backed by MPH/weight. . . But no one is comparing dyno alone to anything. Or using a dyno number alone to prove the lagitimacy of one of the options in question. The hx40 is a viable and proven option for the OP's goal plus more. Those saying, "you're only showing us dyno numbers!", didn't read.

No one is debating whether an hx40 can out perform any turbo mentioned. Simpleminded arguements by those with a lack of research skills brought that into this. . . Which I and others keep refuting as not what this is about. Who's asking whether or not the 6262 in any exhaust setup is capable of making more power than the hx40 in any exhaust setup? This is about whether or not the hx40 is a proven option for the op and why he should choose one over the other. The topic into which silly and unfounded assertations that one of the op's choices is "unproven" were injected. And injected by one whom was "laying in wait" to peck an off topic fight about said turbos lagitimacy, yet proper and varifiable evidence abounds and is quite easy to discover in search. What a joke!

The inept at reading (not refering to you or Diambo4life) are the ones still claiming the turbo isn't proven to make far more power than what the OP is looking for. And being capable of doing it in a bolton volute. . . So we're back to where we started: The OP's question. After DSM_PWR started worthless sh!t in this thread and Image RAN with it stinking up the thread for several pages, we've come full circle. Being: 1) Some can't understand the very information they demand as proof, or chose not to so they can continue belief in the fallacy to ease a deeper personal dilema; 2) The hx40 fits the bill just like his other option.

OP, . . .

HX40:

-Faster spool in bolton.
-Costs far less to install because you can have it as a bolton and bolton form has still net your goal.
-Can upgrade to a t3 setup with this turbo later for under $700. Or you can run the stock twinscroll housing and divided manifold for about the same cost.
-has put down far more power than your goal in the bolton volute (Highest number recorded byt a turbo with a bolton volute is 685whp done by an hx40. the bolton volute trapped 50whp less with 4psi less boost: the dyno is accurate).

PTE6262:

-With a full t3 setup, has put down more power than the hx40 in the .55a/r housing.
-More shop backing

dsm-onster said:

Some people would rather look foolish than accept varified results.

Click to expand...

So true.

At the end of last season Ricky (Dacowgod) ran an 11.08 @ 131 with his HX40-powered 2G which dynoed 575whp on Buschur's Mustang dyno with the dropping boost issue. His car was actually the highest horsepower non-shop car at the Shootout last year. He had the wastegate spring situation repaired by the time he hit the track at the end of the season and was holding 37-38psi, but he still isn't used to launching a 600whp car with a twin-disc clutch so his 60ft times suffer. The 11.08 was run with almost a 2.0 60ft. Imagine how fast that pass would've been with a better launch.

Something else you can't explain to people is how much Ricky's car weighs. It's literally a full-weight daily-driven (during summer months) 2G, with a full body kit and about 200-300lbs of stereo equipment in the hatch. His curb weight is over 3600lbs. If the car was 1000lbs lighter, where would he be? It's possible he could have the fastest HX40-powered car, but apparently that's not what he's looking to do or it would be done by now. Ricky doesn't waste time when it comes to building cars, that's for sure.

My point is that everyone assumes the people who are building these Holset-powered cars are building them for race only (much like the shop cars running the PTE and FP turbos) and that everyone is a perfect driver with years of track experience. This obviously is not the case.

131mph with 3600lbs race weight. yep. It's right in his profile. On the low reading mustang dyno, his boost fell to under 30psi because of using too week a spring, you mentioned. 575whp on buschurs mustang dyno with 28-29psi boost. . . But some wont even look and read. I really think they don't want to. They want to feel their choice was the ONLY choice.

Dacowgod on the dyno.
<embed width="600" height="361" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowFullscreen="true" allowNetworking="all" wmode="transparent" src="http://static.photobucket.com/player.swf?file=http://vid152.photobucket.com/albums/s175/dkapp_2007/dyno2.flv">

:So that people may know what has gone down here today:

I was mocked and called foolish by those who have not even the slightest ability to make their car fast. I guess I am foolish for having a full weight dsm go 145mph @ 33psi built and tuned by none other than myself.
I guess I am Foolish for being able to beat everyones car that posted on this page.
I guess I am foolish for having over 600 track passes in the last decade in my dsms and mirages and never once broke or blew a motor.
I was called Foolish by people who have not even been on this site as long as I have and think they are somebody.
I was called foolish by people who think they know something just by reading results on the internet rather than actually doing in real life themselves.
I was called foolish by those that think they are dsm gods but have not even gotten their pos into the 12s..

Well then If I am foolish. Then so be it. I will continue being foolish in a few weeks when the track opens And I run my faithful old dsm @ 36-40psi like the holset guys. Now with my car 150lbs lighter plus more boost and having a blast driving something no one else helped to build but myself is being foolish. Well then I guess call me foolish because I don't want to be anything else. P.S. I don't even have a pte 6262 or a HTA turbo so what do I know.

Woe is me..... Are people missing the original point of this thread? Everyone can run whatever parts they please. Who gives a crap seriously? Enough of this back and forth BS.
Turbo Monkey- Thank you for informing all of us about your terrible day on DSM tuners. You are right, you are just a god among men. We all wish we could be you and you are better than all of us. I hope you had fun tooting your own horn.

Turbo Monk3y said:

:So that people may know what has gone down here today:

I was mocked and called foolish by those who have not even the slightest ability to make their car fast. I guess I am foolish for having a full weight dsm go 145mph @ 33psi built and tuned by none other than myself.
I guess I am Foolish for being able to beat everyones car that posted on this page.
I guess I am foolish for having over 600 track passes in the last decade in my dsms and mirages and never once broke or blew a motor.
I was called Foolish by people who have not even been on this site as long as I have and think they are somebody.
I was called foolish by people who think they know something just by reading results on the internet rather than actually doing in real life themselves.
I was called foolish by those that think they are dsm gods but have not even gotten their pos into the 12s..

Well then If I am foolish. Then so be it. I will continue being foolish in a few weeks when the track opens And I run my faithful old dsm @ 36-40psi like the holset guys. Now with my car 150lbs lighter plus more boost and having a blast driving something no one else helped to build but myself is being foolish. Well then I guess call me foolish because I don't want to be anything else. P.S. I don't even have a pte 6262 or a HTA turbo so what do I know.

Click to expand...

Nobody cares about anything that has seemingly made your foolish. Also, some of the most knowledgeable guys I know drive the slowest cars. The guys I know with the fastest cars are the guys who pay the big bucks for the shop to do all the work. Not saying that is your case, but you need to take your thumb out of your ass and listen to what everybody has to say. This thread started great, with good opinions (key word: OPINIONS) and some insightful knowledge. Nobody foul-mouthed the more popular and proven turbos. OP simply wanted to know the key differences between an HX40 or an SC6262. Both great turbos, the SC6262 with a longer and more proven track record, but that doesn't automatically make it greater. The Holset simply hasn't been applied long enough to create a fair comparison. Those who know somebody have only simply stated what they know.

Once again, I'd like to reiterate how little I could care for why you are "foolish." I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way.

You have a nice car and some experience, congrats, but that doesn't give you any leverage for knowledge.

Turbo monk3y, I never thought you where foolish, but your last post makes you sound like a bitching child. "I can beat every car on this forum attitude" is lame. I could careless how fast somebody's car is, if you have a shitty attitude about it, that sucks.

at turbo monk3ys awesome dsm driving and building skills.

Want a cookie?

Got the reactions I was looking for. I'm just here for the lulz... Carry on now. Member since 02 with 400 posts. You do the math... Seriously I'm done I won't crap up this thread any longer.

I just see a bunch of yappin'. Same posters (or should I say poseurs) doin what they do best.. Bench racing. And even though I never said you looked foolish, I still got ya beat with a 10.2 monkey. Albeit on a 35r.

I'm just tryin to light a fire under these guys asses. Been the same people #### riding the Holsets for years and never putting any action into it. Just posting what others do and what could be possible. That is called ricer math and doesn't belong on a DSM site.

I personally would run a pte before a holeset.. I have a pte in my car now and I love it.. Its been in the family 4yrs strong bouncing between two cars not one issue. My friends is going to try out a hx35 in his laser and maybe I'll compare results then but to me the holesets are the new "Frankenstein" its just a phase just like the original Frankenstein turbo's. As diablo stated before you can't alway rely on dyno numbers..."dyno proven doesn't mean anything because everyone doesn't have the same exact setup bolt for bolt and tuner. And as for badmans manifold, I believe its a VRP exhaust manifold..

Turbo Monk3y said:

Got the reactions I was looking for. I'm just here for the lulz... Carry on now. Member since 02 with 400 posts.

Click to expand...

We all do it for the lulz, thats why we run slowsets.

P.S. you ###### only have 400posts cause u get into shitty arguments and fail lulz