PTE 6466 vs Xona 9569S

[perrytheplatypus157]

I know some of you guys are running the 9569S. I’ve got the 6466 and looking to stay T3 for street car reasons. I’m curious if you’ve used either turbo, how would you compare them? Otherwise if you just use the 9569, how do you like it? Any information or data on the UHF turbine wheel design would also be really helpful in making a decision. I’ve read the claims on the smaller turbine wheel able to flow like a larger wheel without the extra weight and inertia involved but haven’t seen much data on it. 1/4 mile trap speed with trans type and weight would also be a plus! Thanks

 

[streetraceboi]

Just came here to say your car always kicks ass at TX2K. That is all

 

[perrytheplatypus157]

Just came here to say your car always kicks ass at TX2K. That is all

Thank you! I was just happy It didn’t break. I ended up putting almost 1000 miles on it that week and didn’t touch anything other than emptying the catch can.

 

[1cleangsx]

Hey man I just wanted to say I like your car . I believe it’s the same one I just saw on YouTube on the “shaneomatic” channel? I bought my straight pipe from a guy in Colorado who was running a 9569s in a .82vband, I believe he said full boost was hi in the 6000 range but his car was fully built with similar drivetrain as you, ppg gearset, 300m t-case etc, shifting at like 9500 rpm’s. There’s a video of him putting down like mid 700’s at 38 psi or so, not sure what it made turned up but I know he’s now selling the set up and going 42r. Aside from that I noticed in your profile it says factory dual piston brakes, how are those working at your power level? I’m happy with mine but debating going 4 piston or not

 

[perrytheplatypus157]

Thank you. Yes, that's my car. And actually, I got my 9569S from Josh W if that's who you're talking about and I believe it is. I've heard good things about the UHF wheel but I guess I want to see if for myself. If I can see 50 pounds in third by 6k rpm and make more power, I'd be a happy camper. I like a solid power band. As far as the dual pistons brakes, I like them quite a bit. I use stop tech rotors and their performance pads so they work rather well for my application but I don't think I would use them for any road course action if that's what you're asking about.

 

[1cleangsx]

Heck yeah man Josh is a cool dude! I also got my Morrison hot parts from him, I remember him saying he liked his old dual pistons better than the wilwoods he has now haha. Anyways man thanks for the response and good luck with that Xona

 

[diambo4life]

What are your goals? One of my regrets is not trying the 64 with a T4/0.68a/r backside when I had it. I think there are some gains to be had and just can't beat that turbo for the power/spool in a street car.

 

[jed344]

Interested also. I tune a local car on a 6466 .82 t3. Spool to flow is extremely good. I was considering it or a xona for my car when I dump the 62mm hx40.

 

[perrytheplatypus157]

What are your goals? One of my regrets is not trying the 64 with a T4/0.68a/r backside when I had it. I think there are some gains to be had and just can't beat that turbo for the power/spool in a street car.

Honestly, my biggest goal is to maintain the spool factor while hopefully increasing my efficiency. The Gen 2 6466 is quite old so Im hoping the new tech, like in the UHF wheel, will shine with the 9569. Im going with comparable hotsides, .82AR T3 with the 6466 and .85AR T3 with the 9569S and going to note the difference. Im leaving the same cam timing and other variables the same. If the Xona doesn't prove its worth, I'll just rebuild the PTE and keep using it. The 6466 setup now makes a VERY flat and usable powerband. Xona has had my 9659 for 4 months now for the rebuild. Just got confirmation that it shipped to me today. I will update my findings whenever I can get it.

 

[perrytheplatypus157]

Here’s an update but with questions. I just removed my old .82 AR 6466 and replaced it with a .85AR xona 9569S. 6466 made 50 lbs of boost with the wastegate dUty cycle 45% ramping to 100% by the end of third. Now that im running the 9569S (67.9 comp ind, 69mm turbine exd) im finding that with the wastegate capped 100% I can only make 48 psi tapering to 44 by redline. Car does make slightly more power but also spools almost 1000 rpm later. The only thing changed on the setup was the turbo. EMAP dropped with the new setup from 1.5 to 1.4. Have any theories on why I cant make any more boost? Seems somewhat far fetched that the turbo increased engine efficiency enough that the car only makes 48 lbs and still maxes out the 9569S turbo thats much larger than the old one. EGTs are the same as before. Timing dropped .6° roughly across the entire powerband. Ive also played with cam timing to find no major improvement with spool characteristics. Set up before was 0 exh -2 int. Currently at -2 exh +1.5 int

Again. Everything else is the same and I only removed the turbo to swap it. I pressure tested intake and exhaust side just to be sure I wasnt springing a leak anywhere or something silly.

 

[perrytheplatypus157]

Here’s some data so far too. Ive only had a few days of testing so far. Slightly skewed because 9569 was tested on a hot day with negative slope but I think between the DA change and the slope correction, it might cancel out. I can see the 9569 clearly makes more power, but it also drops significantly between shifts and takes considerable time to make that up. 6466 dropped to 40 psi between shifts. 9569 dropped to 20 psi. Im going to have to incorporate a retard/ign cut between shifts I think to make this up. 4.62/4.45 is the 6466. 4.51/4.07 is the 9569.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

 

[1cleangsx]

Soo are you gonna keep the xona , I’ve been waiting on Justin too chime in with his thoughts. Clearly your making more power but lost 1000 rpm of powerband? I’m mostly surprised because you’ve got a nice dog box setup you can shift high and fast I would think the transient response would’ve been better, i think this tells me I won’t ever go bigger than a 6466 for a street car, but anyways man thanks for the post!

 

[1990TSIAWDTALON]

Soo are you gonna keep the xona , I’ve been waiting on Justin too chime in with his thoughts. Clearly your making more power but lost 1000 rpm of powerband? I’m mostly surprised because you’ve got a nice dog box setup you can shift high and fast I would think the transient response would’ve been better, i think this tells me I won’t ever go bigger than a 6466 for a street car, but anyways man thanks for the post!

Super 99 her Jeremy.......

 

[1cleangsx]

I’ll stick with my ‘little’ 6266 for now

 

[perrytheplatypus157]

Soo are you gonna keep the xona , I’ve been waiting on Justin too chime in with his thoughts. Clearly your making more power but lost 1000 rpm of powerband? I’m mostly surprised because you’ve got a nice dog box setup you can shift high and fast I would think the transient response would’ve been better, i think this tells me I won’t ever go bigger than a 6466 for a street car, but anyways man thanks for the post!

Ill post some logs and data here soon but my shifts vary from .18 to .28 seconds. Thats from the time the clutch switch disengages to the time its engaged again. In that time, the turbo drops to around 21 psi of boost. The 6466 dropped to 41ish. Flat shift is WOT with 100% ignition cut. Im going to need to incorporate some sort of antilag between shifts to maintain so thats my next step. Changing cam timing so far has only netted me a couple hundred rpm sooner for spooling. Im hoping if I can maintain at least 40 lbs between shifts that it could actually pick up some time but im waiting for a comparable day with comparable DA on the same roads ive used before so I can try to compare somewhat closely.

 

[perrytheplatypus157]

Alright, so I've been doing a little testing and trying to get as much "back to back" testing as possible. Something to note ahead of time is that the testing between the 6466 and the 9569 were done in similar weather whereas the testing done on the 9564 was in weather that was 30 degrees cooler. You'll notice in my graph that the intake temps for the 9564 were drastically less than the other turbos.

This portion was simply 3rd gear pulls on the same stretch of road with nothing changed besides the turbo. When it comes to the comparison, the A/R of the 6466 is .82 and the A/R of the 9569/64 were both using the T3 .85 A/R housing. When it comes to the amount of boost being made, the target for all of the tests were 50 psi. So for the 6466, boost controller duty cycle had to be pulled whereas with the 9569/64, the 4 port controller was capped closed and verified that it wasn't opening or creeping open in any way.

Now obviously my comparison isn't really apples to apples considering the compressor wheel inducer of the 6466 is 4mm smaller than the 9569/64 combos but I figured since I had the data, it was worth adding for comparison. Injector duty cycle remained nearly identical between all three turbo setups. The largest factor I had been seeing was in the backpressure. So I'm going to just give the peak EMAP:MAP ratio of each turbo but you can see the trends in the logs

Turbo - EMAP:MAP
6466 - 1.66:1
9564S - 1.49:1
9569S - 1.39:1

Another thing I noticed was the point at which each turbo reached full boost. Even though the 9569 and the 9564 both reached 45 psi around 7000 rpm, the 9564 had higher VE numbers down low and made more power down low which translated to a much more of a "punch" going into the powerband. It wasn't as instant as the 6466, but it was enough torque to make it actually feel faster than the 9569. Then just for some more numbers to look at:

6466 saw 45 psi by 5650 RPM
9569 and 9564 both saw 45 psi by 7000 RPM

When it comes to the powerband though, that's where we start to find that the 9569 parties all night long once it comes alive. Now the power is great to have, but with such a small powerband, it was hard to keep the larger 9564 and 9569 turbos spinning between shifts. I'm no speed shifter by any means, but most of my shifts tend to range between .12 to .18 seconds depending on the gear. I typically use a safe flat shift setup that cuts 100% of the ignition and I used this on all of the tests. During the testing, I found the the 6466 would maintain between 40-42 psi between shifts which translated to .4 seconds from the time I left full boost to the time I got back up to that same boost level. For the 9569, it would typically drop to 20-22 psi between shifts, which costed me another .35 seconds (.75 seconds total) between each shift. And for the 9564S, it would typically drop to 22-24 psi between shifts which costed me marginally less at roughly .7 seconds on average. This is something that's very easy to see in the dragy graphs. As you may notice, the G force graph for the 6466 trends in a more linear motion whereas the 9569 and 9564 are more of a "step" profile. This being due to the fact that they lost their momentum and now have to come back into power. All of these little things cost time and at the end of the day, the more power you can get under the curve of your run (1/4 mile, 1/8, etc) the faster you can get to the finish. However, the 9569 and 9564 made up for their slow recovery effects due to the overall power they can produce while keeping drive pressure low. This is much easier to see in the 100-150 mph draggy section since there’s only one shift to recover from. And would you look at the difference!! Even though the 9569 had to recover from one shift, it still managed to cut a quarter of a second off of the 100-150 time. Something else I want to note is the DA for the 9569 for the 100-150 testing was not as low as the screenshot depicts. It was a very similar day to the testing for the 6466. No way we get 46* days in the middle of our summer here in Wisconsin. I also do my testing on the same roads in the same direction in hopes to get as close as possible as I can to good data.

I will be doing more testing with the 9569S turbo in the future with the smaller Tial .64 housing in hopes to see the recovery aspect improve. And thanks to Morrison Fabrications, I will also have to opportunity to compare their small vs large runner on this same turbo to see how it affects VE throughout the powerband. In the meantime, I have been using different cuts to maintain more boost between shifts but for now, this is the data I have. I tried to color code and overlay some of the datalog data as best as possible so everyone can see the basics. If there's anything else you want me to show, let me know.

P.S. at this level, pulling off my 9 x 4 in K&N air filter netted me another 6 psi on the 9564 at nearly the same turbo shaft speed. None of the data from that was used in this comparison, but I guess you could call it your fun fact for the day.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

You must be logged in to view this image or video.

 

[Vegas Smith]

Thanks for sharing. Overall, are you happy with the new Xona setup? It seems unlikely if you're wanting a smaller exhaust housing.

 

[perrytheplatypus157]

so far I’m not impressed with the t3 housing on it. Speaking with Joe from FP, it sounds like they’re just not a good hot side compared to the tial but that’s why I’m looking to switch it up to the vband housing. I think in a stroker, the .85 AR would work better but for my 2.0, it just lags quite a bit.

 

[bastarddsm]

several comments, draggy times like you are using are not a good performance metric to judge a turbo by. The way you drive the car has huge effect on how it translates into these times you show.

Next, clutch button to button times don't really mean much for how quick the shift is. You need to be looking and working on other aspects of that. But if you are playing on a spool center and street tires, I'd be very careful.

the 6466 is gonna kill the xonas at the track, they are VERY lazy looking at your draggy passes. You need to work on it so that your acceleration is HIGHER when the clutch comes up in the next gear.

What was your peak shaft speeds on these things at that boost level. I have a WSS 6466 and I see about 102k at 30psi with a plugged air filter and a leaking bov. Traps 144 at 3050lbs like that. When I did have boost up in the 40s back in the day it was around 40-45psi exhaust pressure.

Them UHF turbines are weird, if you examine places making cutting edge turbos that work well. Places that make class racer inducer spec turbos, that guys pay $10000 to pick up 15hp, none of them use a turbine like the UHF stuff.....And based on the data you have presented, they are not very good.

 

[CrackedDSM]

Just would like to point out that it's Dragy. Not draggy.


(not a serious post btw in case anyone is unsure)

 

[perrytheplatypus157]

several comments, draggy times like you are using are not a good performance metric to judge a turbo by. The way you drive the car has huge effect on how it translates into these times you show.

Next, clutch button to button times don't really mean much for how quick the shift is. You need to be looking and working on other aspects of that. But if you are playing on a spool center and street tires, I'd be very careful.

the 6466 is gonna kill the xonas at the track, they are VERY lazy looking at your draggy passes. You need to work on it so that your acceleration is HIGHER when the clutch comes up in the next gear.

What was your peak shaft speeds on these things at that boost level. I have a WSS 6466 and I see about 102k at 30psi with a plugged air filter and a leaking bov. Traps 144 at 3050lbs like that. When I did have boost up in the 40s back in the day it was around 40-45psi exhaust pressure.

Them UHF turbines are weird, if you examine places making cutting edge turbos that work well. Places that make class racer inducer spec turbos, that guys pay $10000 to pick up 15hp, none of them use a turbine like the UHF stuff.....And based on the data you have presented, they are not very good.

The dragys are not a great way by themselves, but pairing them with other data helps add to the picture.

With the clutch deal, I actually have it set up as timed through my haltech and not “as triggered” which helps keep the shifts much more consistent and not waiting to see the clutch at the top in order to reintroduce power. I was just giving rough shift estimates to help people understand that the time the engine is uncoupled from the trans isn’t very long or like that of what you would find in a synchro transmission.

I understand what I need to make it faster. A little mix of ignition retard and cut should help but I’m simply making a comparison as well as pointing out how important recovery of a turbo between shifts is. A few have asked me how I like it so I’m giving the data I’ve found.

I’ve never checked shaft speed of the 6466, but my full weight car plus passenger (3520 lbs) trapped consistent 154-155 being 80 degrees out and 900’ above sea level. Shaft speed of the 9564 was the only thing I have and it was being overspun substantially seeing 130k (max should be about 117k according to compressor map). But I personally feel for a street car I’d rather overspin a turbo than be left with a bunch of extra lag. It’s a risk I’m willing to take. Fwiw, that 6466 has been at that level for nearly 5 years now unscathed.

 

[bastarddsm]

I have a lot of synchro trans shifts pedal to pedal at 150ms. Power to power is sub 100, with an single act clutch too. Like I said there is a lot too it all, and you are heading down the wrong path for recovery with any type of cut. I actually pick up shaft speed when my foot is on the clutch. That's why my car goes 9's at 144 on 1.7 60's and everyone else needs 160mph to get it done. 10% of the track they are not accelerating.

 

[biglady112]

Like I have been saying to everyone. Those turbos are just expensive paperweights. Sit down and look at what class racers(think World Cup finals type cars) are running. You will see very few people running the Xona stuff. I personally would pit a junkyard hx52 against what you have and be in the same realm of spool and power but, for a mere $175. I have actual experience with the hx52 or I would not mention it.

And the guy that started this backwards adventure for you is local to me. His car has never actually produced a Dyno video or sheet. Nor has ever made it to the track to back up his claims. Neither has his brother’s car. I am very familiar with their little show and that is about all it really is.

Sorry this has been a fight for you. The few Xona cars I have tuned have all underperformed as well. Just like engines, there is no replacement for displacement. More millimeters equals more power.

 

[biglady112]

On our 6466 car with a .82 Vband housing we ran out of turbo at literally the exact same back pressure as you reported above. Verified on the Dyno of course.

I find it interesting you are out of turbo on the other two at a lower back pressure but, are not seeing the actual gains and benefits one should see from having room to work with.

And I live at 6000ft. So it is kind of apples to oranges. So we cannot make any power and have the lag to go with it. It is not like you made a major jump in turbine wheel size. So the lag shouldn’t be the same.

Those small housings are terrible. Small displacement and high pressure ratios don’t mix well. I promote everyone to try and get the biggest housing they can get. And for our altitude to go up 1-2 turbo sizes for what goals they THINK they have.

 

[Vegas Smith]

Like I have been saying to everyone. Those turbos are just expensive paperweights. Sit down and look at what class racers(think World Cup finals type cars) are running. You will see very few people running the Xona stuff. I personally would pit a junkyard hx52 against what you have and be in the same realm of spool and power but, for a mere $175. I have actual experience with the hx52 or I would not mention it.

And the guy that started this backwards adventure for you is local to me. His car has never actually produced a Dyno video or sheet. Nor has ever made it to the track to back up his claims. Neither has his brother’s car. I am very familiar with their little show and that is about all it really is.

Sorry this has been a fight for you. The few Xona cars I have tuned have all underperformed as well. Just like engines, there is no replacement for displacement. More millimeters equals more power.

What brand of turbo is at the top of the list?