6062 Turbo Dyno

[vollosso]

Hey again, we finished up a build the other day with a 6062. We have long been interested in trying this turbo and I thought I would share the results.

We assembled the short block, 9:1 compression, 87mm, s52 crank, stock head, and stock cams. It is running a custom 6-1 collector t3 turbo manifold. Megasquirt MS3. 1000cc injectors with 92 octane fuel. A precision 6062 w/ 0.63 ar.

We stopped here at 17psi due to 92oct. The owner is going to drive the car for a while and get it over to synthetic oil and we will come back for e85 tuning.

6062 dyno.png

Results:

9Psi 400whp/370wtq
13Psi 473whp/417wtq
17Psi 528whp/466wtq


All in all a very nice street turbo!

We have a few pictures of the build and a dyno video on our instagram/facebook if you want to see more.

[E36 328is]

Looks good! What rpm does it have full spool on the street? Also comared to a Garrett turbo would this be somehwere between a gt3076r and a
gt3582r?

[pbonsalb]

I expected the 6062 to have better response on a 3.2L, especially with a 0.63 T3 turbine housing.

[vollosso]

I expected the 6062 to have better response on a 3.2L, especially with a 0.63 T3 turbine housing.

Agreed, it does considerably better on the street. Full boost by about 3500.

The turbo was installed on an engine before this one, and the engine went. Maybe there was some damage that went unnoticed. I didn’t personally inspect the turbine, and now the thought is in the back of my mind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[vollosso]

Looks good! What rpm does it have full spool on the street? Also comared to a Garrett turbo would this be somehwere between a gt3076r and a
gt3582r?

I’d say this is pretty comparable to a gt35r. Hopefully we find some more top-end though. I’ll update this with e85 results.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mklock]

Very respectable! Nice and square. I'll be going for a dyno run later this summer. I was at 19psi making 618, I'm gonna mix 5gal of 93 and 5 gal of 110 and turn it up to 24 to send this pile to the grave hopefully. Why arent people running bigger turbines / housings. Just for useable power?

[vollosso]

Very respectable! Nice and square. I'll be going for a dyno run later this summer. I was at 19psi making 618, I'm gonna mix 5gal of 93 and 5 gal of 110 and turn it up to 24 to send this pile to the grave hopefully. Why arent people running bigger turbines / housings. Just for useable power?

The owner brought the turbo in. I would have run a bigger housing had we selected it.

You did 618whp on 19psi with a 6062?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mklock]

No, a 64mm Big tractor borg warner, with the biggest twinscroll housing to keep egts down as best I can. Pump gas no meth etc. I ran a housing like said build and it was just way to much heat for my likes because I don't just do straightline crap. Track like conditions is way harder on crap. So I went big housing and crank it down to 10psi which is great power for the track for me. Probably still in the 420+whp on 10ish psi so that's totally fun still.

[vollosso]

No, a 64mm Big tractor borg warner, with the biggest twinscroll housing to keep egts down as best I can. Pump gas no meth etc. I ran a housing like said build and it was just way to much heat for my likes because I don't just do straightline crap. Track like conditions is way harder on crap. So I went big housing and crank it down to 10psi which is great power for the track for me. Probably still in the 420+whp on 10ish psi so that's totally fun still.

Oh hah gotcha. I was thinking 19psi on a 6062 and pump would do more like 550, 618 had me wanting to go inspect the turbo for damage.

On e85, high compression, and a larger housing it might get near 600whp. We stopped at 17 because the fuel was forcing the low timing numbers, you can see it in the 526 graph. I think, barring turbo damage, that’s about as good as this turbo will do.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mklock]

Hah yeah, totally understandable. I've also got cams too so that helps it a little. Or a lot I'm not sure.. is this a cast manifold or tube? The small turbine housing is definetly a factor. If it was bigger I bet 550whp would totally be practical. You can only get so far sadly with 93.

[Gmfwd]

Carries the torque nicely.

When you say stock cams do you mean stock m50/52 cams or stock s52 cams?

[vollosso]

Hah yeah, totally understandable. I've also got cams too so that helps it a little. Or a lot I'm not sure.. is this a cast manifold or tube? The small turbine housing is definetly a factor. If it was bigger I bet 550whp would totally be practical. You can only get so far sadly with 93.

It is tube. Long tube.

Cams can help a lot.

Carries the torque nicely.

When you say stock cams do you mean stock m50/52 cams or stock s52 cams?

S52


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Robocop]

sorry this is off topic but i know that torque is pretty damn flat. looks amazing but have you thought about
raising the boost where the tq slightly drops off to keep it flat to 7k probably get at extra 50hp just from that.

[vollosso]

sorry this is off topic but i know that torque is pretty damn flat. looks amazing but have you thought about
raising the boost where the tq slightly drops off to keep it flat to 7k probably get at extra 50hp just from that.

Yeah I think that would make a really interesting car. We are going to do something similar in our next round of n54 development.

Unfortunately with this car we are limited by octane (92). When your timing table ends up flat in the high boost range it means more boost generally won’t help as you are way below mbt.

Additionally this car is getting an e85 tune shortly so there was less reason to push it on 92.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NOTORIOUS VR]

I expected the 6062 to have better response on a 3.2L, especially with a 0.63 T3 turbine housing.

I didn't... same ish spool I saw on my friends 3L w/ 6262. I"ll expect the 6062 with small housing to just choke up top especially on E85. It's interesting because the compressor is very capable actually.

My 2.9L M52 (8.8:1) spools the same or better than both of these cars with my GT4094R and much bigger housing to boot w/ no boost control.

Vollosso, the dyno runs were in 5th gear here? Nice work btw

[vollosso]

I didn't... same ish spool I saw on my friends 3L w/ 6262. I"ll expect the 6062 with small housing to just choke up top especially on E85. It's interesting because the compressor is very capable actually.

My 2.9L M52 (8.8:1) spools the same or better than both of these cars with my GT4094R and much bigger housing to boot w/ no boost control.

Vollosso, the dyno runs were in 5th gear here? Nice work btw

These were in 4th gear.

I don't think there is anything else we can do on this 6062 to make a huge difference in spool. We started with a good timing and fuel table and spent a few hours maximizing timing. It could spool leaner but this is about as good as one of these turbos will do with a 0.63 ar.

I have always been a proponent for larger turbos, honestly with these motors they do seem to come on better. Attached is a 6870 with a t4 housing on the same motor but with LARGER cams.

I appreciate it, I would really like to try one of this with a huge housing. Maybe I can convince the owner.

2019-04-25 12_49_54-WinPEP 8 Data Center.png

[NOTORIOUS VR]

honestly with these motors they do seem to come on better.

Totally agree, at least from what I've seen. There isn't any downside to going (reasonably) larger on the turbine side IMO.

[BadBoostedBmwM3]

The results are different than I thought.

I suspected a stronger torque (still sub 500wtrq) curve but with more fall on the top end (less peak power). Kind of like an 2.7 Ecoboost motor.

[vollosso]

Well guys, when you look at this turbo realize its basically a Gt35r with a slightly bigger turbine wheel, it makes sense. I think the 0.68 is choking it. We will try again with the same setup and an 0.82 for science.

[Mklock]

Nice. Yeah, I LOVE my diesel sized turbine wheel. 74mm turbine wheel and never looked back.

[BMWManiac]

The results are different than I thought.

I suspected a stronger torque (still sub 500wtrq) curve but with more fall on the top end (less peak power). Kind of like an 2.7 Ecoboost motor.

I agree...this looks more like a supercharger than a turbo....figured the torque would come on BIG early on, not at 4.5k rpms....seems kind of lazy for a smaller turbo

[BadBoostedBmwM3]

Well guys, when you look at this turbo realize its basically a Gt35r with a slightly bigger turbine wheel, it makes sense. I think the 0.68 is choking it. We will try again with the same setup and an 0.82 for science.

Well, you put it like that... I can agree.

[vollosso]

So we just got the car back for the 0.82 housing swap.

it has some mileage on it now, and we wanted to baseline it on the new dyno.

These runs in 5th, about 76*F 100ft altitude. Correction 1.00. (Last runs were 80F and correction factor 0.98)



I put fresh fuel in it from the best local station and did a baseline (Green Run) I am pretty happy with how close that is to the dynojet runs!

Since the runs didnt have the kink like last time I bumped the boost up to 18 psi and cleaned up the fueling a bit.

We weren't really commissioned to play much more with the 0.63 and see how the graph pushes to the left and torque starts falling faster? we are running into backpressure.

I was surprised to see much of a gain, could be related to slightly lower inlet temps and maybe a bit better fuel. On the last dyno it got ran hard all day.

0.82 data coming probably today!

[Bigmac834]

can't open the attachment

[vollosso]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk