60-1 reliability issues?
- Thread starter TheNewRed
- Start date
If you allow no margin for error, you can push pretty far. But if one thing goes wrong, one component isn't working at 100%, you're toast and you are going to wind up with an oil pan full of shiny engine parts...
MDCmotorsports;928433 said:
1) Ebay special - 4" thick but not very large as far as surface area is concerned.
2) 2.5" hardpipes
3) HKS Super Sequential BOV, mounted about a foot from throttle body
4) stock intake setup
Bigdough666;929220 said:
Im curious to know if we could get better data from the people who have had 60-1's fail... what their setup was.
Im wondering if the stock IC, Stock piping, and stock BOV have any thing to do with a compressor housings ability to surge....
MDCmotorsports;929636 said:
I ran it with stock IC and pipes for a while, only had this IC and hardpipe setup for about 1.5 years. Had the HKS BOV for pretty much the entire time though. I get very little compressor surge, but only at low boost (under stock level), I think the valve doesnt open with so little boost pressure.
MDCmotorsports;929636 said:
I've found (and this is purely anecdotal, not statistical), that stock turbos tend to last longer at higher boost levels if the IC & BOV have been upgraded.
I would surmise that the same is true for a 60-1 upgrade, where some durability has been given up for peak performance.
Bigdough666;929222 said:
Thats what the majority of people who reported no problems SF said (aside from one or two other shops).
What I would like to know is where this rumor about the MR2 turbine housings being subpar to supra housings got started. Didnt the Turbo MR2 come out AFTER the MK3 Supra, if my facts are twisted let me know.
How much boost? At stock boost that's unremarkable.
At 10 psi, it's good, at 12 it would be very good. At 21 you'd be lucky if it lasted a year...
At 10 psi, it's good, at 12 it would be very good. At 21 you'd be lucky if it lasted a year...
Cya;929764 said:
and? Windows Vista came out LONG after XP......does that make it better/more reliable??
IwantMKIII;929915 said:
Its because some bozo out there, on an internet forum, has decided that a twin entry scroll housing is better, even though the stock manifold doesn't support twin entry scroll..
My 60-1 died without many miles on the clock and:
- 2.5" hardpipes
- Spearco intercooler
- HKS SSQV installed in the upper IC pipe, next to the passenger side fender
- 2.5" hardpipes
- Spearco intercooler
- HKS SSQV installed in the upper IC pipe, next to the passenger side fender
the point is not the twin scroll entry, thepoint is the fact the you now have two wastegate ports instead of one. now you have less chance for stressed housings because there is more flow after porting. doesnt a bigger wastgate help to prevent boost creep? so there is more accurate boost control, and keep those egts down a bit? correct me if im wrong.
I put just a hair over 9,000 miles on my 60-1 before it finally gave.
This was 100% daily driven, averaging about 13-14psi.
-TiAL BOV mounted 12 inches away from TB.
-Stock Intercooler.
-2.5" Upper Hardpipes.
As for reliability issues -
Just because of a heavy spring in the BOV, I'd get a little compressor surge with anything under 2-3psi.
I had no complaints. I actually LOVED my 60-1...However, the 57 Trim I rocked previously...
I've got to say, for the amount of miles I put on the .57 Trim CT, and the minimal differences in pull between the two, I'll have to side with the 57.
-Jeff
This was 100% daily driven, averaging about 13-14psi.
-TiAL BOV mounted 12 inches away from TB.
-Stock Intercooler.
-2.5" Upper Hardpipes.
As for reliability issues -
Just because of a heavy spring in the BOV, I'd get a little compressor surge with anything under 2-3psi.
I had no complaints. I actually LOVED my 60-1...However, the 57 Trim I rocked previously...
I've got to say, for the amount of miles I put on the .57 Trim CT, and the minimal differences in pull between the two, I'll have to side with the 57.
-Jeff
Supracentral;929730 said:
Sorry i havent been on in a few days guys....Gotta work to keep the Supra in buisness. But anyway, even though everyone says that the stock intercooler can do the job up to like 450hp or something, it still dosent look very trust-worthy, nor does the 3.4 pressure drop that is stated on suprastore's "MK3 Specs" page. I wouldnt consider raising the boost past 11psi before i were to switch to an HKS ssq, 2.75 hardpipes, and atleast an ebay intercooler.
The primary problem with the stock intercooler is it's lack of mass. It heat saturates in very short order. The more mass an IC has, the more heat it can soak up.
In real world driving, or on a road course, you need that mass to suck up heat during your brief moments of acceleration, then during your times of part or no throttle, the airflow pulls that heat away.
Yes the stock IC sheds heat quickly, but it has almost no ability to hold it, so it saturates almost instantly.
This is a gross oversimplification, but it gets the point across.
In real world driving, or on a road course, you need that mass to suck up heat during your brief moments of acceleration, then during your times of part or no throttle, the airflow pulls that heat away.
Yes the stock IC sheds heat quickly, but it has almost no ability to hold it, so it saturates almost instantly.
This is a gross oversimplification, but it gets the point across.