pole position

^ Compared to what ? A ancient stock turbo ?

Seriously, aples to apples ,for example, spool difference between a journal bearing and a BB, like a Precision for example, who give you a choice, is miniscule under the same perameters.

teamcrossworks

Forget I said anything...there are much smarter people on here then me (not being sarcastic).

For my application, it seems the simple ,inexpensive bolt on with great return way to go.

... I better stick to organizing group buys and designing shirts...lol

Scott H

It doesn't leave Charlie as a regular K26/6. There are quite a few things he can do for you, and if you talk with him he will give you options to get you where you want to go. At the end of the day I may end up going with him because I'm tired of the car sitting and I want to drive it again instead of saving up for a $$$$ new turbo.

Dave W.

You'll be OK running an upgraded turbo on a stock AFM. Just remember that the stock AFM is very restrictive, which will choke off the power as well as increase lag. I have a feeling that you'll be very motivated to get a maf upgrade once you get the new turbo installed.

bebbetufs

Well, perhaps I should rather spend the $400 on a MAF rather than a BB CHRA, if you calculate spool-for-the-buck I mean? Or should I aim for both for the optimum effect?

TurboTommy

bebbetufs;
go back and read my original post (#61) in this thread.
If you still want more power after that you can then get a bigger turbo, but everything will be in place.
It might be an unpopular statement, but there's no magical turbo (unless you go VATN); everything is a trade-off.
It's better to engineer your entire system properly as oppossed to buying into the hype of certain turbos.
Lot's of air flow potential entering the intake and exiting the exhaust, together with a so-called smallish turbo, is better than the other way around.

bebbetufs

I did, thanks. I also shipped Rogue an e-mail about the possible upgrade paths I can take from A to M tune. The plot thickens....

I just want to try to explain my position a little better in case you all think I'm nuts I just took a fresh look at my options. Previously I only looked at BBs and this has thrown my aim off because when I started looking at modern journal bearing turbos the prices are comparable to upgraded triple K options.

The reason I don't have a core is because I have a brand new k26/8 replaced under warranty. Shipping a brand new turbo to the US to have it rebuilt seems like a waste. I can stick it back on the car if I want, or I can sell it at a minimal loss to get a modern turbo either a BB or a journal CHRA.

Charlie can set me up with a reworked 26/6, essentially a k27/6 with a hotside machined to use a bigger turbine. He only wants $850 for this (probably more if using Garret internals). No core is needed. To put this into perspective the Turbonetics with journal bearings and f1 inconell turbine is $790...(+ minimal exhaust work to make it fit).

My instinct is that the aerodynamics and materials of turbos must have improved over the last 25+ years, and that a modern journal bearing turbo from Garret or Turbonetics must be better than a reworked 20 year old design.

If, on top of that difference in cost is non existent (if you don't have a core), modern seems like the only sensible choice. Then again many of you are telling me otherwise. Perhaps the fine tuning that experts on the peculiarities of the 951 can do to their turbo's is enough to offset the relatively small benefits of going modern?

On a different note. I just read on Broadfoot's site that the k26 #6 hot housing is .42 A/R and the #8 is .48 A/R, does this sound right? If so they are smaller than I thought.