I have been running your 62/67 HE351 in my 99 vp truck. I fabricated my own charge pipe and drain tube and opted for a hood stack. Absolutely love how it spools. It will make 50 pounds of boost before 2000 rpm which makes it amazing for towing a fully loaded horse trailer.
Have the exact same on my 01 with 150hp injectors. Such an an awesome turbo, Ive tried a few different turbos on that truck and this by far the best in every aspect of spool and overall power.
One thing we know for sure, these two compressors are very, very similar in delivered power/performance! Machining tolerance stackup could be enough to make up the small differences, which is wild!
Awesome video. I like how guy's look and compare all of the numbers. A video suggestion I have is for you guy's to try and match the spool up time of the stock turbo by adding things like a velocity stack, turbo blanket, ect.... Keep up the great work guy's an God Bless.
Great tech info. Looking forward to the added fuel. I have an 05 with 328k and stock fuel and turbo currently. Looking for options to pair in a compound set up with bigger fuel.
You guys should try a stock he351 turbine shoot out. I’ve seen an eBay D5 turbine 5+5 they shortened 5 turbine blades, kinda interesting and light weight. Put it against the stock 12 blade and 10 blade??
Great video. Over last 12+ years of diesel and import stuff i have learned 1 thing. Most times its hotside/ turbine limited. Still way to many do not see that drive pressure is crazy important. Have seen same turbo same compressor but different turbine/ housing. Overall boost goes down and power goes up. The strange anomaly in drive difference yet same boost and power i would be curious what shaft speeds where on the two. I would have bet the farm more power was made with the drop in drive.
Balancing excellent spool-up/driveability from a smaller turbine vs more efficient power delivery from a larger turbine is a fine art!!! We'd agree, hotside is commonly the limit!
I am preparing to dyno test my 5.9 Cummins that I run in my pulling tractor. In the past we have done this by starting the test at 3000 RPM and loading the engine until the RPM reaches 2000 RPM. Have you tried this approach? What are your thoughts?
I would like to know the exhaust side specs of the SXE. I wasn't able to find it in another video where it was included in a comparison as well. It would also be good to see a comparison of turbos with the same compressor side and different turbine specs, for example the 62/65 vs 62/67, or the SXE 62 with the 68 or 73 mm turbine. And how compounding effects turbine choice. If one turbine does the best as a single charger does the same turbine do the best in compounds?
When you guys did the double the horsepower of your common rail 5.9 I believe both the stock runs and max effort runs before modifying the truck made less power. Any idea why this was the case?
The bearings create more resistance at higher RPMs. The bearings in the 67s are likely the same. The stock one apparently has smoother bearings than the 60-67. The Borg has the best bearings. Also, air resistance is a factor, so a blade going faster creates more resistance the faster it goes. BOTH of those factors play into the nutso drive pressure on the 60-67.
The bearings on the 60/67 and 62/67 are identical other than small machining tolerances that are held fairly tight on bearings. The Borg definitely has larger shaft and therefore larger bearings.
This video was great! really informative. it makes me want a swap out the 60mm compressor in my 60/67 holset for 62mm on my 02 vp truck. 62mm compressors aren't as plentiful. do you think the 67mm compressor would make it laggy?
Yes it will be more laggy than the 60mm for sure. Also, you would have to machine the housing to accept a 67mm wheel. If you want to talk about this more in depth, call us! (435)962-9555
I agree that the 60 and 62 making the same power and boost, with different drive pressure is odd. Usually drive and boost would both go up to see same power. Or same boost, more drive and less power. All I've got is the 60 is taking more drive to process a little more air than the 62, but at the same boost. Possibly the outlet temp is higher with the 60 which is dropping read boost? Seems odd. Higher EGT driving the 60 a little harder, but garbage air?
Loving these videos as it helps figure out what to take care if before I have you do some custom tuning to dial it in. Currently my running a 67/67 smarty sr and. Valair dual disc clutch. I need to know what injectors would pair best to a 10 mm pump with a goal of 650 on the streets in a manual trans
Based on simply boost and drive, the Borg is the winner. However, based on that same argument, one could test an 88mm GTX55 which would likely win by a landslide making far less boost and drive, and more HP.... but a GTX55 single charger on a 5.9 Cummins would be so lazy and slow to spool, it would be undriveable on the street. Spool-up is a major factor to consider in street-able turbo selection and should be a major factor in turbo selection. That said, the borg spools reasonably well... but not nearly as snappy quick as an He351 variant!
When talking at 18:00 the answer probably has to do with compressor efficiency. Boost alone is not a great way of getting the whole picture, you know compressor maps and how to read them. My guess is the compressor outlet temp would probably tell you it's in a happier/better efficiency island. Also running a properly calibrated MAF sensor on the inlet side of all these tests would actually show you which is moving more air and thus the potential for making more HP.
I have been looking at a 60 64 from you guys for the past year for my vp truck. I have a bunch of breathing mods including studs, springs, pushrods, lightly ported head, steedspeed, 4" exhaust, S&B intake and inlet horn and an 0n3 intercooler. But looking at this im wondering now if I should try the 62 67. My fuel mods are nothing crazy, I just want a little more boost good driveability, and ability to tow anything. Fuel mods are 100 horse injectors and just an edge EZ with a raptor 100 and a cat fuel filter. I recently got a pan off upgrade from you guys for my 47re. Im NOT looking for 500 hp, just a good towing and driving turbo. Also would more drive and same boost and power just come down to iat? Because it would have to work harder but it could overcome with more air but the air would be more heated and less dense? Or does that factor in at all?
The nice thing about the 60/64 of that it is true drop in turbo. The 62/67 is amazing but will require some additional changes to make work. With your power goals the 60/64 is a great option and will be less expensive all said and done.
Was the borg sxe 362 run with a divided housing and divided manifold or were they mismatched? Would that change the results of this test significantly?
Borg had a divided T3 0.70AR housing, and the exhaust manifold is the factory stock T3 manifold. We do not think a divided vs non-divided would significantly change the outcome on this test with this size/class of turbos.
I have a 362SX-E with a 1.0A/R nonwastegated housing over a 476SX-E 1.58A/R thats pretty lazy under 1800rpms, and plan to buy the Savage Fab HE351 machined housing for the 362, hoping to pick up some response down low as I have a 2004.5 6 speed, and lose all my wheel momentum over and over again shifting. I also have a 362SX-E single with the non wastegated .83A/R 14cm* on an auto 2nd gen that also spools pretty slow. I didn't hear the turbine housing specs for the 362SX-E, but most of what im finding online from Borg Warner is far bigger that HE351 specs. If thats what you used, i would be more interested in a comparison with a closer sized housing to see if I gain anything from a $600 housing swap.
True the Borg housing is bigger. The housing used on this turbo was a divided .70 housing which is like a 12cm housing. The he351 has a much tighter 9cm housing but is undivided.
What about running any of these 3 with your s472 add a turbo kit? Ive been running the kit since February, and I'm still battling issue's with it. Trucks just not happy, building tons of heat, etc. Looking at changing out the 351 for something.
MAY I SUGGEST USING A DIFFERENT COLOR FOR EACH ITEM NOT ALL THE COLOR EACH RUN CHANGIMG IT JUST TO USE THE SAME COLOR IT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT TO SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOTTED LINES OTHER THAN THAT GREAT VIDEO.. SORRY FOR CAPS SCREEN TABLET IS SCREWED UP
Love watching videos where you guys nerd out on turbos! I build a s300-he351 hybrid (s300 super core with custom machined he9cm to fit) that would be pretty interesting to see how it stacks up, best of both worlds maybe? ;)
We think that the 60/67 is the better turbo for towing, but we are doing more research and testing to find out for sure. Realistically they should all be about the same on fuel mileage.
@@pddofficial doesnt the one with the lower backpressure also be the one that also have the best fuel consumption? Also i see that the Borg Warner have a very interesting ratio between back pressure and intake pressure
Depends on the gear ratio of the truck. For example, a 4.10 gear truck would be happier with a 62/65 Aggressor because the higher RPM will keep it in its efficiency range.
Unfortunately we tried to tighten up the editing on this video to save you viewers the monotony of dyno pull after dyno pull. We didn't know that viewers liked mid 500 HP dyno footage, we'll have to include more dyno pulls on the next video!
@leviduff2740 you have a point of there isn't much of a big change i guess it's pointless showing everything. But the 5 seconds or so of a help could be nice for 2 runs to see the difference not just numbers.
Also when you're talking about drive pressures vs boost and your 2:1 ratio. Why it's difficult to explain more power at less boost? Because very few understand the ultimate goal here. It is not PSI. When your drive pressures are significantly lower, your temperatures will be lower.....rest be equal like in this test. That being said, it's not about what pressure, it's about density. Density is king here, not psi like the majority thinks So firstly....you're flowing more volume with the Borg (more oxygen molecules packed into a given space. We usually use ft3) and secondly....(just as important) you're going to be at a lower temperature. Both have a drastic effect on DENSITY. PSI is not king...density is.
Thank you again guys for all you do and thank you for my new compounds I won from you all you are the best ❤
I have been running your 62/67 HE351 in my 99 vp truck. I fabricated my own charge pipe and drain tube and opted for a hood stack. Absolutely love how it spools. It will make 50 pounds of boost before 2000 rpm which makes it amazing for towing a fully loaded horse trailer.
It’s crazy how good they work! Love hearing feedback like this, thanks!
Have the exact same on my 01 with 150hp injectors. Such an an awesome turbo, Ive tried a few different turbos on that truck and this by far the best in every aspect of spool and overall power.
Wanted a video like this for so long. Thank you guys!!
Glad you enjoyed it, we had fun doing it!
Thank y’all for taking the time to do this. Much appreciated. I been looking at the 62-67 for quite sometime for my 2005 Cummings.
Glad we could help!
Would love to see more videos on the 5.9 common rail
We have more coming!
it would be great to see the same video for a drop in on a 6.7 or a comparison to a 2nd gen swap and turbo size comparison on stock fuel
Will have some drop in 6.7 testing in the near future.
Awesome comparison! I just installed my aggressor 62/65 from yall on my 5.9 VP truck... loving it so far!
That is awesome! We are glad you are loving that turbo!
The 62 slows the turbine wheel versus the 60, the slower the turbine wheel the better it flows so drive pressure goes down with the bigger compressor.
One thing we know for sure, these two compressors are very, very similar in delivered power/performance! Machining tolerance stackup could be enough to make up the small differences, which is wild!
Great Video Guys! Love Seeing what an s300 can do!
Love these videos …keep them coming 🙏🏼
Glad you liked it! More coming soon!
This is awesome. I want to upgrade fuel next. Will certainly be waiting for the next video. My truck is a 2006, with one of your transmissions.
We have some cool fuel stuff coming up soon, stay tuned!
Awesome video. I like how guy's look and compare all of the numbers.
A video suggestion I have is for you guy's to try and match the spool up time of the stock turbo by adding things like a velocity stack, turbo blanket, ect....
Keep up the great work guy's an God Bless.
Thanks! We'll keep that in mind for future videos.
i like this series. I have a 05 that i plan on building. this helps with some decision making! Thanks!!
We’re glad it can help with your build!
AWESOME video!!!!!! Love all the numbers!! Keep it up!
Glad you enjoyed the data!
Love these videos!
Glad you enjoyed it, we had fun making it!
Great tech info. Looking forward to the added fuel. I have an 05 with 328k and stock fuel and turbo currently. Looking for options to pair in a compound set up with bigger fuel.
The 62/67 paired with a 480 is a pretty sweet combo!
Awesome info!
I love the 60/67s on my 12 valves. I wonder how a 62/67 would work.
The 67/67 was too big and hot.
The 62/67 is a good option! A lot of guys are running those and like them. Not a huge difference but the change would be noticeable.
I'm running 63/68/9 on a 12 valve with a six speed on wmo and I gotta wind my gears out for truck to be always in the power band
Great info
You guys should try a stock he351 turbine shoot out. I’ve seen an eBay D5 turbine 5+5 they shortened 5 turbine blades, kinda interesting and light weight. Put it against the stock 12 blade and 10 blade??
I was looking at that one too, very curious to see results on it
I have a bunch of those turbines laying around, sounds fun!
I would love to see how the drop in non vgts compare to t4 kits on a 6.0 or even drop in non vgt vs vgt
Me too! I have never done those tests it would interesting to have a direct comparison.
@ I feel like it would clear up a lot of controversy on what turbos people should run
Great video. Over last 12+ years of diesel and import stuff i have learned 1 thing. Most times its hotside/ turbine limited. Still way to many do not see that drive pressure is crazy important. Have seen same turbo same compressor but different turbine/ housing. Overall boost goes down and power goes up. The strange anomaly in drive difference yet same boost and power i would be curious what shaft speeds where on the two. I would have bet the farm more power was made with the drop in drive.
Balancing excellent spool-up/driveability from a smaller turbine vs more efficient power delivery from a larger turbine is a fine art!!! We'd agree, hotside is commonly the limit!
Can you do comparison of the new s364 sx-r to a 62mm and 66mm, to see if the spool up and airflow matches what BW claims please?
I am preparing to dyno test my 5.9 Cummins that I run in my pulling tractor. In the past we have done this by starting the test at 3000 RPM and loading the engine until the RPM reaches 2000 RPM. Have you tried this approach? What are your thoughts?
I know a lot of engine Dyno’s do that type of loading. I’ve never tried it on our chassis dyno. Might be fun to attempt it!
I would like to know the exhaust side specs of the SXE. I wasn't able to find it in another video where it was included in a comparison as well. It would also be good to see a comparison of turbos with the same compressor side and different turbine specs, for example the 62/65 vs 62/67, or the SXE 62 with the 68 or 73 mm turbine. And how compounding effects turbine choice. If one turbine does the best as a single charger does the same turbine do the best in compounds?
All good points! A lot of testing to do! As far as this turbo it was the 68mm turbine in a .70 divided housing
When you guys did the double the horsepower of your common rail 5.9 I believe both the stock runs and max effort runs before modifying the truck made less power. Any idea why this was the case?
Not sure, different trucks maybe? On the modded runs our tuning is better now. Always learning!
The bearings create more resistance at higher RPMs. The bearings in the 67s are likely the same. The stock one apparently has smoother bearings than the 60-67. The Borg has the best bearings. Also, air resistance is a factor, so a blade going faster creates more resistance the faster it goes. BOTH of those factors play into the nutso drive pressure on the 60-67.
The bearings on the 60/67 and 62/67 are identical other than small machining tolerances that are held fairly tight on bearings. The Borg definitely has larger shaft and therefore larger bearings.
@@pddofficial I will take this as confirmation of my logical analysis. Thank you!
This video was great! really informative. it makes me want a swap out the 60mm compressor in my 60/67 holset for 62mm on my 02 vp truck. 62mm compressors aren't as plentiful. do you think the 67mm compressor would make it laggy?
Yes it will be more laggy than the 60mm for sure. Also, you would have to machine the housing to accept a 67mm wheel. If you want to talk about this more in depth, call us! (435)962-9555
Now that trump is back in, maybe i can start buying parts again soon 😂😂
Would like to see how see how the s362 responds to a divided exhaust manifold.
Excellent point! I’m sure the results would improve.
I agree that the 60 and 62 making the same power and boost, with different drive pressure is odd. Usually drive and boost would both go up to see same power. Or same boost, more drive and less power.
All I've got is the 60 is taking more drive to process a little more air than the 62, but at the same boost. Possibly the outlet temp is higher with the 60 which is dropping read boost?
Seems odd. Higher EGT driving the 60 a little harder, but garbage air?
So i can buy a tune for my stock 04 ram 5.9 and make more hp without injectors, ect....?
Yes sir! Truck will be night and day different!
Yes
Yes, I did it with my o5.. huge difference way better fuel economy and big h.p.
Loving these videos as it helps figure out what to take care if before I have you do some custom tuning to dial it in. Currently my running a 67/67 smarty sr and. Valair dual disc clutch. I need to know what injectors would pair best to a 10 mm pump with a goal of 650 on the streets in a manual trans
Give us a call, we'd love to talk to you and help you figure out the right setup! (435)962-9555
I still wanna see you guys do a s369sxe vs a gt45 cause with and without a tune cause those turbos are close in size just a suggestion
I think your thinking of s gt42? The gt45 has turbine wheel similar to that of a 476.
@pddofficial I didn't think about that I was saying the gt45 cause the inlet side is similar to the 369
So the Borg wins by a mile.
Most power on the least boost, with WAY less drive.
Expected from a proper company I guess. Very impressive turbo!
Based on simply boost and drive, the Borg is the winner. However, based on that same argument, one could test an 88mm GTX55 which would likely win by a landslide making far less boost and drive, and more HP.... but a GTX55 single charger on a 5.9 Cummins would be so lazy and slow to spool, it would be undriveable on the street. Spool-up is a major factor to consider in street-able turbo selection and should be a major factor in turbo selection. That said, the borg spools reasonably well... but not nearly as snappy quick as an He351 variant!
Can you guys do some testing with the new SX-R series Borgs?
I do want to play with some of those!
@pddofficial I figured you guys would have been the first
When talking at 18:00 the answer probably has to do with compressor efficiency. Boost alone is not a great way of getting the whole picture, you know compressor maps and how to read them. My guess is the compressor outlet temp would probably tell you it's in a happier/better efficiency island. Also running a properly calibrated MAF sensor on the inlet side of all these tests would actually show you which is moving more air and thus the potential for making more HP.
Great thoughts! Compressor outlet temps would be very fun to see! We really should make some kind of maf setup for the dyno
Can you do the same video for the stealth series turbos (stealth 64, stealth 67) and fleece cheetah?
That is a great idea! We may have to get some and shoot another series.
I have been looking at a 60 64 from you guys for the past year for my vp truck. I have a bunch of breathing mods including studs, springs, pushrods, lightly ported head, steedspeed, 4" exhaust, S&B intake and inlet horn and an 0n3 intercooler. But looking at this im wondering now if I should try the 62 67. My fuel mods are nothing crazy, I just want a little more boost good driveability, and ability to tow anything. Fuel mods are 100 horse injectors and just an edge EZ with a raptor 100 and a cat fuel filter. I recently got a pan off upgrade from you guys for my 47re. Im NOT looking for 500 hp, just a good towing and driving turbo.
Also would more drive and same boost and power just come down to iat? Because it would have to work harder but it could overcome with more air but the air would be more heated and less dense? Or does that factor in at all?
The nice thing about the 60/64 of that it is true drop in turbo. The 62/67 is amazing but will require some additional changes to make work. With your power goals the 60/64 is a great option and will be less expensive all said and done.
@pddofficial fair enough. Thanks for the reply!
Was the borg sxe 362 run with a divided housing and divided manifold or were they mismatched? Would that change the results of this test significantly?
Borg had a divided T3 0.70AR housing, and the exhaust manifold is the factory stock T3 manifold. We do not think a divided vs non-divided would significantly change the outcome on this test with this size/class of turbos.
I'd like to see the 60/64 vs the 60/67 in a 12v.
It’s coming!
I have a 362SX-E with a 1.0A/R nonwastegated housing over a 476SX-E 1.58A/R thats pretty lazy under 1800rpms, and plan to buy the Savage Fab HE351 machined housing for the 362, hoping to pick up some response down low as I have a 2004.5 6 speed, and lose all my wheel momentum over and over again shifting. I also have a 362SX-E single with the non wastegated .83A/R 14cm* on an auto 2nd gen that also spools pretty slow. I didn't hear the turbine housing specs for the 362SX-E, but most of what im finding online from Borg Warner is far bigger that HE351 specs. If thats what you used, i would be more interested in a comparison with a closer sized housing to see if I gain anything from a $600 housing swap.
True the Borg housing is bigger. The housing used on this turbo was a divided .70 housing which is like a 12cm housing. The he351 has a much tighter 9cm housing but is undivided.
Possible to make a 6.0 powerstroke turbo shootout? There’s soooo many vgt options, can even make a separate episode for non vgt people
It’s coming!
What about running any of these 3 with your s472 add a turbo kit? Ive been running the kit since February, and I'm still battling issue's with it. Trucks just not happy, building tons of heat, etc. Looking at changing out the 351 for something.
They all would work well. I would stick with the he351 variants though with a 472. Keep that quick spool!
@pddofficial do the 351 variants already have the wastegate bored/ported?
Yes we oversized the waste gate port on these turbos.
MAY I SUGGEST USING A DIFFERENT COLOR FOR EACH ITEM NOT ALL THE COLOR EACH RUN CHANGIMG IT JUST TO USE THE SAME COLOR IT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT TO SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN DOTTED LINES OTHER THAN THAT GREAT VIDEO.. SORRY FOR CAPS SCREEN TABLET IS SCREWED UP
Noted! Thanks for the suggestion!
Take the turbo off and add Procharger belt driven what would that do to a 05 5,9
That procharger setup would look very cool and unique for sure. Then it would get destroyed by a well designed turbo setup.
Love watching videos where you guys nerd out on turbos! I build a s300-he351 hybrid (s300 super core with custom machined he9cm to fit) that would be pretty interesting to see how it stacks up, best of both worlds maybe? ;)
That would be a cool test. It would require quite a bit of welding to produce the first couple prototypes... but it might be awesome!!
@@pddofficial If you want I can send you a housing to try out, your 362 in the test has a 68mm turbine right?
What would you recommend for a stock 1999 2nd gen manual turbo upgrade
I would like either the k27 or the aggressor 60/64 if you want a little more power in the future. Both will drive and tow great
@@pddofficial ok thank ya
whats better for towing and what turbo is more fuel efficient??
We think that the 60/67 is the better turbo for towing, but we are doing more research and testing to find out for sure. Realistically they should all be about the same on fuel mileage.
@@pddofficial doesnt the one with the lower backpressure also be the one that also have the best fuel consumption? Also i see that the Borg Warner have a very interesting ratio between back pressure and intake pressure
Depends on the gear ratio of the truck. For example, a 4.10 gear truck would be happier with a 62/65 Aggressor because the higher RPM will keep it in its efficiency range.
Now show us good tubos to add to our stock turbo for a compound set up
Have you seen our add a turbo kit for this truck? They are pretty sweet
@@jimschaffroth5652 they are very nice I love mine
What would you recommend for a 1st gen 1993 turbo upgrade
Get there 60/64 I think it would be awesome in a first gen
Agreed!
@@Two-twelve-valves appreciate it 👌🎯
Hell yeah turbos and trump
Thank yo for the election distraction.
Always like your video and as a die hard diesel lover hopefully the leftist will not take this away from us.
I was expecting to see the dyno runs 😢 guess that ain't happening lol
I'm actually glad they didn't show every dyno run. They all look the same, I want to see the numbers.
Unfortunately we tried to tighten up the editing on this video to save you viewers the monotony of dyno pull after dyno pull. We didn't know that viewers liked mid 500 HP dyno footage, we'll have to include more dyno pulls on the next video!
@leviduff2740 you have a point of there isn't much of a big change i guess it's pointless showing everything. But the 5 seconds or so of a help could be nice for 2 runs to see the difference not just numbers.
Also when you're talking about drive pressures vs boost and your 2:1 ratio. Why it's difficult to explain more power at less boost? Because very few understand the ultimate goal here. It is not PSI. When your drive pressures are significantly lower, your temperatures will be lower.....rest be equal like in this test. That being said, it's not about what pressure, it's about density. Density is king here, not psi like the majority thinks So firstly....you're flowing more volume with the Borg (more oxygen molecules packed into a given space. We usually use ft3) and secondly....(just as important) you're going to be at a lower temperature. Both have a drastic effect on DENSITY. PSI is not king...density is.
❤️🔥🇺🇸😎💵💵💵
Turbskis and a Trump win. Gonna be a good night!