bradsm87

Not entirely true. If a cat uses better, much more expensive coatings, they are more effective and can have the same catalyst effect with less surface area and/or length. This is why an HJS 200cpi cat won't trigger a CEL code, even on a brand new Euro 5 car, even though it flows much, much more than the 400cpi ceramic cat it replaced.

The cat will be a foot behind the turbo with thermal wrap up to the cat so it should heat up fairly quickly. None of the options listed are really what I'm after. I'm after something that actually does a really good job as a catalyst but sacrifices as little as possible flow. Something that's 200cpi and at least advertises that it's suitable for Euro 3. The wastegate will be plumbed in after the cat because the cat does pretty much nothing at richer than stoich and the wastegate is NEVER open in any stoich condition. This will reduce the performance hit of running a cat with no sacrifice to emissions. I will argue until black and blue if any transport inspector tries to tell me otherwise but there is near zero likelyhood of the position of the wastegate merge location being picked up on. I reckon I'll just try and find the cheapest reseller in Germany that respond to english emails and just fork out the extra :-(

HJS are awesome but very, very expensive. I'm looking for something that's a really good unit but not quite the price of an HJS. Best product under HJS would be what I'm after. round and metallic core are no brainers but there's still a huge difference in quality and catalyst effectiveness between brands.

Fuel pump can't flow enough > lean > hot > melt stuff

There's still no ETA on the 7064 .92. Announced over 2 years ago. This is getting beyond a joke. I've been waiting patiently for one for over 2 years!

I have no idea how that quick spool valve would be set up to actually work. They should only work with divided turbine housings and NON-divided manifolds. U can't just block off 3 cyliders until you're on full boost. Does anybody know how this one would work and the benefit? Edit: I think I get it now. The valve must direct the gas from one side into the other sie of the turbine housing.

The EFR is a T2 flanged single scroll .64.

The password has finally been lifted on the Perrin blog's review of the 7163. Looks impressive: http://blog.perrinpe...-test-and-tune/ I hope it comes out in twin scroll. I hope EVEN MORE that they bring out a smaller twin scroll than the T4 .92 for all B1 frame turbo's. Something like a divided T3 .82 would be ideal.

Ur prob thinking of the HKS GT2530

10:1 would work well with 98 but only with upgraded cams, a bigger turbine housing and low-ish boot. No need to run big boost wen u have high comp, cams and very little backpressure in the exhaust manifold.

Is is all Neo's or just the N/A ones?

There will be little gain with stock compression. Chuck some 13:1 comp pistons in and it'll be a whole different story!

I wouldn't go higher than about 10:1 with a .63 housing because higher C/R and small housing both contribute to the detonation threshold. I'd go with 10.5:1 comp and chuck a .82 housing on and it'll probably make full boost about the same as before but make a shit load more torque off boost, as it's coming on to boost and on boost, so EVERYWHERE. Even for me going from 8.5:1 with a GT2871R .64 to 9:1 and a .86 housing, I only lost about 100rpm spool threshold but it just felt better everywhere, especially off boost and coming on to boost.

3071R is bigger that a 7064. I want smaller. I'd use a 7064 over a 6758, even if I lost 150rpm of spool (which is all the dirrefence would be) in exchange for 10psi less exhaust manifold pressure and and extra 30kw up top. Makes for a way safer setup. It just annoys me that one must choose between a T25 .64 turbine housing and the next thing up is a T3 .82 with nothing in between. A T3 .82 divided housing for the 6258 through to 7670 would be just SO WINNING!

Different for each one. It's the far right line on the compressor map. 167,000rpm for the EFR 6258.

Tha coating looks great. I'll do that on mine for sure. I'm just REALLY frustrated about which one to get. "over-revving" these turbos seems to be a big no-no which sux because a 6258 looks ideal for awesome response on a 2.15L SR20 but even though I'm happy to run it down to 60% efficiency up near rev limiter, it's going beyond the "recommended" RPM. Not interested in th 6758 at all. It's compressor map looks horrible and the 7064's inducer is smaller anyway. I just wish turbos were more customisable. I think the 70mm compressor model should also be offered with a 61mm turbine for smaller engines and a T3 divided .82 housing as well to fill the gap between the T25 .64 and the T4 divided .92/T3 .82 (both spool about the same).

-7's are N1 turbos. OP is after GT2530 equivalents. Also the -9 is a more modern version of the -7 and is the same turbo as a HKS GT-SS and they are as responsive as -7's with more top-end. -7's are totally pointless these days.

The biggest trim of GT2871R has a 53.1 inducer so I have no idea what turbo you might be referring to. Any GT2871R will be noticably laggier than GT2530's. The one that is very, very similar to the GT2530's is the GT2860R (707160-5).

Haha billet is lighter because u can decrease the thickness more than the difference in density between cast and billet. Some are heavier because they have 7/7 blades instead of 6/6 but they'll handle high boost more efficiently and generally flow more for same size.

The new .82 and 1.06 T3 divided housings are supposedly 100% garrett unlike the .78 housings that are sleeved by ATP. I know high 300's can be done with a GT30 turbine but I'll pass on having 50psi in my exhaust manifold.

A GT30 turbine wheel at 350rwkw would be choking like all hell. I'd go a GTX3576R with a T3 divided 1.06 housing if you're not keen to go down the BW path (again).

If you're running E85, I'd run no less than 10:1 compression pistons and go with a BorgWarner EFR 8374 .92.

Sorry to revive an old thread but I got bored the other day and started playing with photoshop and removed the other maps from this one...

R34 GTRs use a 245/40R18 but you would need a 245/35R18 or 255/35R18 to keep the correct diameter for an R32 GTR.

Someone must know something about the EFR 7163. The only hints at real-world use are a password protected entry on the Perrin blog and a video that has been removed from Youtube. Has BW changed their mind about releasing it and trying to destroy the evidence or something?