Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

No. It would be good for an unopened motor also, of any variety IMO.

They are about 20 years newer than the 2860, think about that in general technology terms and it should make sense why they are out performing the old stuff.

  • Like 1

Man, If I owned a car that could easily mount an EFR (like a GTR or something) I would be allllll over them I think they are awesome turbos, despite them looking a little ugly...

The fitment on something like an EVO is such a pain.. I'm in the process now of TRYING to figure out how to mount one... but because they are so bulky, its difficult. In something like a GTR, it would be epic!

Man, If I owned a car that could easily mount an EFR (like a GTR or something) I would be allllll over them I think they are awesome turbos, despite them looking a little ugly...

The fitment on something like an EVO is such a pain.. I'm in the process now of TRYING to figure out how to mount one... but because they are so bulky, its difficult. In something like a GTR, it would be epic!

Nothing a simple manifold cannot fix. Y so srs?

Man, If I owned a car that could easily mount an EFR (like a GTR or something) I would be allllll over them I think they are awesome turbos, despite them looking a little ugly...

The fitment on something like an EVO is such a pain.. I'm in the process now of TRYING to figure out how to mount one... but because they are so bulky, its difficult. In something like a GTR, it would be epic!

If you get the newer external gate housings it should fit no problem. 4cyl manifolds are easily made/modified.

I am in the same boat once the evo7 is run in, I would like to push the 2.3 stroker to its limits, but lag is a bummer.

If you get the newer external gate housings it should fit no problem. 4cyl manifolds are easily made/modified.

I am in the same boat once the evo7 is run in, I would like to push the 2.3 stroker to its limits, but lag is a bummer.

If your referring to the Tial housings... they are good, but you loose twin scroll. Which is kinda what you want on a single turbo 4cyl... If not, you should just save yourself money by getting a precision.

Fitting the T4 divided is not that simple. Not for a daily driver anyways. The CHRA is longer then the generic Precision or Garrett offering, and so is the turbine housing. Add this in with the bulky compressor cover, and it is a real struggle to fit downlow.

1. You need to notch the gearbox mount

2. If your keeping the A/C in the stock location (I'm currently looking into relocation or replacement with electric), the radius on the dump pipe would be and is horrible.

Mounting internal (or external gate) in high mount configuration has its own issues;

1. Your moving a significant amount of weight HIGHER in the front of the car. It doesn't promote good handling.

2. The 'lower intercooler pipe' or turbo to intercooler pipe has increased length over a low mount, thus kinda defying the whole point of using an EFR - Loosing transient response

The actual construction of the manifold isn't that hard, its more how everything sits. If you can manage to relocate the A/C to give you a better radius on the dump pipe, it would be perfect....

Edited by Tonba

I initially though they were airwerks due to the fact the FMW compressor wheels are apparently the same wheels as EFRs.

But then I saw the pic of what they actually run, which looks to be a custom casting.

borg-warner-turbochargers-used-in-the-iz

Anyone found out if we can get these yet?

I can tell you, keeping the split pulse is nowhere near as important as getting the Ti wheels in there. I will be going a single pulse manifold if nothing twin is available by then, as I believe the whole split V single debate is a bit of a crock.

Externally gating off the housing opens up so many more options, and if the compressor housing is bulky and gets in the way, it will be modified.

I will definitely be low mounting, whatever the turbo I end up with, but if you are seriously worried about a couple of kg mounted 6 inches higher, you have issues. The turbo fits where it fits, and it's my job to make it work.

Dump radius, I have yet to see a good one on an Evo. :P

I can tell you, keeping the split pulse is nowhere near as important as getting the Ti wheels in there. I will be going a single pulse manifold if nothing twin is available by then, as I believe the whole split V single debate is a bit of a crock.

Externally gating off the housing opens up so many more options, and if the compressor housing is bulky and gets in the way, it will be modified.

I will definitely be low mounting, whatever the turbo I end up with, but if you are seriously worried about a couple of kg mounted 6 inches higher, you have issues. The turbo fits where it fits, and it's my job to make it work.

Dump radius, I have yet to see a good one on an Evo. :P

I disagree with a few things there. First off, the whole point of the EFR's is that a whole lot of little things come together to make a noticeable result. The compressor housing is bulky because of the integrated BOV. Now, sure you can modify it so the BOV doesn't exist, BUT the BOV outlet is positioned to 'vent' on the back side of the compressor blades. What this does is on release of throttle, the air vents onto the compressor wheel, to help keep the momentum of the assembly up. In combination with this, you have the light weight turbine AND compressor so the effect of the BOV is greater.

In addition to the above, the twin scroll housing assists in transient response as you do not have exhaust waves/pulses fighting against each other. This minimises losses here.

The light weight turbine is only a piece of the puzzle. Sure you might notice something with it only, but the effect is multiplied with the integrated BOV and twinscroll.

In regards to the high mount, while most people mounting the turbo this way in a street application, wouldn't notice the change in weight distribution, they WILL notice the increase in intercooler pipe length as it contributes to longer spool times and longer transient response time, in comparison to a low mount setup.

And I do agree, Evo's generally have poor dump pipe designs.. so where is the harm in trying to optimise this area?

Edited by Tonba

I can tell you, keeping the split pulse is nowhere near as important as getting the Ti wheels in there. I will be going a single pulse manifold if nothing twin is available by then, as I believe the whole split V single debate is a bit of a crock.

Externally gating off the housing opens up so many more options, and if the compressor housing is bulky and gets in the way, it will be modified.

I will definitely be low mounting, whatever the turbo I end up with, but if you are seriously worried about a couple of kg mounted 6 inches higher, you have issues. The turbo fits where it fits, and it's my job to make it work.

Dump radius, I have yet to see a good one on an Evo. :P

It is so nice when people just make perfect sense!

And Tonba one thing, I can tell you right now that if ppl weren't so scared of axial loads on the compressor wheel causing damage (however manufactured they are to sell product i.e. BOV's) then no one would have them.

Light weight wheels are the biggest part of the puzzle because it is minimising the rotating mass which would have the most direct effect on 'transient response' (just to quite the most recent buzz word going around here).

Agreed Michael.

I don't want a BOV on the compressor housing, or a stupidly long internal gate housing. I have a Tig welder handy which can place both exactly where they need to be to fit.

What I am looking for is the EFR pictured above, Tial housing and all. The shaft speed sensor can even get farked.

  • Like 2

The BOV is incorporated for only one reason, the shaft would fail if you didn't run a bov at a guess, too brittle.

Yes, not like the big beefy Airwerks series based on diesel applications...

Ever seen a BOV on a 600hp CAT engine? Fair enough they don't throttle on/off like we would.

I would only keep shaft speed sensor location just to make sure you didn't exceed recommended limits.

I would only keep shaft speed sensor location just to make sure you didn't exceed recommended limits.

And what, buy a new ECU just so I can log it? I would rather keep the cash aside for a new turbo if it lets go.

Limits were meant to be exceeded. ;)

The BOV is incorporated for only one reason, the shaft would fail if you didn't run a bov at a guess, too brittle.

Borg Warner broke the existing turbocharger mold when it created the EFR line. One of the main goals was integrating other turbo system components into the turbocharger. This ploy can save time, money and headaches. The biggest integration is the inclusion of an integrated blow-off valve. No more bung welding on delicate intake pipes. The BOV is laid-out as a compressor recirculation device that redirects the charge air from the turbo's compressor outlet to a low-pressure point just before the compressor inlet, which really helps keep the unit spooled between shifts.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yep, pretty much what you said is a good summary. The aftermarket thing just attached to the rim, then has two lines out to valve stems, one to inner wheel, one to outer wheel. Some of the systems even start to air up as you head towards highway speed. IE, you're in the logging tracks, then as speeds increase it knows you're on tarmac and airs up so the driver doesn't even have to remember. I bet the ones that need driver intervention to air up end up seeing a lot more tyre wear from "forest pressures" in use on the highway!
    • Yes, but you need to do these type certifications for tuning parts. That is the absurd part here. Meaning tuning parts are very costly (generally speaking) as well as the technical test documentation for say a turbo swap with more power. It just makes modifying everything crazy expensive and complicated. That bracket has been lost in translation many years ago I assume, it was not there.
    • Hahaha, yeah.... not what you'd call a tamper-proof design.... but yes, with the truck setup, the lines are always connected, but typically they sit just inside the plane of the rear metal mudguards, so if you clear the guards you clear the lines as well. Not rogue 4WD tracks with tree branches and bushes everywhere, ready to hook-up an air hose. You can do it externally like a mod, but dedicated setups air-pressurize the undriven hubs, and on driven axles you can do the same thing, or pressurize the axles (lots of designs out there for this idea)... https://www.trtaustralia.com.au/traction-air-cti-system/  for example.... ..the trouble I've got here... wrt the bimmer ad... is the last bit...they don't want to show it spinning, do they.... give all the illusion that things are moving...but no...and what the hell tyre profile is that?...25??? ...far kernel, rims would be dead inside 10klms on most roads around here.... 😃
    • You're just describing how type certification works. Personally I would be shocked to discover that catalytic converter is not in the stock mounting position. Is there a bracket on the transfer case holding the catalytic converter and front pipe together? If so, it should be in stock position. 
    • You talking about the ones in the photo above? I guess that could make sense. Fixed (but flexible) line from the point up above down to the hubcap thingo, with a rotating air seal thingo. Then fixed (but also still likely flexible) line from the "other side" of the transfer in the hub cap thingo up to the valve stem on the rim. A horrible cludge, but something that could be done. I'd bet on the Unimog version being fed through from the back, as part of the axle assembly, without the need for the vulnerable lines out to the sides. It's amazing what you can do when you have an idea that is not quite impossible. Nearly impossible, but not quite.
×
×
  • Create New...