Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, s2d4 said:

Hopefully people will start posting turbo speed, since it's absolutely crucial for these EFR's

Nicks has the speed sensor installed but the road rage gauge was faulty. If it doesn't get fixed soon the speed sensor will go straight back to the ECU.

  • Like 1
17 hours ago, Nismo 3.2ish said:

Someone had to start it again, lets hope it does not get bogged down with BS ?

But it is hard to find info on the EFRs ?

I think because there are so many build types for Skylines now ranging from stock  to over 3.2Lt , it is also hard to have back to back comparisons.

But from what I can find out,  the EFR8374 will get me going quicker, with a much better transient response and roughly to the same top HP as my PT6266 Gen 2 ?

Hopefully some back to back comparisons :)

So put it on already

8 hours ago, usmair said:

I might do the speed sensor in the next couple of weeks

Can you do a little test for me? 4th gear flat road, low rpm, load it up and see when you hit 15psi?

PS. Very nice result, I'm guessing it's going to be awesome to drive

Edited by SimonR32
  • Like 1
3 hours ago, SimonR32 said:

Can you do a little test for me? 4th gear flat road, low rpm, load it up and see when you hit 15psi?

PS. Very nice result, I'm guessing it's going to be awesome to drive

will give it a go on the weekend.... what i've found from with this turbo is that it goes from 10 to 30 very quicky so trying to find exactly when 15 comes will be tricky

As promised

6262 vs 8374

Both stock rb26 on e85 with relatively small cams (i think my brother has 260s and i've got 256s)

6262 made that power on 32 psi by memory. 8374 is on 30psi. 6262 can probably go to 480kw where as my EFR can probably stretch to 550kw if pushed so there is more top end with the Borg Warner

The difference in torque is immense! (not sure if those are just weird dyno numbers though).

Both cars are making 90-100kw around 3900rpm. At 4700RPM the 6262 is around 275kw whereas the BW is making just over 300kw. After that its a walk over and the BW just takes it.

At 5500 Rpm the 6262 is at 370kw where as the BW is around 440kw

The 6262 is on a r34 whereas mine is a r33 so the 6 speed gearing may also be having an impact (it should be helping with response on the 6262 right???)

Very very interesting.

 

 

 

6262 vs 8374.jpg

Edited by usmair

Strong results on the 8374! Any clue what it made on 18-19 psi range? Trying to estimate what i should expect as gains when i move to E85 and 30+ psi.

Just now, HarrisRacing said:

Strong results on the 8374! Any clue what it made on 18-19 psi range? Trying to estimate what i should expect as gains when i move to E85 and 30+ psi.

my gate pressure is around 20psi and it made 380-390kw on e85

  • Like 1
my gate pressure is around 20psi and it made 380-390kw on e85


Then I'm right on target. 93 pump and 17-18 psi was 464 whp for me. (Your results convert to 510-523 whp). I'm probably 500 wheel now at 20 psi (haven't dyno'd). So I am now more motivated than ever to make the move and crank the boost up!

Thanks!
6 hours ago, usmair said:

As promised

6262 vs 8374

Both stock rb26 on e85 with relatively small cams (i think my brother has 260s and i've got 256s)

6262 made that power on 32 psi by memory. 8374 is on 30psi. 6262 can probably go to 480kw where as my EFR can probably stretch to 550kw if pushed so there is more top end with the Borg Warner

The difference in torque is immense! (not sure if those are just weird dyno numbers though).

Both cars are making 90-100kw around 3900rpm. At 4700RPM the 6262 is around 275kw whereas the BW is making just over 300kw. After that its a walk over and the BW just takes it.

At 5500 Rpm the 6262 is at 370kw where as the BW is around 440kw

The 6262 is on a r34 whereas mine is a r33 so the 6 speed gearing may also be having an impact (it should be helping with response on the 6262 right???)

Very very interesting.

 

 

 

6262 vs 8374.jpg

How do they drive? Which one "stands up" quicker?

7 hours ago, usmair said:

As promised

6262 vs 8374

Both stock rb26 on e85 with relatively small cams (i think my brother has 260s and i've got 256s)

6262 made that power on 32 psi by memory. 8374 is on 30psi. 6262 can probably go to 480kw where as my EFR can probably stretch to 550kw if pushed so there is more top end with the Borg Warner

The difference in torque is immense! (not sure if those are just weird dyno numbers though).

Both cars are making 90-100kw around 3900rpm. At 4700RPM the 6262 is around 275kw whereas the BW is making just over 300kw. After that its a walk over and the BW just takes it.

At 5500 Rpm the 6262 is at 370kw where as the BW is around 440kw

The 6262 is on a r34 whereas mine is a r33 so the 6 speed gearing may also be having an impact (it should be helping with response on the 6262 right???)

Very very interesting.

 

Thanks good to get something solid for comparisons, but It would have been a little better comparison if the PT6266 CEA Gen 2 (800BHP) was used instead of the 6262 CEA (705BHP) as the 8374 & 6266 are rated at 800BHP if you are looking for a bottom and top end HP comparisons, I think :)

1 hour ago, Nismo 3.2ish said:

Thanks good to get something solid for comparisons, but It would have been a little better comparison if the PT6266 CEA Gen 2 (800BHP) was used instead of the 6262 CEA (705BHP) as the 8374 & 6266 are rated at 800BHP if you are looking for a bottom and top end HP comparisons, I think :)

Can only work with what we've got.......

2 hours ago, Nismo 3.2ish said:

Thanks good to get something solid for comparisons, but It would have been a little better comparison if the PT6266 CEA Gen 2 (800BHP) was used instead of the 6262 CEA (705BHP) as the 8374 & 6266 are rated at 800BHP if you are looking for a bottom and top end HP comparisons, I think :)

Pretty fair to say you're on a winner with an 8374 then Pete if a little 6262 with .84 rear is making similar power down low as a larger turbo with a much bigger turbine housing ?

So your manifold is single gate Usmair? Does your brother run the same manifold? 

Are they both single gate setups? 

I think there is a little more to be had with a proper twin scroll twin gate setup ☺

Thanks for sharing some data too mate. 

I think you should give us a drive review between the 2 also ?

Edited by Mick_o
  • Like 1
6 minutes ago, Mick_o said:

Pretty fair to say you're on a winner with an 8374 then Pete if a little 6262 with .84 rear is making similar power down low as a larger turbo with a much bigger turbine housing ?

So your manifold is single gate Usmair? Does your brother run the same manifold? 

Are they both single gate setups? 

I think there is a little more to be had with a proper twin scroll twin gate setup ☺

Thanks for sharing some data too mate. 

I think you should give us a drive review between the 2 also ?

that is a good point actually.... my manifold is a split pulse but its single gate. My brothers is a split pulse twin gate setup so there is probably a little bit more response to be had out of the twin gate BW setup.

I'll try to take them both for a spin back to back on the weekend.

Usmair, I asked in another thread but you prob didn't see it. Why are the dyno runs done in 3rd on your R33 and in 4th in the r34?? Reason I ask is I tried comparing it to my old graph and realized they were different speeds.

Does this make a difference in response and power reading on a graph or would it be same shit.

I love the response I have at the moment but I'd like more top end too, I really don't wanna upgrade to something that'll make it too much laggier.

I'm gathering as much info atm on these turbos, they look like a dream!!

3 hours ago, Piggaz said:

Are the gates plumbed in or VTA, Usmair?

VTA

2 hours ago, Buraz said:

Usmair, I asked in another thread but you prob didn't see it. Why are the dyno runs done in 3rd on your R33 and in 4th in the r34?? Reason I ask is I tried comparing it to my old graph and realized they were different speeds.

Does this make a difference in response and power reading on a graph or would it be same shit.

I love the response I have at the moment but I'd like more top end too, I really don't wanna upgrade to something that'll make it too much laggier.

I'm gathering as much info atm on these turbos, they look like a dream!!

no idea why it was done in 3rd.... but i doubt it will make much of a difference as Paul mentioned.

Next dyno day that pops up I will throw it on to see how it comes on a different dyno.

For sh!ts and giggles more than anything else.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Jdm DC2R is also nice for a FF car compared to the regular hatches of the time.
    • Gotta admit, I love the 20b Cosmo.
    • Now that the break-in period for both clutch and transmission is nearly over I'd like to give some tips before I forget about everything that happened, also for anyone searching up how to do this job in the future: You will need at least 6 ton jack stands at full extension. I would go as far as to say maybe consider 12 ton jack stands because the height of the transmission + the Harbor Freight hydraulic platform-style transmission jack was enough that it was an absolute PITA getting the transmission out from under the car and back in. The top edge of the bellhousing wants to contact the subframe and oil pan and if you're doing this on the floor forget about trying to lift this transmission off the ground and onto a transmission jack from under the car. Also do not try to use a scissor jack transmission lift. You have to rotate the damn thing in-place on the transmission jack which is hard enough with an adjustable platform and a transmission cradle that will mostly keep the transmission from rolling off the jack but on a scissor lift with a tiny non-adjustable platform? Forget it. Use penetrating oil on the driveshaft bolts. I highly recommend getting a thin 6 point combination (box end + open end) wrench for both the rear driveshaft and front driveshaft and a wrench extension. These bolts are on tight with very little space to work with and those two things together made a massive difference. Even a high torque impact wrench is just the wrong tool for the job here and didn't do what I needed it to do. If your starter bolts aren't seized in place for whatever reason you can in fact snake in a 3/8 inch ratchet + 6 point standard chrome socket up in there and "just" remove the bolts for the starter. Or at least I could. It is entirely by feel, you can barely fit it in, you can barely turn the stupid ratchet, but it is possible. Pull the front pipe/downpipe before you attempt to remove the transmission. In theory you don't have to, in practice just do it.  When pulling the transmission on the way out you don't have to undo all the bolts holding the rear driveshaft to the chassis like the center support bearing and the rear tunnel reinforcement bar but putting the transmission back in I highly recommend doing this because it will let you raise the transmission without constantly dealing with the driveshaft interfering in one way or another. I undid the bottom of the engine mount but I honestly don't know that it helped anything. If you do this make sure you put a towel on the back of the valve cover to keep the engine from smashing all the pipes on the firewall. Once the transmission has been pulled back far enough to clear the dowels you need to twist it in place clockwise if you're sitting behind the transmission. This will rotate the starter down towards the ground. The starter bump seems like it might clear if you twist the transmission the other way but it definitely won't. I have scraped the shit out of my transmission tunnel trying so learn from my mistake. You will need a center punch and an appropriate size drill bit and screw to pull the rear main seal. Then use vice grips and preferably a slide hammer attachment for those vice grips to yank the seal out. Do not let the drill or screw contact any part of the crank and clean the engine carefully after removing the seal to avoid getting metal fragments into the engine. I used a Slide Hammer and Bearing Puller Set, 5 Piece from Harbor Freight to pull the old pilot bearing. The "wet paper towel" trick sucked and just got dirty clutch water everywhere. Buy the tool or borrow it from a friend and save yourself the pain. It comes right out. Mine was very worn compared to the new one and it was starting to show cracks. Soak it in engine oil for a day in case yours has lost all of the oil to the plastic bag it comes in. You may be tempted to get the Nismo aftermarket pilot bearing but local mechanics have told me that they fail prematurely and if they do fail they do far more damage than a failed OEM pilot bushing. I mentioned this before but the Super Coppermix Twin clutch friction disks are in fact directional. The subtle coning of the fingers in both cases should be facing towards the center of the hub. So the coning on the rearmost disk closest to the pressure plate should go towards the engine, and the one closest to the flywheel should be flipped the other way. Otherwise when you torque down the pressure plate it will be warped and if you attempt to drive it like this it will make a very nasty grinding noise. Also, there is in fact an orientation to the washers for the pressure plate if you don't want to damage the anodizing. Rounded side of the washer faces the pressure plate. The flat side faces the bolt head. Pulling the transmission from the transfer case you need to be extremely careful with the shift cover plate. This part is discontinued. Try your best to avoid damaging the mating surfaces or breaking the pry points. I used a dead blow rubber hammer after removing the bolts to smack it sideways to slide it off the RTV the previous mechanic applied. I recommend using gasket dressing on the OEM paper gasket to try and keep the ATF from leaking out of that surface which seems to be a perpetual problem. Undoing the shifter rod end is an absolute PITA. Get a set of roll pin punches. Those are mandatory for this. Also I strongly, strongly recommend getting a palm nailer that will fit your roll pin punch. Also, put a clean (emphasis on clean) towel wrapped around the back end of the roll pin to keep it from shooting into the transfer case so you can spend a good hour or two with a magnet on a stick getting it out. Do not damage the shifter rod end either because those are discontinued as well. Do not use aftermarket flywheel bolts. Or if you do, make sure they are exactly the same dimensions as OEM before you go to install them. I have seen people mention that they got the wrong bolts and it meant having to do the job again. High torque impact wrench makes removal easy. I used some combination of a pry bar and flathead screwdriver to keep the flywheel from turning but consider just buying a proper flywheel lock instead. Just buy the OS Giken clutch alignment tool from RHDJapan. I hated the plastic alignment tool and you will never be confident this thing will work as intended. Don't forget to install the Nismo provided clutch fork boot. Otherwise it will make unearthly noises when you press the clutch pedal as it says on the little installation sheet in Japanese. Also, on both initial disassembly and assembly you must follow torque sequence for the pressure plate bolts. For some reason the Nismo directions tell you to put in the smaller 3 bolts last. I would not do this. Fully insert and thread those bolts to the end first, then tighten the other larger pressure plate bolts according to torque sequence. Then at the end you can also torque these 3 smaller bolts. Doing it the other way can cause these bolts to bind and the whole thing won't fit as it should. Hope this helps someone out there.
    • Every one has seemed to of have missed . . . . . . . The Mazda Cosmo . . . . . . what a MACHINE ! !
×
×
  • Create New...