Borg Warner EFR Series Turbo's V 2.0

[Kinkstaah]

For what it's worth I am considering the a very similar setup, but I was planning on going the TS T4 option on a 6boost.

If I had a RB25 I would consider it on the stock manifold like you are, but I may even consider going 7163 if you're happy to stop at 300KW which is going to be very very lively on a street tyre. There's a couple of results from a 1J making 320kw without maxing it out, which is also a 2.5. If you want more than that though the 7670 is what I'd be choosing as well.

If I was using the stock manifold I wouldn't be going an adapter plate because... well, it's just one more thing that can go wrong. If you think of the 7670 like a GTX3076R, the .83 rear seems like it's a pretty suitable size, I don't think you'd gain much/anything at all going to a T4 .92 adaptor plate on a stock mani.

[Watermouse]

Ive been watching yours and discopotato's posts, I'd be happy with the 7163 as 300-320kw with insane street response is right where I want to be but some warned about surging because of the .80 hot side maybe being a bit small. This is were Im beating my head against the wall like you, trying to pick the right turbo and A/R cause that now brings the 7064 into the picture as well.

I have to go low mount I/W to try to be as much stealth as possible 

Thanks for your input

[MotHot]

Keep in mind there is very (!) limited room when using a 7064 or 7670 with the OEM manifold on the RB25, even more so on the R34 GTT than on the R33 GTST (strut tower on the R34 is about 1,5cm closer to the engine). Not sure if using an adaptor to go twinscroll would make it easier or harder.

The 7163 is a smaller turbo (shorter as well), because it's B1 frame and not B2 frame like the 7064 and bigger.

I have a 7064 T3 on my OEM manifold on the R34 GTT at the moment, but wouldn't do it again. We even had to remove the AC because making the downpipe with the AC in would have been much harder (though probably not impossible). Other than that my EGT are way high, not sure why that is, but decided to go 6 boost top mount + plazmaman intake anyway.

Edit: If I had to choose again, I'd probably go 7163 (wasn't available at the time I purchased my 7064).

Pictures attached for reference (BW EFR 7064 T3 IWG, OEM manifold RB25DET Neo, R34 GTT).

Edited January 18, 2017 by MotHot

[blah_blah]

Very keen to see you results Mothot. When will we see results?

 

So we are saying then a 7670 wont fit stock position in an RB25?

[discopotato03]

Mothot I thought of the T3 single scroll IW version too and it will be very interesting to see your results .

As for the 7163 the only hands on feedback I have is that the 7064 is a bit more responsive and tends to work better on engines that don't have brilliant volumetric efficiency levels . Gut feeling is that the wheels are getting big for B1 frame sized housings but I'd say that's part of the compromise for having the flow capacity and packaging a bit more easily .

I'm wondering how the 7064 and 7670 compare in single scroll IW form to the GT3076R 0.82 IW T3 turbos . Geoff has said that the 7670 is getting bigish for an RB25 but if its any more responsive than the GT3076R 0.82 AR then its still not too bad . The big question is will the standard exhaust manifold keep up flow wise with a 7670 ?

A .

 

[Dose Pipe Sutututu]

Standard exhaust manifold is too restrictive.

I'm sure you'll ignore my post Adrian, but at least others reading will get some information. 

Moving an external gate from the turbine house onto the stock manifold netted an easy 20kW on my car with the same timing, same tune put out 350kW. The motor than was happy to take more timing as well due to the lower back pressure on the exhaust side. Overall with the same SS2 HyperGear turbo  (except the centre being ball bearing instead of journal) I went from 330kW to 372kW and that's with me stopping myself pushing the stock motor further. 

[VFRegal]

@MotHot Have you got this running ?
Are you having any issues with controlling boost ?

Cheers

[Griffin]

Just wondering..... I'm not sure whether to go the 8374 or 7670. I've got greddy 264 cams. Would that have a bearing on which turbo to pic?

[sneakey pete]

What you want out of the car would probably be a better yardstick. One thing to remember about cams is you already had 246 duration ones in there, so its not like you've completely changed the engine

[Griffin]

Either up to 400 kW with smaller turbo or 450 kW + with the 8374. Currently got was in basically an airwerks 8370 now with 380ish now. About half a bar boost at 3500 rpm. 

I think the efr 8374 will be similar response wise with more power.

The 7670 better response wise with similar power. 

Any ideas?

Where I'm at now is a bit boring.

[sneakey pete]

Less power is is always more boring....

 

7670 would give you some better response but would that be worth the cost to change to it? That's my gut feeling on it

[Griffin]

I'm only up for the cost of turbo. You think go bigger?

[discopotato03]

Johnny I'm not ignoring your post , I just want to keep the standard manifold and so pointless going beyond its realistic flow capacity .

 

[sneakey pete]

54 minutes ago, Griffin said:

I'm only up for the cost of turbo. You think go bigger?

that  is my gut feeling based off all i've ever read.
Hopefully I'll go pick up my car running (on run in tune) when i get home ont he 14th of Feb.. so might have more first hand advice to say about it then...
Also know someone up here doing a 7670 on theirs so will get to ride in that and get a somewhat comparison

[No Crust Racing]

I'm a bit confused, I didn't think 7670 would make high 300s on a 26?

I had a chat with Geoff about and he was suggesting the 8374 instead.

I'm like a few of you, want the most responsive 500rwhp or so street setup.

I do have N1 manifolds (wanted bigger.but cast) a full 3.5" exhaust and e85 to help though, oh and about to fit Kelford L182-A drop ins.

[Sick_R31]

Full-race has dyno sheets and videos on their website of a supra running a 7670 and it makes 489.61hp in the video and 524.75hp on the dyno sheet http://www.full-race.com/store/efr-series/turbos-efr-series/borgwarner-efr-7670-turbo-2.html/. There's also plenty of evo results with the 7670 making 500hp+ and in the old borg warner thread someone went 500hp with a 7670 on their RB25. Where is the confusion coming from?

[GTSBoy]

4 hours ago, Sick_R31 said:

Full-race has dyno sheets and videos on their website of a supra running a 7670 and it makes 489.61hp in the video and 524.75hp on the dyno sheet http://www.full-race.com/store/efr-series/turbos-efr-series/borgwarner-efr-7670-turbo-2.html/. There's also plenty of evo results with the 7670 making 500hp+ and in the old borg warner thread something went 500hp with a 7670 on their RB25. Where is the confusion coming from?

Dyno Dynamics rwhp or USS dyno rwhp?

[Nismo 3.2ish]

This is some indication of what the 7670 can do, they do not use WHP for the tests  but BHP (crank) I think, but there is always the question about the US Dynos reading higher , so ??

 

EFR 7670 is ideal for road racing and time attack applications, as well as responsive high power street driven vehicles. Engineered for great spool, quick response and the potential to surpass 640hp - the 7670 is capable of 64lb/min compressor flow - unheard of for this size compressor wheel. The 7670 is an excellent turbocharger for road racing and time attack applications, as well as responsive high power street driven vehicles.

[sneakey pete]

The general concencus around here is that a 7670 would make at most 400kw but more likely high 300's, so not sure why you're thinking it wouldnt, I can't think of anyone saying that at all to be honest.

 

[Sick_R31]

11 hours ago, GTSBoy said:

Dyno Dynamics rwhp or USS dyno rwhp?

Well click on the full-race link to determine which one the supra is, the evo results would be a mix of those 2 and the RB25 result is in the old borg warner thread, the car is from nsw.