Borg Warner EFR Series Turbo's V 2.0

[burn4005]

I'd imagine for flow rates towards the upper end of the 8374 the 9174 will have a lower exhaust manifold pressure as the compressor will be more efficient, all other things equal.

at 75lb/min @ 2 bar you're at 65% on the 83mm but still up over 72% on the 91mm that effeciency change correlates to shaft power requirement dropping, so the required turbine pressure ratio also drops.

 

the changeover in efficiency occurs at about 58lb/min. less than that the 8374 will be lower pressure, and more than that the 9174 will be lower. during acceleration transients however the 9174 will be slightly higher due to the increase in inertia of the larger comp wheel.

 

17 hours ago, Full-Race Geoff said:

that is correct, 9174 works best with the big 1.45 a/r housing when pushing the turbos limit.  The 74mm turbine is relatively small to swing the 91mm compressor so anything that can be done to reduce preturbine drive pressure at high rpm / high boost is a win for this one. 

if only Borg warner made an EFR 67/84mm compressor wheel!

maybe even anodize it black?

Edited July 12, 2018 by burn4005

[RICE RACING]

9174 on a well built 2.7lt 4 cyl

 

[RICE RACING]

Looks like 1.05AR housing ?

[RICE RACING]

One in the video looks like the 1.45AR

[Lithium]

56 minutes ago, RICE RACING said:

9174 on a well built 2.7lt 4 cyl

 

That's just bollux.  What a ridiculous power delivery haha.

For those who didn't watch the video - check out this power delivery, 300kw at 4000rpm on something holding power to 8500rpm... Like 875hp power.  There isn't much to question there.

 

Cheers for sharing!

 

[RICE RACING]

6 minutes ago, Lithium said:

That's just bollux.  What a ridiculous power delivery haha.

For those who didn't watch the video - check out this power delivery, 300kw at 4000rpm on something holding power to 8500rpm... Like 875hp power.  There isn't much to question there.

 

Cheers for sharing!

 

That's with a 1.00TCF too, so basically ~1000bhp @ engine with the FR combination in that car with the rear end and 1:1 4th (minimal gear train *gearbox* losses no driver/driven x driven/driver power flow since direct drive *no lay shaft* so input shaft>output shaft).

Now to pick what to use on the EVO????

Edited July 12, 2018 by RICE RACING

[Full-Race Geoff]

we built the turbo kit on steph's drift car.  its a 2.6L engine from a toyota sienna minivan, typically he revs to 7800-8000rpm depending on the track and gearing.  Turbo setup is divided t4 manifold, very similar to evo but flipped so its a top mount obviously.  the turbo started as 8374 0.92 a/r, then tested 1.05 a/r 8374 and went back to 0.92 once they had the nitrous on the car.  He is battling V8s and 2jz's so he needs as much bottom end torque as is possible.  once they switched to the 9174 he kept the 0.92 a/r for a while due to the setup already being built and in place.  as of right now i believe he is back on the 1.05 a/r. 

keep in mind there is a lot of nitrous on this engine

Edited July 12, 2018 by Full-Race Geoff

[Full-Race Geoff]

21 hours ago, Piggaz said:

What kind of exhaust pressure increase are you seeing on the 9174 over the 8374 for a given turbine housing size/engine combo?

it depends entirely on the application - altitude, engine size, max rpm, boost level, VE, etc.  typically the 9174 exhibits increased emap at most points

[Lithium]

3 hours ago, Full-Race Geoff said:

 

keep in mind there is a lot of nitrous on this engine

The Dyno plot I posted was the highest before they got nitrous involved

[Lithium]

13 hours ago, RICE RACING said:

That's with a 1.00TCF too, so basically ~1000bhp @ engine

Yeah, definitely noticed that - ANNNNND in the most "harsh" correction mode Dynapack dynos offer.   No two ways about it, this is making some big power with a very wide delivery.

[RICE RACING]

38 minutes ago, Lithium said:

Yeah, definitely noticed that - ANNNNND in the most "harsh" correction mode Dynapack dynos offer.   No two ways about it, this is making some big power with a very wide delivery.

Yep good to know a 9174 with 1.45 will actually do 1000bhp on a 2.7lt engine. It's not often you find nuggets of info like that around, saves having to test everything yourself for sure!

[No Crust Racing]

Somebody help me out, being offered a seemingly near new 7670 with a 1.05 TS rear on it. this would be to go on my forged SR with a sexy head and good TS manifold. 

Too big/small max power? I have a hard time wraping my head around EFRs other than they seem to be a "good" thing. 

Sprint/time attack style car so the transient is what interests me, I'm expected the motor to be capable of "decent" revs. 

[Kinkstaah]

The 7670 is the turbo I used to have,
Up to 450kw, maybe even 465kw.

It's a big turbo. It's not as big a turbo if you're realistically considering using it as a track car, i.e always up in that rev range. You'd have to define "sexy head" as this is a turbo you'd be need to be living at 5-8k at constantly.

It is GTX3576 sized.

[Lithium]

26 minutes ago, ActionDan said:

Somebody help me out, being offered a seemingly near new 7670 with a 1.05 TS rear on it. this would be to go on my forged SR with a sexy head and good TS manifold. 

Too big/small max power? I have a hard time wraping my head around EFRs other than they seem to be a "good" thing. 

Sprint/time attack style car so the transient is what interests me, I'm expected the motor to be capable of "decent" revs. 

I guess I don't know what turbos you are familiar with, but I feel like the most sensible way of describing one is if you were looking at something using "back in the day" turbo terms - its in the area of a Trust/Kinugawa T67 - Garrett GT3582R power wise but wanted better response (just to clarify, I'm not saying it will be like a supercharger - just something that is in that power range with less lag) then you should be happy with it.

Edited July 17, 2018 by Lithium

[No Crust Racing]

Maybe too big for me then I was looking at Gen2 GTX3076 or so. 

Maybe it was the 7163 I was looking at. 
 

 

[Lithium]

8 minutes ago, ActionDan said:

Maybe too big for me then I was looking at Gen2 GTX3076 or so. 

Maybe it was the 7163 I was looking at. 
 

 

Haven't seen much of the Gen2 GTX3076Rs, but I'd take an EFR7670 over a Gen1 GTX3076R from what I've seen.  

An EFR7163 would be a beast on an SR, though if you are going for high rpm there is a chance of choking it - I'd use the biggest housing you can get on that turbo.

[MaximuSmurf]

7 minutes ago, ActionDan said:

Maybe too big for me then I was looking at Gen2 GTX3076 or so. 

Maybe it was the 7163 I was looking at. 
 

 

I would highly recommend AGAINST the 7163 for your track use. IMHO the rear exits are too small for TS use. I would think a 7670 and 1.05 (MAYBE even the smaller 0.92) would be perfect. The 7163 only come in 0.80 rear in TS form which I believe (no expert) chokes too much, especially under higher RPM.

FYI I'm running an EFR7163 on T4 TS SR20DET. I will be pushing it HARD to get maximum response and power for street / light track duties. But the small lag hit I think you'd be wanting the extra ~80-100rwkw and freer flowing turbo setup.

[No Crust Racing]

I don't wanna blow the bottom end apart trying to "use" a turbo properly. 

Will have CP pistons, Manly rods, and some other tricks, but I was under the impression most "basic" forged h beams were only good for 600-650 crank hp in an SR, but how long is a piece of string? 

 

 

[admS15]

Yolo:)

[No Crust Racing]

You Oughta Listened Originally

Because now it's dead...