Borg Warner EFR Series Turbo's V 2.0

[Nosure]

6 hours ago, Lithium said:

Any updates?

Hi mate, not yet. already booked tune next week. the leak is fixed. the hose is like 10mm or 12mm hose pop off. you can put your finger in that hole. and when i drive back to home i can feel it response much better. and i got 0.35 bar at 2500 rpm. 

[Lithium]

11 hours ago, Nosure said:

Hi mate, not yet. already booked tune next week. the leak is fixed. the hose is like 10mm or 12mm hose pop off. you can put your finger in that hole. and when i drive back to home i can feel it response much better. and i got 0.35 bar at 2500 rpm. 

Awesome, nice work - that is REAL promising    Pretty amazing you could get to 470kw at around 114,000rpm with a leak like that - not to mention the spool not sounding that bad considering.   Also if it was able to do that with that kind of leak it makes it seem like the hotside will not be any real restriction, if all the air that's being moved actually gets into the engine then the hotside will have to work WAY less.  You'll probably get significant gains everywhere, even psi for psi.

This is going to be a beast, good luck for next week!

Edited August 22, 2019 by Lithium

[taijohnsen]

Hi guys,

Loving all the info. I have been a lurker on this thread since the very beginning and would like to hear your opinion on the setup that i have.

My goad from the start was a super responsive 300rwkw on 98 octane from a 1JZ which I easily achieved with the 7163 0.80ar IWG at around 23psi and BC264 cams.

It is a great little turbo, however I am still not happy with the lack of torque down low with a low compression ratio 2.5L engine pushing a heavy manual jzz30 soarer, so I have converted to the 2JZ bottom end for more natural low end torque.

The turbo still had more in it before with the 1JZ hitting 130krpm at the previous power figure, and from the matchbot the EMAP vs MAP ratio was already pretty high.

With the extra capacity of the 3L bottom end it's going to be an even bigger restriction and I will most likely have to taper the boost off at redline to stop overspeeding the turbo (hopefully the gate can flow enough)

I know the turbo is very small for the application, but I am chasing a super responsive street setup and have no interest in big numbers, 300-350rwkw is all that I want, which the turbo can do.

With all that out of the way, my question is to do with reversion.

The BC264's have 10deg overlap as per the cam card, with a high EMAP engine, would this be enough to cause significant reversion and spoil the intake charge? I have adjustable cam gears, so I could close it up if necessary.

[GTSBoy]

Remember that EMAP is a function of how hard you need to drive the compressor. The only reason for EMAP to go a lot higher on the 3L bottom end than the 2.5 is if you try to make a lot more power. If you start with the same power as a target, you will almost certainly need less boost, and this could even result in a reduction in EMAP (because boost costs more drive power in a compressor than flow does).

I wouldn't stress. They're still baby cams too, and you have gears, so you're insulated against the unlikely outcome of needing to deal with reversion.

[Lithium]

50 minutes ago, GTSBoy said:

If you start with the same power as a target, you will almost certainly need less boost, and this could even result in a reduction in EMAP (because boost costs more drive power in a compressor than flow does).

Double edged sword of course, if the boost reduces then the EMAP needs to drop even more to maintain the same IMAP/EMAP ratio.   Anyway yeah, I agree overall with the sentiment and in this situation I'd just "feed it to it" in the midrange and bleed off boost up high and have a low revving torque monster.

[taijohnsen]

Cheers guys, i think I'll have to soften it up a bit as it comes on too as it sounded like it was on the brink of surge before. But if all else fails I'll probably be inheriting 'burn4005's' 8374  and let the old girl breathe a bit more..

Edited August 23, 2019 by taijohnsen

[GTSBoy]

Will be further away from the surge line when feeding a larger engine. More airflow at the same boost is further to the right on the comp map.

[taijohnsen]

You are right! I thought the larger exhaust flow would outweigh the displacement growth.

Here is a quick throw together from matchbot.

Drive pressures are indeed high, but it still reckons there's +50hp 1000rpm sooner!

(interestingly data points #5 and #6 are reversed on the turbine expansion graph..)

 

Maps:-

https://www.borgwarner.com/go/FP26ED

https://www.borgwarner.com/go/QF2YVO

 

 

Edited August 26, 2019 by taijohnsen

[RB335]

I'm happy to do some dyno comparisons and provide data if it's valuable enough to us all, but I can't fund all of it myself. 

I can provide a 9180, 8474 and some dyno time from my own pocket.  If you guys want to see how it stacks up against the bigger brother 9280, I am able to do this and will need some funds for dyno time, and a 9280 either  :

lended to me, or crowdfunded to me.  The re-sale of that extra EFR turbo after tests are done will then be re-funded back to everybody in proportion minus difference for "second hand sale".  I also may not be able to fund the additional R&R + dyno time for the 3rd turbo myself, and may require funds to do this, as the tests are to be done as back to back as possible, so unbolting, re-fitting will be charged as time the car takes up on the dyno. 

I personally run mild cams in the car for a street idle, but for test purpose I will also require 272/272 cams or similar in the motor for the test to allow the big 9280 to breathe up top, it.s a 2.8 with a 1mm oversize at the moment.   It is in hopes the test should show the response between the 9180 and 9280 to those considering what an upgrade may do and how the "Black" series performs.  It also will show if the 8474 can deliver 9180 "like" flow, while being considerably more responsive, which has been the issue of much speculation

I'll probably throw in a few mild cam and big cam runs with the 8474 if of interest to anybody if I (and we?) can stretch the budget enough.

I plan to do the bolting, unbolting while car is on the dyno, not taking it off, then doing it another time.  So everything will be charged to me as Dyno time.  It is a brand new motor that is run in with everything working how it should be.

If enough people can contribute to this, I'm happy to provide my credentials so you can do a check on me.

Edited August 26, 2019 by RB335

[Meathead]

Good luck!

[RB335]

I couldn't edit my post soon enough.

Otherwise I'll have some 8474 vs 9180 feedback soon excluding 9280 which I'll be doing, it won't be perfect but good enough for a rough comparison, I'll post that when I manage to get a hold of a 8474 which I'm keen to test out in the near future.

[Piggaz]

6 hours ago, RB335 said:

I couldn't edit my post soon enough.

Otherwise I'll have some 8474 vs 9180 feedback soon excluding 9280 which I'll be doing, it won't be perfect but good enough for a rough comparison, I'll post that when I manage to get a hold of a 8474 which I'm keen to test out in the near future.

Have you sorted out your exhaust issue yet?

[Nosure]

Got result. 

Look like the turbo like higher boost. 

Now we got 662awhp at 24psi 114krpm 

726awhp at 26psi 118krpm. 

Look like still a lot more rooms but the power already pass my clutch limit.  So I decide stop at around 25-26psi.  

 2 more psi made 60awhp. Which make me believe it like higher boost. 

And for a reference: my old setup gtx3582 g2 made 690awhp on 31psi.  (Maxing out)

Edited August 27, 2019 by Nosure

[burn4005]

Very nice! first 8474 result on SAU. those are some stout numbers and plenty of speed headroom, looking at 117k at 2.65:1 pressure ratio you're pretty close to dropping off the lower efficiency limit of the map (60%) so more boost would certainly keep making power.

for comparisons sake, I made about 650whp at 127k RPM and 27psi with an 8374.

when does it reach full boost? do you have any plots or logs?

Edited August 27, 2019 by burn4005

[Nosure]

This was 4th gear dyno but I got 4.1 diff ratio. (Original diff ratio 3.5)  So if use 5th gear it should spool a little better.  4.1 4th gear is same as 3.5 ratio 3rd gear.

 I haven’t drive the car yet. So can’t tell what it drive like.  

It reach full boost about 5000rpm. About 400rpm slower than my old 3582 0.82a/r. But also different cams, exhaust, intercooler. 3.5 diff. Everything bigger with 8474.   

Edited August 27, 2019 by Nosure

[welshy_32ZILA]

14 hours ago, Nosure said:

Got result. 

Look like the turbo like higher boost. 

Now we got 662awhp at 24psi 114krpm 

726awhp at 26psi 118krpm. 

Look like still a lot more rooms but the power already pass my clutch limit.  So I decide stop at around 25-26psi.  

 2 more psi made 60awhp. Which make me believe it like higher boost. 

And for a reference: my old setup gtx3582 g2 made 690awhp on 31psi.  (Maxing out)

This gets me excited in the pants.

Just need the wiring guy to finish it off then it's off for a retune.

[Shoota_77]

Hi guys, this is my first foray into single turbos so go easy on me!

I'm looking at a few different turbos being 9180 with 1.05 housing and then a 9174.

It's going on an RB30/26 and I'm chasing a maximum of 550kW at the treads.  If it's more or less I'm not fussed.  To be honest I'd prefer more midrange response than massive top end.

Obviously two fairly similar turbos in terms of power capabilty but done in a different way.  One with flow, the other with the ability to spin up to a higher speed.

What effect would whacking a 1.45 housing on the back of the 9174 have?  Would that harm low range too much at the expense of top end or would the lower restriction be a bonus all across the range?

I'm being a hog here firing off so many questions at once but in regards to manifolds, obviously split pulse but is a twin wastegate (one off each bank) better than a big single wastegate which is not really a true split pulse?  I know the signle is a lot less mucking around with less wastegate plumbing to worry about.

Many thanks guys, I've been loving all the discussion on here but it's still a bit data heavy for me so hopefully you legends can point me in the right direction!

[Full-Race Geoff]

Because you want more midrange than top end, 550kw / 750hp with EFR is doable in two ways here: twin EFR6258 or single EFR8474 both are options. 

The 9180 and 9174 you are asking about are good turbos.  9174 was our most popular turbo for professional drift competition for many years... the 9174 continues to work extremely well despite people who dont like the numerical rotor sizing.

the 1.45 a/r does increase top end power in exchange for a slight midrange loss, but on a RB30/26 the 8474 or 9174 on 1.45 a/r makes sense for this power target

twin gates typically provides slightly earlier spool and more midrange due to the fact that the pulses remain seperated, and more energy is imparted to the turbine

Edited September 6, 2019 by Full-Race Geoff

[Shoota_77]

Thanks Geoff, great info. 

I really want the simplicity of single so definitely going that way. 

Given I can get a 9174 with a 1.45 and a 9180 with a 1.05 housing for the same price, what would be the better option?

I’m leaning towards 9174 for some reason I can’t fully explain apart from gut feeling!

The turbo manifold I’m looking at (Sinco twin scroll forward facing) recommends/mandates 60mm wastegate. Is that too big?  I would have thought 50mm was the better size but if there’s no option to get 50mm will the 60mm be ok?

Thanks again. 

[Piggaz]

Why a 9174 when the 8474 is around? ?