Borg Warner EFR Series Turbo's V 2.0

[Piggaz]

I know the 83 mm update map got posted the page before but I thought i'd post both large frame maps up in the one post.

83 mm update -

91 mm update - 

91 mm inducer goes from 67.8 mm to 73.7 mm (thats cute.... same length as a stock RB26 crank throw) with no increase in exducer

83 mm inducer goes from 62.6 mm to 67.5 mm with an increase of 1 mm on the exducer to 84 mm.

[Griffin]

I would make my own manifold twin scroll with 50mm gate, not sure what rear housing. ether that or go for the 8374 efr.  I used a 0lain bearing 8374 before this one. it worked better than expected. I'm hoping an efr would be a big improvement. 

[discopotato03]

Thanks fellas for the feedback . The 6758 7163 7064 and 7670 are the range that interest me most . With the right IW turbine housing or a T3/T4 flange adapter plate any of these can in theory bolt up to a standard manifold RB25DET . I don't seek a squillion Hp but I like the idea of reasonably linear power delivery .

Part of the aim of these EFR units is good response without high turbine inlet pressures . I've had the GT3076R experience and while these are alright for "classic type" turbo power delivery I think its possible to have the same output with a lower boost threshold and better transients .

I spent hours in the last two days going through threads about 7163s mainly the long one at NASIOC and many of them are in two minds over this turbocharger . Admittedly an EJ25 is hardly an RB25 but at least the capacity is similar .

Interesting that the 6758 now has the 0.80 AR TS IW turbine housing available but would possibly overspeed on an RB25 . Somewhere in the 7163 7064 area is where I think a real good street tire/power range would be and sort of line up with what the ole GT3076Rs did power wise . You'd think either would be better overall its just little seeds of doubt exist over the 7163 , like Lith the Cranium dyno scratches the casing over that big trim 71mm compressor .

I mentioned elsewhere that I was surprised to read that the 7064 uses a 70mm 56 odd lb compressor with something like a 52.2mm inducer . B2 EFRs also have available a T3 flanged single scroll 0.83 IW turbine housing and this should make it a bolt on to an RB25 if you can live without twin scrolls . A TS 7163 should go on with a T3/T4 adapter plate but the result is hard to guess .

I think I remember Geoff saying that the 7670 is getting to be a big turbo for an RB25 and is probably heading into "classic" power delivery . Possibly a different story on an RB26 with a decent manifold and waste gating .

Anyway I'll do some more reading on the 7064 and see what results people are getting with them on 2500cc engines preferably 6s . Geoff would probably lean me towards the TS 7163 but I'd like to hear his theories on the 7064 RB25 combination .    

Thanks all cheers A .

 

[R_34]

A friend of mine got one on his rb25 but in TS EWG 1.05 a/r on a hybrid performance manifold open scroll T4. Feels torquey off boost and boost begin high 2000 with 0.7b around 3500/3800 (full boost for now until it get it running with something else than the basemap) without EBC.

A clutch kick at 3k and this thing smoke the 265 at the rear without breaking a sweat.

I'm keen to see a 7163 .80 on a 25. Should spool earlier with a better top end even if the hotside isn't flowing as good as a 7064 .92 or 1.05.

[Full-Race Geoff]

hey guys - we just got back from an epic SEMA show. Ive attended for 16 years straight, this was by far the best.  Thank you to everyone who stopped by the Ford and BorgWarner booths to say hi.  BorgWarner introduced some *concept* turbos such as the ebooster and of course "black series" EFR9280 and EFR8474.  It will be a while before these are production parts available for purchase - but the groundwork is in place.

 

On 11/3/2016 at 8:44 AM, Piggaz said:

i wonder when they're going to be released and what this does to the other snails in the lineup.

Hopefully the extra flow is without copping a penalty which would be ideal but hopeful at the same time.

Is the rear big enough to accomodate the large increase in flow?

-The updated EFR9280 and EFR8474 turbos are purely in concept/development at this time.  We do not have timeframe for release, however i expect 10-14 months.  Not any time soon.
-these turbos will be differentiated with a black hard anodize compressor wheel.  All other turbos in the lineup remain unchanged
-the available turbine housing A/R ratios for 74mm and 80mm turbine are: 0.83, 0.92, 1.05, 1.45 a/r. 
-If you plan to run serious boost and max out these turbos, then 1.45 should be a consideration to accommodate the increase in mass flow - without a corresponding increase in EMAP

On 11/3/2016 at 9:26 PM, SimonR32 said:

Looks very nice but it does say "concept"

That is correct, these are concept units.  The purpose of displaying these is to show that BW is working on the next generation of EFR turbos

On 11/4/2016 at 0:18 AM, Nismo 3.2ish said:

Would they release that type of info if it had not been tried and tested?

I doubt they would mention it and definitely not show  the graph if they were having problems.

I would think it would stop or at least slow down the sales of the 8374 by releasing this type information, but ????

Yes.  BW releases concepts every year... sometimes they get the axe and dont go into production - as was the case with the VTV housings last year

On 11/4/2016 at 1:18 AM, Lithium said:

Something worth noting with that compressor map and indicates where this should be relevant to the interests of Skyline guys/everyone who have been worried about the risk of overspinning these turbos.  If you look at the 2.8 pressure ratio line at the 75lb/min area which is more or less the common and sensible area to stop pushing harder with an EFR8374 on an RB, the old EFR8374 is >111,000rpm so both compressor flow and max safe rpm are starting to get close.    The prototype compressor map shows it as under 104,000rpm, you could push the same setup up to 80lb/min and still not be working the turbine as hard.

that is correct. These new turbos can be expected to move more air at less shaft speed

On 11/4/2016 at 3:20 AM, Nismo 3.2ish said:

My problem is time and waiting 6 months, a year or so is not going to happen and I would still have to go with the 8374 and install the speed sensor, but will wait until I see what is happening with the 8474

its going to take more than 6 months.  these wheel designs are undergoing more tweaks and then testing/validation before entering production.  BW does not move quickly

On 11/4/2016 at 9:38 PM, munt-WA said:

Hey all, been reading this forum for like 8 years but never bothered creating an account. Have enjoyed reading these EFR threads :).

Currently building an R32 GTR myself and have decided to go with the 9174. I'm not sure where everyone is buying there EFR's from but I have been quoted for an alloy bearing housing 9174 Supercore at $1897+GST from MTQ, they also quoted the 1.05 ext gate housing at $891+GST but it looks like JEGS sell the 1.05 housing at 575aud not inc shipping.

shoot us an email at Full-Race.  we have the turbos in stock and can certainly beat that price for you

On 11/5/2016 at 8:44 AM, GREENMAHINEUK said:

I was told the 8374 would be maxed out , didnt want a 9180 as I dont need to go into orbit so a 9174 seems to fit nicely inbetween .. I was looking at the ext gate 1.05 but only because thats what ive been advised so far.  Engine is an OS giken 3 litre , with a flowed head and 1 mm o/size valves step 2 hks cams with uparated springs etc manifold is a 6 boost. It has a crank trigger set up running with a link G4

for 800 crank HP on a built 3L engine - i think the 9174 is a great turbo.  The 8374 is too small and 9180 too big

14 hours ago, Griffin said:

How would a efr 7670 perform on Rb26 n1 engine with 264 cams? 

Looking at near 400 rwkw on e85. close to it now with a plain bearing borgwarner. I'm after more go under 3500 rpm.

7670 is an animal for mild RB25/26 builds.  It will be out of breath at 400kw so keep this in mind.  If you want more than 400rwkw go with the 8374 and 3500rpm threshold

11 hours ago, Piggaz said:

I know the 83 mm update map got posted the page before but I thought i'd post both large frame maps up in the one post.

83 mm update -

91 mm update - 

91 mm inducer goes from 67.8 mm to 73.7 mm (thats cute.... same length as a stock RB26 crank throw) with no increase in exducer

83 mm inducer goes from 62.6 mm to 67.5 mm with an increase of 1 mm on the exducer to 84 mm.

thanks piggaz

4 hours ago, R_34 said:

A friend of mine got one on his rb25 but in TS EWG 1.05 a/r on a hybrid performance manifold open scroll T4. Feels torquey off boost and boost begin high 2000 with 0.7b around 3500/3800 (full boost for now until it get it running with something else than the basemap) without EBC.  A clutch kick at 3k and this thing smoke the 265 at the rear without breaking a sweat.

if your friend is running a twinscroll EFR on openscroll manifold - he's missing out

[R_34]

I know that and him too but it couldn't afford a TS manifold.

[HarrisRacing]

On 9/6/2016 at 1:42 PM, HarrisRacing said:

Umair,

I took the liberty of converting your results to excel and graphing them vs my pumpgas results (including corresponding boost curves). Looks like my combo of stock-bore 79mm stroker (2.75L) and/or the .92 IWG housing turbo is making a bit more bottom end than yours (below 4500 rpms), but obviously with higher boost and E85 you're crushing me anywhere over that. The boost is x10 for scaling purposes (ie 100 = 10 psi, 200 = 20 psi, etc). I'm willing to bet when converted to E85 and when I start pouring on the boost that I will make more power lower in the rpms, but not significantly so (maybe 250-300 rpms sooner), and with the increased backpressure of the .92 housing I'd bet I'll start dropping sooner as well.

Good looking dyno!

 

Updated Dyno run for my car from the other day. Now solid 20 psi, 3-4 more deg of timing and no knock. BIG power increase! Umair I'm catching you up top with only 20 psi. Gonna run the 1/4 again (hopefully this weekend) and see what she does. Should be 10's on pump 93 octane.

 

[discopotato03]

So Geoff do you still think TS IW 7163 over 7064 for a street RB25DET .

A .

 

[Lithium]

My money would be on the EFR7163.   It would be a pretty crazy thing, imagine less lag than your GTRS with more power than a 56 trim GT3076R.... I'm guessing that'd be not far off the mark 

[Griffin]

What do know about the efr7670 Lithium?

[Lithium]

Haven't experienced one directly, a couple of mates have played with them and rate the hell out of them - anything I said would be anecdotal.  They certainly don't look to have the boost threshold of the EFR7163, if I had to say then I'd say they start feeling a bit more like a big turbo but some seriously good response once past boost threshold like the whole EFR range.    

Fwiw back in 2011 I was intending on getting an EFR7670 for my RB25 with a 1.05a/r T4 hotside, I ended up bailing on the idea as I lost enthusiasm for a few reasons (not least how long it took BW to get production moving properly :/) but I was hoping for a similar drive under 4000rpm to my old GT3076R but particularly from 3500+rpm that it'd start REALLY getting perky and building a gap in both response and flow... hoping the setup to be capable of another ~50wkw peak power.  

I still think that's not unrealistic and really it'd have potential to be on of the best possible turbo matches for an RB25 which isn't intended as a drag car, I reckon.

Edited November 8, 2016 by Lithium

[Kinkstaah]

I have visions of a standard engine and a T4 7163. My query would be wether as mentioned before it's worth going a full high mount twin scroll manifold ala 6boost or Fullrace (or sinco, or hypertune..) or whether the adaptor/welding up stock manifold is a 'better' idea for 'sort of' Twin Scroll and low mounting it.

Is it worth fathoming a guess as to what the performance impact of that would be?

[HarrisRacing]

I have visions of a standard engine and a T4 7163. My query would be wether as mentioned before it's worth going a full high mount twin scroll manifold ala 6boost or Fullrace (or sinco, or hypertune..) or whether the adaptor/welding up stock manifold is a 'better' idea for 'sort of' Twin Scroll and low mounting it.

Is it worth fathoming a guess as to what the performance impact of that would be?

I'd be willing to bet with the smaller turbo honestly not a whole bunch. Smaller diameter runners can actually lead to more spool on smaller setups.

[discopotato03]

$64 question that one . For a roadie that has to vaguely pretend to look registerable I think adapting to the standard manifold is at least convenient . 

I've been ploughing through another thread , Evom this time , and getting different perspectives on these EFR 7163s .

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2640508&page=3

The figures are pretty had to ignore and the most impressive data I've seen to date on 7163s esp in TS form . I gather the T4 TS IW turbine housing is what was used to make the monumental torque in one case .

I reckon its sold me on the TS 7163 and B1s being compact for a BW EFR will package better than a B2 ie TS 7064 or 7670 .

If a TS T3/T4 adapter gets it on the standard manifold then I'd say that's going to make a very torquey RB25 if tuned properly . My gut feeling now is a lot of thought and development went into these turbos to enable them to make good airflow early and avoiding compressor surge . Very difficult to have fast response with low hot side restriction with lots of airflow/power potential - and not surge in a plain style compressor housing .

I have read where in their early days people thought these units gave sort of lackluster performance which lead me to think they had compromises built in for whatever reasons . Obviously 7163s are not a flat out drag turbo and wouldn't suit everyone , I wouldn't expect to see them as singles on many 2.5L and larger engines other than EJ25s - unless people wanted a mini V8 . My only reservation is will it allow you to soft pedal an RB25 around without flying into boost and positive pressure AFRs all the time .

I guess you can't have everything but somewhere in the 7163 - 7670 range lies the answer I'm sure .

A .     

[Lithium]

Agreed.  The 7163 would be the smallest I'd put on an RB25 and honestly, aside from the fact that it'd drive like a small turbo it is NOT that small.   People have already gone ~350rwkw on Dyno Dynamics on E85 with them, from memory.

EFR7163 or bigger on an RB25, for sure.   

[Piggaz]

6 minutes ago, Lithium said:

Agreed.  The 7163 would be the smallest I'd put on an RB25 and honestly, aside from the fact that it'd drive like a small turbo it is NOT that small.   People have already gone ~350rwkw on Dyno Dynamics on E85 with them, from memory.

EFR7163 or bigger on an RB25, for sure.   

Considering how the 7163 on the 2.0, I'd be inclined to go a 7670 on an RB25 IMO.

An extra 500 cc and spiny cams, it would be a weapon. Packaging would be an issue though I would use imagine:

[Kinkstaah]

I currently have a GTX3582 low mounted on the standard manifold, so if the B1 frame is smaller it should be fine. Depends a bit on how thick the spacer is, but generally people space out a GT3582 in any case.

High mounting the thing on a RB25 whilst wanting to use a return flow intercooler, and the standard intake plenum starts making it look like fabrication hell, whereas keeping it low mount.... doesn't.... at all.

The question really comes around sealing that adapter and whether you're negating all the benefits of Borg Warner by doing so. But from most reports it appears the tech is mostly in the turbo and turbo wheels/turbo wheel material and not so much the manifold it's connected to.

[discopotato03]

Be real interesting to see some back to back testing of the TS 7163 and TS 7064 , final outputs may not differ a lot real world but the all round drive characteristics could .

Since you've had the GTS25T and GT3076R experience what's your gut feeling with these two units if you were doing it with the standard manifold ?

Also small update , been tuned on 98 recently and making my own adjustments for the part throttle low rev stuff , makes a noticeable difference advancing up the timing in these areas . In the GTRS E70 days I was doing this but eventually the limited exhaust flow took its toll , the 30s much improved exhaust flow really showed up how clean mixtures and suitable timing pulls up the low end torque and drivability .

A TS 7163 is a far cry from a GTRS but just prefer to avoid the what you call smallish turbo feel . Having said that some people in the States commented that applied properly 7163s can make the next two up EFRs seem almost redundant - big call that one . Everyone will be different in regard to their ideal power delivery and engine characteristics . 

A .  

Edit . About manifolds , I want to keep mine standard and not bolt things to it that it can't usefully support flow wise . There would be a point turbine size wise where the B2 housing needs something better .   

Edited November 8, 2016 by discopotato03

[discopotato03]

Hi Lith , crystal ball question .

I was reading your 2011 post at GTROUK and I'd like to hear what your gut feeling is on how the 7670 would have gone compared to your GT3076R .

My 52T doesn't feel terrible but a little more slightly lower would be nice . Geoff guesstimated at the time that it should have churned out about 450 whp or around 337 WKw . At the time I think you were considering an FR manifold and the non gated 1.05 TS housing .

Do you think a flange adapted std RB25 manifold would hold back the TS IW 0.92 version ? I think I've pretty much narrowed it down to this or the TS 7163 . I think the 7064 was a gap filler in the range because the development phase of the 7163 stretched out so long .

One or the other will come from Full Race once the details are sorted .

A .    

[Full-Race Geoff]

On 11/8/2016 at 3:30 AM, discopotato03 said:

So Geoff do you still think TS IW 7163 over 7064 for a street RB25DET

It's still hard to say.  Ive got some tuners who swear by the 7064.  Yet there are others who love the 7163.  I think the decision ultimately depends on the boost level and max rpm for a given EMAP level.  No question the 7163 will come into boost sooner, but it does have considerably higher backpressure - and the standard 7163 inlet is a 2.5" (non ported shroud) which can be prone to surge in applications with lower VE.  For example YB cosworth works better on 7064 than 7163 and I suspect RB20 would be similar

 

On 11/8/2016 at 5:36 AM, Griffin said:

What do know about the efr7670 Lithium?

I have a 7670 on my daily driver 2.3L mustang ecoboost right now.  It is a "small" big turbo, 2 steps larger than 7163 - and comes on around 3500rpm.  However i am really tempted to try a 7064 because this 2.3L engine does not like excessive emap, nor does it rev high.  I'd like to be in the power around 3000rpm and still be on a 0.92 a/r

16 hours ago, Lithium said:

Haven't experienced one directly, a couple of mates have played with them and rate the hell out of them - anything I said would be anecdotal.  They certainly don't look to have the boost threshold of the EFR7163, if I had to say then I'd say they start feeling a bit more like a big turbo but some seriously good response once past boost threshold like the whole EFR range.   

agree

15 hours ago, Kinkstaah said:

I have visions of a standard engine and a T4 7163. My query would be wether as mentioned before it's worth going a full high mount twin scroll manifold ala 6boost or Fullrace (or sinco, or hypertune..) or whether the adaptor/welding up stock manifold is a 'better' idea for 'sort of' Twin Scroll and low mounting it.

as long as you can keep twinscroll, either option will work well

13 hours ago, discopotato03 said:

My gut feeling now is a lot of thought and development went into these turbos to enable them to make good airflow early and avoiding compressor surge . Very difficult to have fast response with low hot side restriction with lots of airflow/power potential - and not surge in a plain style compressor housing...I guess you can't have everything but somewhere in the 7163 - 7670 range lies the answer I'm sure .

i agree.  each application and driver preference is unique and we can choose the rotor/housing combination that is best fitted to the application at hand

13 hours ago, Piggaz said:

Packaging would be an issue though I would use imagine:

photos attached of 7163 rb25 and 7064 rb25

13 hours ago, Kinkstaah said:

The question really comes around sealing that adapter and whether you're negating all the benefits of Borg Warner by doing so. But from most reports it appears the tech is mostly in the turbo and turbo wheels/turbo wheel material and not so much the manifold it's connected to.

by all means, seal the volutes and make it a true twinscroll.  Manifold has a massive difference, its not just turbo and fancy materials.  Coming from a gtx3582R on a standard manifold Id expect you will gain significant lowend/midrange by using a properly sized twinscroll turbo

13 hours ago, discopotato03 said:

Be real interesting to see some back to back testing of the TS 7163 and TS 7064 , final outputs may not differ a lot real world but the all round drive characteristics could... some people in the States commented that applied properly 7163s can make the next two up EFRs seem almost redundant - big call that one . Everyone will be different in regard to their ideal power delivery and engine characteristics . 

I believe the 0.80 a/r vs 0.92 a/r is a bigger argument than 7163 vs 7064 rotor pair.  It takes much more wg spring to keep the 7163 spinning up to max speed than the 7064 - due in large part to the a/r differences