Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, R.3.2.G.T.R said:

EFR 8374 ordered, cant wait for the goodness 

You will love it!

Can't wait to run mine with the new 2.8L engine! It was good on the 2.5L but will be amazing one the 2.8 :D

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

So Guys.

What is the consensus with the 7670?  There appears to be only 1 person who has run it here on a worked RB, that being Kinkstaah on your 2.8 with VCT.

I'm going to be running a very similar setup :

RB28 Nitto 2.8 with 9.5:1 Compression
HKS Vcam 264 in.   Tomei 260 out

I'm going to have my 7670 on there and probably end up bolting a 1.05 rear housing to it.

But from seeing the results people are saying the 7670 on these bigger engines while will work, will give no added response over a 8374 and make less power - while not proven but that's what I'm getting from the hearsay.

So does anybody have any real results from the 7670 ?


 

For your setup I would recommend the 8374.

Mine is a RB25 based RB28 from the neo. I still have a redline of 7000RPM and RWD. I have the 1.05 twin scroll rear.

You have a RB26 based motor, which I would assume you plan on revving to 8000rpm. Most RB26 people don't have VCT so the 8374 is great. They and you also have AWD.

I don't personally think there's a huge difference in spool (or power) between them. That said, mine may be getting close to the limit on the upper end of 430kw. I don't have a speed sensor to test, but absolutely would if I was going to spin it that far.

I run about 18psi and make 395rwkw, 12psi will get me 329kw, but that info is in the dyno sheet. The BW Matchbot shows me very bad things if I put 25psi into it, hence not going to push my luck without a speed sensor.

Is the 7670 and a 2.8 and VCT a transient response monster? I'm happy enough with it that I want to pull the motor and turbo out and put something else in there. Still feels like a full second between WOT and boost coming back in a scenario where you'd otherwise be off throttle. I'd be keen to see those numbers side by side running that test actually. It is however pretty nice from part throttle.

But on a 26 in a GTR, make use of the AWD and the 8000rpm redline. The 7670 will nose over anyway if you plan to push it, which everyone does. Obviously it won't if you run 10psi and aim at 300kw with it, but I doubt that is the plan.

nitto 2.8 AND V-cam??

Id be going 9000rpm redline, EFR9180 1.05 and sending it.

8374 at the minimum.

I've got a 8374 1.05 on a little 2.6 and its bloody good at 450awkw but not a lot left turbine speed wise, let alone extra capacity and 50 degrees of cam adjustment to play with.

I've been googling 8474 every week for the last 2 years.

most people regret going smaller, very few regret going larger, especially when your engine is built with headroom to cop it.

Edited by burn4005
  • Like 1

The difference in my case (i.e I'm the only one who went smaller and has no desire to go bigger)

1) Need to go from a 1 pump fuel system to a 2 pump system at 450kw+
2) Blowing up gearboxes is a risk
3) Blowing up motors is a risk "Safe 350kw' is a long way from 'Safe 500kw'
4) Grip (RWD)
5) Lag (RWD)
6) Daily driven Clutches start becoming painful
7) Don't have 1000 more RPM to play with like a 26. Maybe I do because solid head, but I'll stay close to factory rev limit which is still 1000rpm lower.

The most effiecient max power on BW Matchbot is a 9174 or 9180 to run 30psi through a motor like yours or mine. These according to BW, make in the region of 850hp. Do you want to make 630kw once, or do you want to make 630kw through 150 hot laps every other weekend?

IMO that is the decision process regarding selecting any turbo really.

  • Like 2
1 hour ago, Buraz said:

Never posted my dyno sheet after EFR upgrade. Here it is 2.8 with 9180 1.04 housing and all other supporting mods on E85.
IMG_9274.jpg

extra capacity/built engine makes a big difference. You come on around 1,000RPM earlier compared to my 2.6 with 9.180 - you get going at 5,000RPM where mine comes on song around 5,800 RPM

  • Like 1

It's interesting to see how everyone perceives lag so differently. Maybe it's because AWD and RB26 land with more rpm. But Kinstaah's result is fckin amazing in my book. 394rwkw at 18psi. Surely capable of ~440rwkw+ if you wanted to lean on the turbo a little more. IMHO that's more than enough power (especially in RWD).

Can't recall if he popped the dyno sheets up but I'm pretty sure it's making just over 300rwkw at 4000rpm. It is comparable (but next level) to the response and pickup I get with the 7163 on my SR20 (250rwkw at 4000rpm). Makes for an amazing road car, spools very early and really picks up and goes without having to wind up the rpm much at all. I can't fathom possibly being happy with a turbo that doesn't make full boost until 5000rpm or later.

On something a little more 'standard' like a Neo RB25 I'm sure the 7670 would be an absolutely fantastic option. Awesome driveability with IMHO more than enough power.

Again just my opinion. And maybe it's different in 4wd land, but I don't see how you can USE more than 400rwkw on the road, especially taking into account the pressure you're putting on your engine, gearbox and inevitably very heavy duty clutch.

extra capacity/built engine makes a big difference. You come on around 1,000RPM earlier compared to my 2.6 with 9.180 - you get going at 5,000RPM where mine comes on song around 5,800 RPM

Tbh dyno sheet doesn’t do it justice, feels like it’s on even earlier than it shows, but not sure if yours is same with smaller capacity. I got another almost 1500rpm to go in my turbo. I’m over the moon with it all tho

 For those who are interested on some racing results on the 9180.

I ran 10.4 @ 140.68 mph today at GTR festival before my triple plate decided to shit itself. 

The haltech log showed 2nd, 3rd and 4th had full boost of 30 psi with 35 psi only being achieved in 5th. 

Now in the process of upgrading to an eboost2 as the profec II just doesn't have the flexibility needed.

This will help with more boost and hence more power in 2nd, 3rd and 4th  hopefully resulting in bigger mph and lower ET.

  • Like 1

I also have real results of an EFR7670 on an RB26, it was within my power goals and I felt like giving it a go seeing as the resaleability of EFR turbos is good and later going with an 8374 with the same rear housing would make it a straight fit.

From what I found we really had to restrict how quickly it came on due to knock, results were inconclusive as I saw power loss in the exact same RPM area as my R32 Nismo turbos. I am wanting to see how far I can go with this before jumping ship and going to a larger compressor.

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

    • Yeah, the latter. No diff should have a centre replaced without checking clearances because its unlikely to be the same as whatever came out. Not that that stops most people just checking a new centre in
    • Major thread necro but how bad of a job is it to DIY? Looking at it online it looks like if you reuse your ring and pinion as long as those are in good condition it should be fine to just pull the axles/front cover and replace the diff that way? Or should I be replacing everything and doing preload measurements/gear mesh testing like the factory service manual mentions for the rear diff?
    • in my list I had the R33 GTR as the best Skyline. Infact I had all GTR's (33>34=32), the NSX, the GTO, the 300ZX, the 180SX, the S15 better than the FD RX7. I had the MR2 and the A80 as 'just' better. I also think the DC5R Integra looks better but this is an 01 onwards car. I also think the FC>FD. It's almost like aesthetics are individual! The elements @GTSBoy likes about the FD and dislikes about the 180 are inverse in my eyes. I hate the rear end of the FD and it's weird tail lights that are bulbous and remind me of early hyundai excels. They are not striking, nor iconic, nor retro cool. The GTO has supercar proportions. I maintain these look much better in person (like the NSX) especially with nice wheels and suspension which is mandatory for all cars pretty much. Some (or all) of these you have to see in person to appreciate. You can't write a car off until you see one in the flesh IMO. Like most people we probably just like/dislike cars which represent certain eras of design or design styles in general. I also think the 60's Jag E type looks HORRIBLE, literally disgusting, and the 2000GT is nothing to write home about. FWIW I don't think the Dodge Viper Gen1's have aged very well either. You can probably see where I rate bubbly coupes like the FD. I know we're straying now but the C4 and C5 absolutely murder the Viper in the looks department as time goes on, for my eyes. Wouldn't surprise me if people who love the FD, also love the MX5, Dodge Viper, Jag E Type, etc etc.
    • I used to hate R31s, and any of the other Nissans that led up to it, and any of the Toyotas with similar styling, because of the boxiness. They were, and remain, childish, simplistic, and generally awful. I appreciate R31s a lot more now, but only the JDM 2 door. The ADM 4 door (and any other 4 door, even if they are unique compared to our local one) can eat a bowl of dicks. The Aussie R31 is also forever tarnished by their association with stereotypical bong clutching Aussie R31 owners of the 90s and early 2000s. I think the Nissans of the 70s (other than 120Y/180B/200B) are far superior looking to the 80s cars. The 240K era Skylines are boss. The same is broadly true of Toyotas. Hondas don't ever register in my thinking, from any era. Mitsus are all horrid shitboxen in any era, and so also don't register. Subarus are always awful, ditto. Daihatsus and Suzukis also don't generally register. They are all invisible. I think the SW20 MR2 looks fiddly. The 3000GT/GTO is like that but way worse. Too many silly plastic barnacles and fiddly gimmicks ruined what could have been a really nice base shape. Kinda-sorta looks like a big heavy ST165 Celica coupe (and I'm not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing). I think the 180SX is dreadfully bland. It's not bad looking. But it has no excitement to it at all. It's just a liftback coupe thing with no interest in its lines, and bad graphical elements (ie wide expanses of taillight plastic on the rear garnish). The S13 Silvia is a little better - getting closer to R32 shapes. But still....bland. S14? Nope. Don't love it. S15...a little better. Probably a lot better, actually. Benefits from not being like a shrunk in the wash R34 (where the S13 was a shrunk in the wash R32 and the S14 looked like a Pulsar or something else from the stable on Nissan mid 90s horrors). The Z32 was hot as f**k when it came out but hasn't aged as well as the A80. Keep in mind that I think the R33 is the most disgusting looking thing - and out of all the previous cars mentioned is objectively closest to my precious R32. It's just....real bad, almost everywhere you look. And that is down to the majority of what was designed in the 90s being shit. All Nissans from that era look like shit. Most other brands ditto. In that context, the FD absolutely stands out as being by far the best looking car, for reasons already discussed. Going behind the aesthetics, the suspension alone makes it better than almost any other car.  
    • If they just called it the "Mazda Tiffany", it would have been spot on.
×
×
  • Create New...