Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

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 by burn4005
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!

 

Screenshot_20180712-221707_YouTube.jpg

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!

 

Screenshot_20180712-221707_YouTube.jpg

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 by RICE RACING

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 by 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

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.

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!

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. 

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.

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 by 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.

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.

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? 

 

 

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...