Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, khezz said:

Slightly off topic but do twin scroll manifolds really cost $2.5k? Does that include the twin waste gates? Is it cheaper for an Efr since it doesn't need a waste gate?

Really surprised.

6 boost manifold = $1,300 ish

Fullrace manifold = ALOT more, depending on exchange rates.

Twin 38 or 44 mm gates, $450 ish each.

Depening on how you set up boost control. 1x3 port MAC valves or as crazy as 2 X 4 port MAC valves = $120 - $360 depending on which way you want to go.

Braided lines (you'd have to have rocks in your head to run rubber). This ain't cheap. Well over $1,000 here in lines and fittings. Gets a bit out of hand when running lines to the top and bottom of the diaphragm with duel 4 port MAC valves.:cool:

Water and oil lines = Not quite sure. Haven't added that up.

 

IWG EFR would be a fair bit cheaper. No gates and not as much plumbing pain with the lines. No fab work with plumbing the gate pipes back in. That itself is an expansive exercise.

4 minutes ago, khezz said:

Suppose this makes BW a fairly popular choice. That and they seem like a really well designed and made product.

Well that's a IWG version only (0.92). 1.05 and 1.45 ass ends are external gate which would make them the same cost to setup as choosing another brand (with however you decide to set it up).

Why Lol? I've been told that higher lift helps greatly with response on turbo engines. I know longer duration only comes in at high revs. Please explain, I'm not being sarcastic I would genuinely like to know if I've been steered wrong. My rb26 is about to go through a full rebuild and one of the items on the list is 11mm cams with 264 duration. The idea is to help response/reduce lag.

Higher lift help a lot with power and maybe a little response but longer duration is a massive detriment to response, it's actually surprising how little duration it takes to have a big effect  

34 minutes ago, khezz said:

Would 0.92 still flow enough for 500AWKW+ ? I imagine it would spool up well. Especially with well matched cams and E85. Maybe add a slightly higher comp ratio.

I suppose it depends on what dyno you throw it onto. What would be good is to see the exhaust gas pressure difference between a 0.92 and 1.05.

You have a 79 lb/min turbo. Why choke it with a small ass end? Let it breathe!!!!! In AND out!

For the record, the 1.05 AR ain't laggy AT ALL, especially if you have pulled off/come from "responsive twins" ?. Don't let the number scare you away.

18 hours ago, khezz said:

Just watched this video thats seems to put a little dent in the BW EFR. Its a back to back test of the 8374 vs 6266 on the same car and the 6266 wins quite comprehensively. They use a 3.4L 2jz supra. the EFR does spool quicker but the power difference is huge.

 

 

A car set up for and running an open T4 turbo from the brand they are dealers for (Precision) then they get a divided T4 turbo and put it on the same open manifold, somehow that turbo still makes >700whp and spools better than the Precision despite god knows what awesome stuff happens when the gases suddenly meet a brick shaped fork in it's path.

Somewhat BS comparison.

Thats right! I remember there was something about that back to back that stank lol what shit kunce posting shit up like that ?

 I've driven 2 cars with both of those turbos & i know which 1 i would rather have strapped to the side of my motor ?

  • Like 3

 

13 hours ago, Piggaz said:

A car set up for and running an open T4 turbo from the brand they are dealers for (Precision) then they get a divided T4 turbo and put it on the same open manifold, somehow that turbo still makes >700whp and spools better than the Precision despite god knows what awesome stuff happens when the gases suddenly meet a brick shaped fork in it's path.

Somewhat BS comparison.

http://www.supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?668656-The-Big-Thread-BW-8374-EFR-vs.-Precision-6266-CEA-(Jourbal-amp-DBB)-DYNO-RESULTS

If you want the actual facts of that comparison there posted in the above thread unfortunately it requires a account to access the page. 

The manifold is a copy of a HKS T4 divided single wastegate. In the above thread people complained about the HKS manifold not being a true divided design with twin wastegates so SP racing carried out further testing of the same turbos comparing a true twin scroll dual wastegate fullrace setup against the HKS manifold. 

Make up your own minds with the facts available.

http://www.supraforums.com/forum/showthread.php?672553-Hks-full-race-t4-exhaust-manifold-test-results&p=8809015#post8809015

 

Higher lift help a lot with power and maybe a little response but longer duration is a massive detriment to response, it's actually surprising how little duration it takes to have a big effect  


So what would be your recommendation for cams. For the type of setup discussed in this thread. 2.6l, e85, 750-800hp turbo. Going for 500kw at all fours?

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

    • My first car was a HG. I'm very familiar with them. A mild cam upgrade is a good idea. The 186 is a very flexible engine - meaning it has good torque from down low. You can give up a little torque down low for quite a lot more excitement in the mid range, and a bit more up top - but they are not exactly a rev monster. You need to upgrade valve springs at the minimum. For a bigger cam, you'd want to make sure it wasn't still running the original fibre cam gear. That would be unlikely, given that most of them shat themselves in the 70s and 80s, but still within the realms of possibility. Metal cam gear required. Carbies are a huge issue. The classic upgrade was always a Holley 350, which works, but is usually pretty bad for fuel consumption. The 186S had a 2 barrel Stromberg on it that was very similar to the one on the 253, and is a reasonable thing if you can find one, and find someone to help you get it set up (which is the same issue with setting up a 350 to work nice). The more classic upgrade was twin sidedraught CD type carbs, or triples of same, or triple Webers. The XU-1 triple Webers being the best example. You can still buy all this stuff new, I think, but it's a lot of coin to drop. And then the people able to set them up are getting fewer and further in between. There's still some, but it used to be everyone's** dad and uncle could do it. **Not everyone's! But a lot. All in all, I wouldn't get too carried away with the engine. Anything you do to it without a full rebuild for power and revs will only make it slightly faster. I am all in favour of a complete teardown rebuild, with nice rods and pistons, 10 or 1.5:1 compression, and a clean port job with at least a big enough cam to run 98 with that compression, if not bigger. And if I did that to a dirty old red motor, I'd want to inject it too, which I'd struggle to fight against the devil on my shoulder that would argue for ITBs and trumpets. But the bills would start to mount up, and it will still never make stupid power. OK, a few people still know how to build absolutely mental red motors, courtesy of the work that went into HQ racing and modern knowledge being applied. But even a 300HP red motor is no match for an RB20 with a TD06. So you have to decide what it's worth to you. I'd just put a set of 6>2>1 extractors, a 2.5" exhaust and an electronic ignition conversion/dizzy on it and just run the old girl like the fairly slow old girl that she really is.
    • Thank you so much for the comments.  This is very interesting and gives me some great ideas to think about. Keen to keep it simple and relatively classic looking. That said, i am not too worried about staying 100% period correct.  A little extra performance and relatively good (or improved) economy is just what i am looking for. Ill be keeping any parts i swap out so if i get nostalgic i can always swap it all back in.  Right now just trying to get some good ideas from people in the know (I still have a lot to learn in this space). Thank you again!  
    • Wrt the engine, you're very much limited by 'production quality' as to how much extra power you can extract from them (I'm talking i6 red-motor) -- a lot here depends on how 'authentic' or 'period correct' you want the modifications to be... ...I'm too old... <grin>...the first true performance engine Holden made, was in the HD/HR models ~ this was the 'X2' performance pack...it came with twin downdraft strombergs on an otherwise unimproved intake manifold, with a two piece exhaust manifold (reckoned to be as good as extractors)... ....these engines were built upon the '179HP' cylinder block, which included extra webbing in the casting to make it stronger and less susceptible to block distortion... The next performance i6 came out with the HK Monaro (also found it's way into the LJ GTR Torana ... the car I wish I hadn't sold)...it had pretty much the same manifold setup, but was built against the '186S' block...this block retained all the extra webbing of the 179HP block, but added a forged steel crankshaft (instead of the stock cast crankshaft), because it was possible to snap the crank... ...apart from the inherent weaknesses in the stock (cast crank) blocks, the next limiting factor is the cylinder head porting & combustion chamber design, and the actual valve sizes. Back in the day, you could buy a 'yella terra' cylinder head (from stage 1 to stage 5 gradients), and this was the way to get serious power out of them -- with the extra breathing of these heads, you could fit a triple SU or DCOE Weber setup... ...obviously, these mods were a waste of time on a stock cylinder head/camshaft grind. My housemate rebuilt the i6 in his VH dunnydore about 6 months back -- this is a 186S block with the 12port 2850 blue motor head and intake/exhaust manifolds, with a dual throat Weber off an XF Falcon mounted on an adapter plate ; it's not a bad makeup...got more torque & fuel economy just light-footing it about on the first throat, but stand on it and it makes more giddy-up than the standard 2850 blue motor that it replaced. Personal note: I'd just fit an RB30 and be done it it 馃槂  
    • Thanks for sharing. That's a great video! My buddy is doing the same thing on his build (S chassis struts and towers). He's building an S14 with billet RB30 shooting for 2000whp... a race car with a TH400 just like this video. For a road car I just couldn't go this route as the strut has to be almost vertical and the caster is not going to pivot correctly (let alone camber gain). You think the R32 frontend is bad, wait till you put a MacPherson strut on without modeling it all in Solidworks to check geometry. I'm not saying it's a bad way to do it but I'd be really curious to see how it affects the geometry.
    • Hey Christof and welcome!  Sounds like an awesome project! I'm not sure many of the regular users on here would know much about the HK but I could be wrong.  Looking forward to updates.
  • Create New...