Lithium

Yeah flat shift and other antilag strategies are all awesome as well, and given @Piggaz has a sequential with flatshift etc also - I suspect it's not going to be the worst. I guess it's a shame he doesn't have transient (like off/on versus gear shifting) data from prior to the 1.05 as that's probably what will suffer the most on with the change to that 1.45 housing.

I think most people seriously interested in EFR turbos are interested in them because they don't miss that basic point

PS Mr @RICE RACING, if it's not inappropriate to ask - how does the EFR9180 hold on up high on the 3.2? I have a mate having issues with his 9180 RB32 build, it's falling on it's face at 6000rpm - like power is rolling over hard. He changed from 1.05 to 1.45 and it's made no difference at high rpm, and it happens at all boost levels. I'm not currently at all convinced it's the turbo though some sound like they're suggesting it is. It is also struggling to make the power it should be - actually barely making any more than a good EFR8374 setup would, imho.

That makes for some good reading as is, thanks for sharing - lines up relatively well with how I kind of picture things. Obviously a 1:1 pressure ratio across the engine is ideal from the stand point of something that doesn't have to deal with transient conditions (drags, steady state etc) but I definitely feel that letting a bit of drift upwards in EMAP to ensure response etc is not the worst thing in the world. Hell, it seems only to be a semi recent thing where people start shunning anything over 1:1 for road/track cars when previously it was usually a target for drag cars. These days it gets more plausible because turbos etc are so much more efficient that you can float around 1:1 and still have fairly decent response. Obviously there is no one size fits all as it depends on temperatures etc etc etc, but I think a lot of people would shxt if they knew what most factory turbo cars, rally cars, and most serious race cars have run in terms of IMAP vs EMAP. In @Piggaz case however, it sounds like the bigger housing is not likely to really cost anything which is going to compromise his driving experience much - the 1.05 EFR8374 sounds like a response beast, and having surge issues down low is a nightmare I've had to deal with in the past and I can associate with wanting to try stuff to get rid of it... especially if part of your buzz is trying new things and learning from it. I'd probably have just gone a 1.05 EFR9180 to reslve it, but there is no secret I have a raging one for those turbos haha.

Haha yes, I'm very very interested in this as well. The data geek in my is a little sad that there wasn't at attempt to run it up to max rpm with the 1.05 to get a flat out comparison of EMAP, IMAP and power along with spool between the 1.05 and 1.45 but I understand the position of being a tuner and also owner of a car and having your comfort levels etc. While 360kpa:260kpa EMAP:IMAP (1.38:1 EMAP:IMAP) is starting to build up a bit I didn't personally think it was over the top, especially when so close to the suggested max compressor speed - but who am I to question when someone is willing to try the big housing out on an engine which is as likely as any to justify the large one? ESPECIALLY with all the data @Piggaz has set up to be able to record. How the new housing affects spool, cylinder filling, surge, compressor speed, power etc etc is all very relevant to my interests. So much science! Looking forward to seeing how this comes out

I've had a few false starts trying to add 2c to this topic but keep ending up tied up with other things, but I thought I'd at least throw this out there: It's one of the best performing RB setups I've seen, I love it.

Will hold off the (like) until you post a dyno plot (y)

Yeah good on them for being the guinea cops at that kind of expense, that is a LOT of unproven turbo to jump into using on a 2.8litre turn-corners-car. Will be very interesting to see how they perform in the real world, they do definitely seem to be not shy of pumping some air!

Yep, from my experience with an 8374 on even an RB26 I can't see why you would go smaller... not remotely comparable to the lag of -5s haha

They are out, just doesn't seem like a lot of people have tried them - or at least boasted about their results so far. It's probably too early to draw any conclusions one way or another from what little info is out there, it feels like there is potential there. The odds are there are a lot of people like you, who are interested and thinking about it but want someone else to try it first - which is very reasonable... but also means there is probably not much point holding your breath. The "next size up" G-series are likely to be more interesting to everyone, it was an interesting choice going for the baby size first.

I wouldn't hold my breath, I certainly haven't heard any hints of anyone doing such a build and given they won't realistically be bolt on options I'd say most would go for known and easier/cheaper to fit combinations. There are VERY few dyno results out the for the G25s, and so far I've seen nothing worth really writing home about. The most indicative of any potential I've seen is an EJ25 powered Subaru with a .72a/r G25-660 on it putting down a bit over 500whp (~370wkw) on a Mainline roller dyno at 26psi with full boost coming in in the mid/low 4000rpm range. It's decent, but nothing to put the EFRs on notice.

Nice - any more specifics? Been quite curious about the SX-E turbos and a few RBs seem to have them but no dyno sheets or hardly even any numbers, yours included now haha

^ wrong thread guys. The TD05 16G is an awesome turbo but the wastegate actuator that comes with the turbo is pretty crap - external gate or a different actuator detract from the cost effectiveness and ease of using these but in terms of reliability and performance for the price they would be very very hard to beat

What fuel are you running, and what manifold/flange? What is the existing turbo? In some ways it'll come down to how cheap/easy you want to do it etc. If you have a T3 manifold I'd be inclined to suggest a Gen2 GTX3071R if you aren't really looking to go past 300kw @ wheels.

The GTW range is the budget performance series, they are effectively revamped Garrett T-series turbos with "GTW" compressor wheels replacing the old compressors. They go well enough but are pretty much Garretts equivalent to the Precision and FP turbos which were available 8 years ago.

I'll point out (unless I am missing something) what should be relatively obvious on this, with equivalent for equivalent ITB vs single throttle plenums (same runner length, same plenum size and design) the power delivery should be pretty much identical as once the throttle is wide open everything should be much of a muchness. Any differences are likely to be in the behaviour at throttle transitions.

Ahh ok, yeah could have been a thing to muddy things a bit. Still, it's a lot of power in any money - and I'm not sure a 6870 would make 1100hp @ hubs haha

Oh interesting - I guess I shouldn't be surprised, but a few Mainline lads have implied that the Dynapacks read a lot higher and I just went with that. I wouldn't have expected the R35 coils to make much difference unless your spark was only just (or not) holding up before.

Nice, be interested to see the results So far they've been pretty good for us, especially if using a Kevlar belt on higher rpm setups though probably not really an issue for you haha

RB26 Head? Will you be getting an E85 tune? Looks like it's holding power quite well to redline currently, will be interesting to see it does with more stable triggering. There is an outfit in NZ who do a very affordable cam trigger setup (but not using the flimsy stock Nissan drive) which fixes this kind of thing with the stock cam angle sensor configuration without going 10/10ths on a crank trigger setup, if you haven't gone there yet and were wanting a reliable trigger setup without going 4 digit costs.

Yeah it's a bit tricky when two turbos being compared have fairly different flow potentials, it's pretty misleading if it's not made really clear that the "laggier" turbo actually is operating below it's potential to make that power while the "awesome powerband" turbo is probably sitting near it's limit to achieve the same thing. On the flipside, 200-300 sounds pretty generous - >840 @ hubs is not messing about, the Mainline hub dynos don't seem as "happy" as the Dynapacks.

Awesome, I'd have thought the 1.45 would be more appropriate but that still seems to be pumping out quite a bit of power even with the "smaller" housing.

Nice- fair to assume the blue line is the EFR9174? Any idea of which housing on the EFR? Interesting seeing the progression - Garrett > Precision > Borg Warner EFR. Be interesting to see if he stays with this now.

Can't promise anything but will mention it. Where do you get an 8370!? Never heard of such a combo

So its like a Borg Warner S300SX 8375 or something - 60mm turbo? I'll mention it to Kiwis who may want a 9174, you have the 1.05 hot side?