Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

^ Further more...

I wonder if the compressor wheels on the Airwerks line of BW turbos can be interchanged for the EFR compressors.
EG - Purchasing a EFR8374, removing the 62/83mm compressor and replacing it with a BW 64.5/88mm compressor... The turbine side should be large enough to still power that size compressor??

^ You don't think BW will develop a 64mm turbo?

My response was moreso in reference to a hybrid thing of potentially mismatched technologies, althouth in respect of this question I would say no. I don't.

The current field feedback doesn't appear to indicate a void between the two that would necessitate a new product, particularly considering the smaller demographic at the target outputs. Most of the early comments (admittedly from the likes of FR) read to the tune of "go bigger, you won't miss anything".

Sometimes its good to roll back and have a second read of the thread to form a better opinion on this sort of thing. A varied knowledge base like what most full-time SAUers have leaves our opinions a little tainted, and I feel we may be searching for a 64mm alternative purely because other hot-topic competitor outfits have them. Correct me if I am wrong but even FP have jumped on the PTE sizing bandwagon.

Anyhows, such is another opinion.

  • Like 1
  • 3 weeks later...

Here I am again, I took 2 weeks to read the whole 94 pages..

Long story short : RB26 Head need a rebuilt, I was leaning toward a RB28 + billet 60mm on my twins ; A few friends told me it would weaken my block and would push the turbos to their limits = not so ''safe'' and reliable option.

They told me to stay rb26 and put a single... more reliable and the single won't be pushed to the limits., I like the idea, so I want a EFR!! :D

RB26 Forged piston + type-B poncam ( I could swap them if needs to be..), I would really prefer to keep my 3 inch exhaust ( it's quiet and cops never give me trouble). IT WOULD BE TUNED ON 94 octane + WMI (aquamist kit).

I want response ( I used to drive GT-SS and somewhat missed the quicker response the gt-ss had Vs. the -5s) and I reckon IWG 0.92 would spool quicker than 1.05 and would be a good load cheaper!

- Considering I only have acces to 94+ WMI.. I don't think going any higher than 26-27psi is recommanded, Agree on this ?

So which EFR, should provide me the best response/power at 23-27psi on a 2.6L ? is 81/90

83/74 0.92 IWG ? ( I would upgrade to the Turbosmart IWG EFR option) I'm hesiting because sub-boy did 640whp on a rb30 with this turbo.. so with 400cc less and 3 inch exhaust vs 3.5, should I be expecting approx. 600whp out of it ? or even less..

(without beeing a dynoqueen, I somewhat wished to break the 600whp marks ( I was at 573whp with my -5s), but ''transient response'' is still more important in my book than the bragging number)

Edited by cobrAA

I run both 8374 and 9180 turbos on my 2.6L engine, the EFR8374 is my call for a street driven 2.6L rb26... 1 bar by 3400rpm and so much fun to drive. The 9180 is a bigger turbo, comes on later and hits much harder. Regardless of this, the WG config will depend on which fuel you are using and your boost targets.. for a street car the 0.92 makes a lot of sense. i prefer the IWG because it is so simple and lightweight, but externals do have their benefits also

I run both 8374 and 9180 turbos on my 2.6L engine, the EFR8374 is my call for a street driven 2.6L rb26... 1 bar by 3400rpm and so much fun to drive. The 9180 is a bigger turbo, comes on later and hits much harder. Regardless of this, the WG config will depend on which fuel you are using and your boost targets.. for a street car the 0.92 makes a lot of sense. i prefer the IWG because it is so simple and lightweight, but externals do have their benefits also

your 8374 is the 1.05 right ? so should the 0.92 spool a tad quicker then ?

As for your question, I said in the previous post, we only have acces to 94 octane and I added WMI, so I imagine 27psi should be approx. the max I could go without being in the danger zone.

thank you

I run both 8374 and 9180 turbos on my 2.6L engine, the EFR8374 is my call for a street driven 2.6L rb26... 1 bar by 3400rpm and so much fun to drive.

1 bar at 3400 in 4th on the road? How about the 9180?

Videos please!!! That's almost enough to convince me to switch from my 6262 (if it fits on my manifold), in fact if I can make 700hp on a Dynapack with SAE2004 with a 8374 T4 1.05 and it makes 1 bar by 3400 I will purchase :)

your 8374 is the 1.05 right ? so should the 0.92 spool a tad quicker then ?

As for your question, I said in the previous post, we only have acces to 94 octane and I added WMI, so I imagine 27psi should be approx. the max I could go without being in the danger zone.

thank you

Im switching back to 8374 0.92 a/r now. We have a new shop track car to focus on, so my Nissan will go back to being a fun casual project. Considering your boost limits and fuel, I agree the 0.92 could work well. Just expect the turbo to run out of exhaust flow around 625-645whp as opposed to 700-730 with the external gates and 1.05 a/r

1 bar at 3400 in 4th on the road? How about the 9180?

Videos please!!! That's almost enough to convince me to switch from my 6262 (if it fits on my manifold), in fact if I can make 700hp on a Dynapack with SAE2004 with a 8374 T4 1.05 and it makes 1 bar by 3400 I will purchase :)

compared to 8374, the 9180 came on song ~400-500rpm later. I can not verify fitment on other company's manifolds, but even on the older Full-Race RB manifolds the EFR will fit no problem. Just make sure its divided with dual wg for optimal performance. If a gt40R can fit it then EFRs can fit

here is a dyno video from a couple years ago when my car had 8374 1.05 a/r on a dynapack with R33 trans and catalytic converter:

Edited by Full-Race Geoff

Im switching back to 8374 0.92 a/r now. We have a new shop track car to focus on, so my Nissan will go back to being a fun casual project. Considering your boost limits and fuel, I agree the 0.92 could work well. Just expect the turbo to run out of exhaust flow around 625-645whp as opposed to 700-730 with the external gates and 1.05 a/r

I apologize for being annoying in advance :)

I rather save 1000$ish and put it toward a Quaife front diff ( my engine is coming out this winter). However, I also know, 6 month later, I will regret not paying an extra 1000$ to get an extra 75whp so I rather do it right the first time. ( At the same time, I gotta ask if 700whp ish isn't too hard for a standard 5speed gearbox..)

Spool : How much of a difference is there between the 0.92 and 1.05 ? Are we talking something like 150rpm or we're talking 400-500rpm ?

Power: I know the 1.05 can make 700whp, you did it, but you also had 3.5 inch ( I have 3 inch) and you have E85 ( I only have 94+WMI), so given the same 1.05ar , shouldn't I be more in the 650whp mark Vs your 700whp ? In other words, I'm unsure if my setup will be able to make ''full-use'' of the 1.05ar.

Thanks a lot! ( I rather write it here than PM so other can benefit from the answer)

I rather save 1000$ish and put it toward a Quaife front diff

I consider a good front diff a mandatory upgrade on an R32/R33 (stock is fragile) and even though R34's front diff is stronger the improvement in vehicle dynamics from a proper limited slip differential is hard to argue with

I gotta ask if 700whp ish isn't too hard for a standard 5speed gearbox..)

yes, 700whp is too much for a standard 5speed and wayy too much for a stock front diff. front diff will probably fail before the trans, but 3rd and 4th gear will let go too.

Spool : How much of a difference is there between the 0.92 and 1.05 ? Are we talking something like 150rpm or we're talking 400-500rpm ?

with the stiff actuator on the 0.92 a/r I'd guesstimate the spool difference to be ~200-250rpm due to the smaller A/R.

However, if a soft iwg actuator is on the 0.92 then they will spool about the same

I know the 1.05 can make 700whp, you did it, but you also had 3.5 inch ( I have 3 inch) and you have E85 ( I only have 94+WMI)

since you only have access to 94octane fuel with water/meth you are not going to be making that kind of power safely. Pump fuel is such poor consistency from pump to pump that you can not safely map with aggressive ignition timing. I made 590 on my car with pump gas, I could have made more and pushed it harder but I think that is probably a good stopping point and with meth you can get into the low-to-mid 600 range.

keep in mind i was using an off-the-shelf catalytic converter, thats a big restriction. Admittedly we try to run E85 in everything since its easier on the motor to run high boost with some ignition advance

A mate on here went from -5's to a 8374 internal 0.92 rear. 5-700 rpm earlier it comes on and makes more power. Given that Geoff reckons the 1.05 will be 150-200 rpm behind the 0.92, you're still infront.

A mate on here went from -5's to a 8374 internal 0.92 rear. 5-700 rpm earlier it comes on and makes more power. Given that Geoff reckons the 1.05 will be 150-200 rpm behind the 0.92, you're still infront.

so it's a done deal. Buying a 1.05 :)

Btw, did your mate posted his result/comparaison somewhere on the net, I couldn't find any rb26 with a 0.92 from my research.

Will gladly post result when I have them ( in about 6 months considering where I live lol)

  • Like 1
  • 2 weeks later...
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yea that’s why I said ima test them with multimeter and see the reads.
    • Only at idle. Isn’t a problem when rev it seems.
    • @Haggerty This seems silly to ask, but are you confident in your ability to tune the Haltech?  
    • Next on the to-do list was an oil and filter change. Nothing exciting to add here except the oil filter is in a really stupid place (facing the engine mount/subframe/steering rack). GReddy do a relocation kit which puts it towards the gearbox, I would have preferred towards the front but there's obviously a lot more stuff there. Something I'll have to look at for the next service perhaps. First time using Valvoline oil, although I can't see it being any different to most other brands Nice... The oil filter location... At least the subframe wont rust any time soon I picked up a genuine fuel filter, this is part of the fuel pump assembly inside the fuel tank. Access can be found underneath the rear seat, you'll see this triangular cover Remove the 3x plastic 10mm nuts and lift the cover up, pushing the rubber grommet through The yellow fuel line clips push out in opposite directions, remove these completely. The two moulded fuel lines can now pull upwards to disconnect, along with the wire electrical plug. There's 8x 8mm bolts that secure the black retaining ring. The fuel pump assembly is now ready to lift out. Be mindful of the fuel hose on the side, the hose clamp on mine was catching the hose preventing it from lifting up The fuel pump/filter has an upper and lower section held on by 4 pressure clips. These did take a little bit of force, it sounded like the plastic tabs were going to break but they didn't (don't worry!) The lower section helps mount the fuel pump, there's a circular rubber gasket/grommet/seal thing on the bottom where the sock is. Undo the hose clip on the short fuel hose on the side to disconnect it from the 3 way distribution pipe to be able to lift the upper half away. Don't forget to unplug the fuel pump too! There's a few rubber O rings that will need transferring to the new filter housing, I show these in the video at the bottom of this write up. Reassembly is the reverse Here's a photo of the new filter installed, you'll be able to see where the tabs are more clearing against the yellow OEM plastic Once the assembly is re-installed, I turned the engine over a few times to help build up fuel pressure. I did panic when the car stopped turning over but I could hear the fuel pump making a noise. It eventually started and has been fine since. Found my 'lucky' coin underneath the rear seat too The Youtube video can be seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLJ65pmQt44&t=6s
    • It was picked up on the MOT/Inspection that the offside front wheel bearing had excessive play along with the ball joint. It made sense to do both sides so I sourced a pair of spare IS200 hubs to do the swap. Unfortunately I don't have any photos of the strip down but here's a quick run down. On the back of the hub is a large circular dust cover, using a flat head screw driver and a mallet I prised it off. Underneath will reveal a 32mm hub nut (impact gun recommended). With the hub nut removed the ABS ring can be removed (I ended up using a magnetic pick up tool to help). Next up is to remove the stub axle, this was a little trickier due to limited tools. I tried a 3 leg puller but the gap between the hub and stub axle wasn't enough for the legs to get in and under. Next option was a lump hammer and someone pulling the stub axle at the same time. After a few heavy hits it released. The lower bearing race had seized itself onto the stub axle, which was fine because I was replacing them anyway. With the upper bearing race removed and the grease cleaned off they looked like this The left one looked pristine inside but gave us the most trouble. The right one had some surface rust but came apart in a single hit, figure that out?! I got a local garage to press the new wheel bearings in, reassemble was the opposite and didn't take long at all. Removing the hub itself was simple. Starting with removing the brake caliper, 2x 14mm bolts for the caliper slider and 2x 19mm? for the carrier > hub bolts. I used a cable tie to secure the caliper to the upper arm so it was out of the way, there's a 10mm bolt securing the ABS sensor on. With the brake disc removed from the hub next are the three castle nuts for the upper and lower ball joints and track rod end. Two of these had their own R clip and one split pin. A few hits with the hammer and they're released (I left the castle nuts on by a couple of turns), the track rod ends gave me the most grief and I may have nipped the boots (oops). Fitting is the reversal and is very quick and easy to do. The lower ball joints are held onto the hub by 2x 17mm bolts. The castle nut did increase in socket size to 22mm from memory (this may vary from supplier) The two front tyres weren't in great condition, so I had those replaced with some budget tyres for the time being. I'll be replacing the wheels and tyres in the future, this was to get me on the road without the worry of the police hassling me.
×
×
  • Create New...