Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

GCG were able to also advise turbine speeds over 153,000 rpm could cause failure. They reported quite a few failures of the 9180 used in time attack under extreme conditions.

153,000RPM is nothing for a turbo. your stock turbos probably spin hard then that at full boost. There should be no way of exploding turbine wheel at that point. Might be some welding bits fell out of exhaust manifold or things jammed into the turbine housing.

153,000RPM is nothing for a turbo. your stock turbos probably spin hard then that at full boost. There should be no way of exploding turbine wheel at that point. Might be some welding bits fell out of exhaust manifold or things jammed into the turbine housing.

So after BWs mega hours of testing

you're telling us that they are wrong......

153,000RPM is nothing for a turbo. your stock turbos probably spin hard then that at full boost. There should be no way of exploding turbine wheel at that point. Might be some welding bits fell out of exhaust manifold or things jammed into the turbine housing.

I hope this is the case

So after BWs mega hours of testing

you're telling us that they are wrong......

I'm just passing on what GCG told me. It's not uncommon for Ti wheels to fail in this way. Borg Warner or not. This is why the limit is posted on the compressor map an they actively support the purchase of a speed sensor and road rage gauge. Ti wheeled turbos are certainly more fussy than their inconel cousins. On closer inspection of my turbine wheel it has porous holes noticeable in the surface which doesn't fill me with confidence in regards to expansion rates.

This whole failure analysis process is about understanding why my turbo failed after 100km to make sure it doesn't happen again. Im not trying to poo poo the product. I've have already bought a replacement 6758.

Matt

post-49288-14277724765359_thumb.jpg

post-49288-1427772726648_thumb.jpg

153,000RPM is nothing for a turbo. your stock turbos probably spin hard then that at full boost.

Peter, Please understand the max speed will depend entirely on the diameter of the wheels, it doesn't matter who makes the turbo.

560 m/s is turbo mfg's definition of max wheel speed. This is the same across the board for "maximum tip speed" -- Not krpm which does not factor in diameter. 153k rpm is enough to fail most any gt35R or gt40R sized turbo and can only be acheived with a significant boost leak. unfortunately most people do not accurately monitor turbo shaft speed or EMAP which are 2 critical operating parameters for these engines

Mate's EVO with a Garrett reads off 170,000RPM at 18psi. And that thing's through hundreds of tracks days. 153,000RPM can't cause your wheel to explode.

Peter, your friend's Evo has a very small turbo or his speed sensor is setup wrong. There is no reason any aftermarket garrett turbo on evo should be operating at 170k rpm. it would need to have a small turbo with boost leak.

Edited by Full-Race Geoff

I'm just passing on what GCG told me. It's not uncommon for Ti wheels to fail in this way. Borg Warner or not. This is why the limit is posted on the compressor map an they actively support the purchase of a speed sensor and road rage gauge. Ti wheeled turbos are certainly more fussy than their inconel cousins. On closer inspection of my turbine wheel it has porous holes noticeable in the surface which doesn't fill me with confidence in regards to expansion rates.

This whole failure analysis process is about understanding why my turbo failed after 100km to make sure it doesn't happen again. Im not trying to poo poo the product. I've have already bought a replacement 6758.

Matt

ImageUploadedBySAU Community1427772038.605493.jpg ImageUploadedBySAU Community1427772475.999362.jpg

was referring to old mate petre

post-49288-14279561108357_thumb.jpgpost-49288-14279561336696_thumb.jpgpost-49288-14279563417955_thumb.jpg

post-49288-14279565241856_thumb.jpgpost-49288-14279565804777_thumb.jpgpost-49288-14279566604959_thumb.jpgpost-49288-14279567264545_thumb.jpg

Inspection of the failed EFR shows the turbine most likely was damaged due to a piece of the turbine housing coming loose. Discoloration around the fragment area shows it separated recently. Comparing the turbine housings there is a vast difference in finishing. Also the turbine discharge area has been revised. The newer version is channeled around me the entire turbine outlet which flutes the wastegate gas. The earlier version channel is only 30% of the outlet. I wonder if this was done due to uneven expansion rates..

I'll have a chat to GCG. I feel I may have a case for refund/rebuild.

Matt

  • 3 weeks later...

If ever a found my EFR 83/74 1,05ewg with type-R cam not responsive enought, can i simply swap a 76/70 1,05 EWG in place on the full-race manifold and expect a more responsive rb26 ?

Also, #2, I have a haltech ECU, would you rather keep your profecb2 EBC that act as a boost gauge at the time or use the EFR boost module and buy the boost solenoid to control boost over the haltech ?

I believe going from the 8374 to the 7670 you will

Need to modify the dump pipe slightly as they're not based on the same frame/housings. It will still fit on the manifold but the exhaust will need to be in a slightly different spot. You maybe should have gone the 8374 in the 0.92 IWG.

I believe going from the 8374 to the 7670 you will

Need to modify the dump pipe slightly as they're not based on the same frame/housings. It will still fit on the manifold but the exhaust will need to be in a slightly different spot. You maybe should have gone the 8374 in the 0.92 IWG.

maybe... but got a good deal on a EWG setup.. and was told the difference between IWG and EWG was approx. 80whp by Full-race. Not ot mention the problem with the IWG tha tneed to be swapped for a turbosmart unit.. i just went ahead with the EWG deal I found..

If ever a found my EFR 83/74 1,05ewg with type-R cam not responsive enought, can i simply swap a 76/70 1,05 EWG in place on the full-race manifold and expect a more responsive rb26 ?

Also, #2, I have a haltech ECU, would you rather keep your profecb2 EBC that act as a boost gauge at the time or use the EFR boost module and buy the boost solenoid to control boost over the haltech ?

#1 as long as youre using 1.05 a/r on the 8374 and on the 7670 -- they should drop in place of each other without any changes other than IC piping coupler and intake coupler to suit. I doubt the 8374 will not be responsive enough on RB26, its a really really good combination

#2 Haltech ECU is very good, it can control the EFR 3 port BCSV or the profec solenoid you already have. We just started to carry the 4 port solenoids also, which is an option to consider

I believe going from the 8374 to the 7670 you will

Need to modify the dump pipe slightly as they're not based on the same frame/housings. It will still fit on the manifold but the exhaust will need to be in a slightly different spot. You maybe should have gone the 8374 in the 0.92 IWG.

I disagree Piggaz, i dont think he will need to change anything on the hotside between these two turbos

#2 Haltech ECU is very good, it can control the EFR 3 port BCSV or the profec solenoid you already have. We just started to carry the 4 port solenoids also, which is an option to consider

Can I still use my greddy profect just to monitor boost reading ? i like the fact the profec fit in the clock compartment and take zero place while a 52mm gauge will take useless space.

Hi Geoff,

For your RB kit with the 6258s is it possible to use an external wastegate on it ? and why did you go with the internal wastegate set up ? was it just for the utilizing the parts that already came with ?

Thanks

Bummer... I asked last page about fititng issue with the Single manifold for R32.. i was told it was better to fit a single stage P/S pump.. Well the problem is not the P/S, it's the A/C.

If I go with a R33/R34 A/C pump, can i still use my r32 crank pulley and simply adjust the belt ( if needed) or i need to change everything.. maybe I should've of went with the Raw manifold that clear everything. :(

  • 1 month later...

I have one, but I am still waiting on my cylinder head and my manifold for my 83/74 .91 AR IWG turbo now from RAW Brokerage.

I will have pumpgas dyno numbers hopefully before summer, but it will be on a BC stroker motor w/ ported head and mild cams.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • As far as I can tell I have everything properly set in the Haltech software for engine size, injector data, all sensors seem to be reporting proper numbers.  If I change any injector details it doesnt run right.    Changing the base map is having the biggest change in response, im not sure how people are saying it doesnt really matter.  I'm guessing under normal conditions the ECU is able to self adjust and keep everything smooth.   Right now my best performance is happening by lowering the base map just enough to where the ECU us doing short term cut of about 45% to reach the target Lambda of 14.7.  That way when I start putting load on it still has high enough fuel map to not be so lean.  After 2500 rpm I raised the base map to what would be really rich at no load, but still helps with the lean spots on load.  I figure I don't have much reason to be above 2500rpm with no load.  When watching other videos it seems their target is reached much faster than mine.  Mine takes forever to adjust and reach the target. My next few days will be spent making sure timing is good, it was running fine before doing the ECU and DBW swap, but want to verify.  I'll also probably swap in the new injectors I bought as well as a walbro 255 pump.  
    • It would be different if the sealant hadn't started to peel up with gaps in the glue about ~6cm and bigger in some areas. I would much prefer not having to do the work take them off the car . However, the filler the owner put in the roof rack mount cavities has shrunk and begun to crack on the rail delete panels. I cant trust that to hold off moisture ingress especially where I live. Not only that but I have faded paint on as well as on either side of these panels, so they would need to come off to give the roofline a proper respray. My goal is to get in there and put a healthy amount of epoxy instead of panel filler/bog and potentially skin with carbon fiber. I have 2 spare rolls from an old motorcycle fairing project from a few years back and I think it'd be a nice touch on a black stag.  I've seen some threads where people replace their roof rack delete with a welded in sheet metal part. But has anyone re-worked the roof rails themselves? It seems like there is a lot of volume there to add in some threads and maybe a keyway for a quick(er) release roof rack system. Not afraid to mill something out if I have to. It would be cool to have a cross bar only setup. That way I can keep the sleek roofline that would accept a couple bolts to gain back that extra utility  3D print some snazzy covers to hide the threaded section to be thorough and keep things covered when not using the rack. 
    • Probably not. A workshop grade scantool is my go to for proper Consult interrogation. Any workshop grade tool should do it. Just go to a workshop.
    • In my head it does make sense to be a fuel problem since that is what I touched when cleaning the system. When I was testing with the fuel pressure gauge, the pressure was constantly 2.5 bar with the FPR vacuum removed. When stalling, the pressure was going up to 3.0 bar (which is how it should be on ignition).
    • ECUtalk pages don't mention they support the ABS computer (consult port has more than one CAN), so you might just need a different scan tool. But, I would expect ABS is a different light to the brake warning/handbrake light, do you see an ABS light come on for a few seconds when you turn the key from ACC to IGN? But since you said: I'd have a look at the ABS sensors in the rear hubs to make sure they are not damaged, disconnected etc.
×
×
  • Create New...