Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Lithium said:

Interesting - I would have expected more than that!    Still, must be pretty solid even with that?

That doesn't sound great :/

Yea, I'm not sure about the oil/wastegate, but it only seems to be a very small amount and only when I'm really hard on it. And 750awhp is pretty nuts already. If there is more, I am pretty happy with where it is now. It just pulls and pulls all the way to 9k rpm. I've already gone through a back set of tires from spinning 3rd and some of 4th.

On 9/2/2017 at 11:40 AM, minesskyline said:

After speaking with the tuner further, I believe that 750 was all he could get out of the setup. If they can do more, I don't know what other changes could be made to extract more power.

im interested to see the chart, and whatever info you can share of the tune/setup.  how much boost, ignition advance and WGDC? Do you have turbo speed sensors?  Do you have a boost chart showing RPM vs boost and where are you reaching 1bar boost?  obviously there are many changes that can be made to extract more power, but thoroughly understanding the baseline is important before changing anything else

On 9/2/2017 at 11:42 AM, minesskyline said:

@Full-Race Geoff Do you know why the wastegates would allow small amounts of oil to be blown out from them? I have the turbosmart wastegates from your site.

All wastegates internal or external will have a small leak from the lower port.  In the case of turbosmart IWG actuators, if you use a 4 port solenoid with pressure in the lower canister it can push assembly lube out of the lower bushing. Turbosmart is fantastic to deal with, if you have any concerns send them a photo of the actuator. 

On 9/2/2017 at 7:22 AM, Piggaz said:

@Full-Race Geoff

Have you seen a 8373/1.45 result at all?

Any news on the 8474?

yes 8374 1.45 was a popular evoX turbo, but 9174 1.45 has pretty well displaced it

8474 and 9280 both required a new compressor housing design.  This will not be released until 2018

1 hour ago, Full-Race Geoff said:

im interested to see the chart, and whatever info you can share of the tune/setup.  how much boost, ignition advance and WGDC? Do you have turbo speed sensors?  Do you have a boost chart showing RPM vs boost and where are you reaching 1bar boost?  obviously there are many changes that can be made to extract more power, but thoroughly understanding the baseline is important before changing anything else

All wastegates internal or external will have a small leak from the lower port.  In the case of turbosmart IWG actuators, if you use a 4 port solenoid with pressure in the lower canister it can push assembly lube out of the lower bushing. Turbosmart is fantastic to deal with, if you have any concerns send them a photo of the actuator. 

yes 8374 1.45 was a popular evoX turbo, but 9174 1.45 has pretty well displaced it

8474 and 9280 both required a new compressor housing design.  This will not be released until 2018

Here's the 91 pump gas and e85 dyno plot overlay. Let me know what other information you need that's not represented here. I will get whatever you need. Also, I'm running a megasquirt standalone so I might be able to get the tune as a whole. This is not to say that the tuner did not do a good job, because I believe they did a fantastic job with this build.

20170903_195944.jpg

Edited by minesskyline
Added more info.
9 hours ago, minesskyline said:

Here's the 91 pump gas and e85 dyno plot overlay. Let me know what other information you need that's not represented here. I will get whatever you need. Also, I'm running a megasquirt standalone so I might be able to get the tune as a whole. This is not to say that the tuner did not do a good job, because I believe they did a fantastic job with this build.

20170903_195944.jpg

now hit the track and tell us the mph you run :)

  • Like 1
11 hours ago, minesskyline said:

Here's the 91 pump gas and e85 dyno plot overlay. Let me know what other information you need that's not represented here. I will get whatever you need. Also, I'm running a megasquirt standalone so I might be able to get the tune as a whole. This is not to say that the tuner did not do a good job, because I believe they did a fantastic job with this build.

20170903_195944.jpg

Can't really read from the graph (sorry blurry and at an angle), but what power did it make on pumpgas (looks like 620?) and what boost level to achieve that? Same question for E85. Dang...mustang dyno those are STRONG numbers!

1 hour ago, HarrisRacing said:

Can't really read from the graph (sorry blurry and at an angle), but what power did it make on pumpgas (looks like 620?) and what boost level to achieve that? Same question for E85. Dang...mustang dyno those are STRONG numbers!

Sorry, I will take a better picture. 641 on pump at 26psi. 758 at 32psi on e85. The car is really fast. I've been in 9 second cars before and I am more than confident that this is one. I will try to get setup for the track this year to find out officially. 

6 hours ago, minesskyline said:

Sorry, I will take a better picture. 641 on pump at 26psi. 758 at 32psi on e85. The car is really fast. I've been in 9 second cars before and I am more than confident that this is one. I will try to get setup for the track this year to find out officially. 

Oh that's interesting - that sounds a LOT more positive than I expected, what size cams and what headwork do you have again?  Normally 758whp on a US dyno doesn't necessarily represent THAT fast a car.  

 

Oh that's interesting - that sounds a LOT more positive than I expected, what size cams and what headwork do you have again?  Normally 758whp on a US dyno doesn't necessarily represent THAT fast a car.  
 

Aren't Mustang dynos meant to read low or realistic by Oz standards?
16 minutes ago, admS15 said:


Aren't Mustang dynos meant to read low or realistic by Oz standards?

I am not sure they are totally consistent, my general feeling is the order of "generous" to "heartbreaker" for your average example of each would be Dynapack=Dynojet, Mainline=Mustang, DynoPower (Popular NZ dyno), then Dyno Dynamics... but then there seem to be more generous and also harsher examples of all of those which throw the rules, rules of thumb for dyno comparisons can't ever be taken as gospel from my observations so far.

Sound Performance use a Mustang dyno and they made ~770whp (over 550wkw) out of a 1.05a/r EFR8374 on kill with a hot 2JZ - if that was an absolute then comparing that with this result basically kills the "twins are better" argument for EFRs, which to be fair is a tricky one as there has not yet been transparent public result for twins which have justified their use over a single EFR that I've seen beyond where the twin kit covers what no single EFR can do (ie, twin EFR7163s flow MUCH more than any single EFR).

 

Edited by Lithium
  • Like 1
3 hours ago, Lithium said:

Oh that's interesting - that sounds a LOT more positive than I expected, what size cams and what headwork do you have again?  Normally 758whp on a US dyno doesn't necessarily represent THAT fast a car.  

 

Port and polish, bronze valve guides, retainers and valves (I don't remember the brand off the top if my head). Cams are Poncam B's.

btw i now have a 34 getrag with a triple plate clutch sitting on 275 Mickey Thompson radials

im going to try and hit wsid in september, shove 31psi down its throat and better my 134mph

Edited by usmair
  • Like 2
3 hours ago, usmair said:

btw i now have a 34 getrag with a triple plate clutch sitting on 275 Mickey Thompson radials

im going to try and hit wsid in september, shove 31psi down its throat and better my 134mph

Currently changing from Haltech platinum to EMU Black. Also resetting my out of spec shims (been this way forever), and going to water/meth injection. 20 psi is 126.7 mph now. I can't imagine 27-31!

Good way to find out whether the overspin problem is instant death or not. Garrett rate their wheels to near-similar maximum RPM too and people don't really seem to care much about spinning them way past it

Please post results :P

4 minutes ago, Kinkstaah said:

Good way to find out whether the overspin problem is instant death or not. Garrett rate their wheels to near-similar maximum RPM too and people don't really seem to care much about spinning them way past it

This is kind of a good point which I've been meaning to ask @Full-Race Geoff...  or anyone who has found anything, I've never seen any official Borg Warner documentation on the maximum recommended turbine speed for any of their EFR range - same goes the Garrett range?!

They both have the rpm lines on compressor maps, but there is nothing stated to indicate that any of those imply a maximum rpm - which from all I can tell is treated like a single magic number.  Is there any information available we can refer to?  There has been much noise made about how risky it is to go past the max rpm of any of these turbochargers but without that max rpm I feel awkward sometimes bringing it up without any supplied information.  One of the justifications given for the EFR9174 existing is that it allows for more rpm safely, which implies that the compressor wants to spin faster than the turbine can happily spin at - but that is a number which we are not given... obviously going off the compressor map will result in rpm skyrocketing to try and move any more air as compressor efficiency plummets but surely the intention of the 9174 isn't to encourage running the compressor into uncharted territory?

Clarification would be awesome :)

 

4 hours ago, Lithium said:

This is kind of a good point which I've been meaning to ask @Full-Race Geoff...  or anyone who has found anything, I've never seen any official Borg Warner documentation on the maximum recommended turbine speed for any of their EFR range - same goes the Garrett range?!

They both have the rpm lines on compressor maps, but there is nothing stated to indicate that any of those imply a maximum rpm - which from all I can tell is treated like a single magic number.  Is there any information available we can refer to?  There has been much noise made about how risky it is to go past the max rpm of any of these turbochargers but without that max rpm I feel awkward sometimes bringing it up without any supplied information.  One of the justifications given for the EFR9174 existing is that it allows for more rpm safely, which implies that the compressor wants to spin faster than the turbine can happily spin at - but that is a number which we are not given... obviously going off the compressor map will result in rpm skyrocketing to try and move any more air as compressor efficiency plummets but surely the intention of the 9174 isn't to encourage running the compressor into uncharted territory?

Clarification would be awesome :)

 

I've got the EFR speed sensor on my S15 (SR20DET). Hits 29psi and tapers to ~23psi. This peaks up at ~140,000rpm (can't remember exact figure). Max turbine speed for each EFR turbo is well documented, pretty sure it's in the manual. My 7163 is 'rated' to 150,600 rpm. Full-Race website lists that the EFR 9174 turbine RPM 'max' is 125,000rpm.

 

I bought the sensor so I could push the turbo to it's top end limit on my engine and still feel a little 'safe' in that it was still within manufacturers specs.

9 minutes ago, MaximuSmurf said:

I've got the EFR speed sensor on my S15 (SR20DET). Hits 29psi and tapers to ~23psi. This peaks up at ~140,000rpm (can't remember exact figure). Max turbine speed for each EFR turbo is well documented, pretty sure it's in the manual. My 7163 is 'rated' to 150,600 rpm. Full-Race website lists that the EFR 9174 turbine RPM 'max' is 125,000rpm.

 

Awesome, obviously I am missing something then - I've tried looking and so far can't find it, can you please point me at somewhere which either 

a) Specifies specifically that the turbine speed should not exceed 150,600rpm (which is coincidentally the last rpm line on the compressor map, which doesn't have to mean that it's at all linked to max turbine wheel speed

b) Clarifies that the compressor map is constructed to sit within the confines of the maximum speed you should spin the turbine to.

?

I research these things quite thoroughly and I've not seen anything beyond the Full-Race website's "125,000rpm" limit mentioned - that is the only time I've seen a limit mentioned, and it doesn't refer to any Borg Warner official specs I've seen, and I've certainly not seen that in any of the Borg Warner spec sheets I've looked at.  If you are investing heaps of money and intend on pushing hard it really would be nice to have some more clearly communicated specs on this.

I'm not saying that they aren't there, but I have no found anything which I consider clear and exact so admit that I may have missed it but I'm certainly not the only one who hasn't seen it specifically outlined for the whole range and would benefit from that being clarified, so pointing it out would be very appreciated!

Edited by Lithium

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

    • See if you can thermal epoxy a heatsink or two onto it?
    • The other problem was one of those "oh shit we are going to die moments". Basically the high spec Q50s have a full electric steering rack, and the povo ones had a regular hydraulic rack with an electric pump.  So couple of laps into session 5 as I came into turn 2 (big run off now, happily), the dash turned into a christmas tree and the steering became super heavy and I went well off. I assumed it was a tyre failure so limped to the pits, but everything was OK. But....the master warning light was still on so I checked the DTCs and saw – C13E6 “Heat Protection”. Yes, that bloody steering rack computer sitting where the oil cooler should be has its own sensors and error logic, and decided I was using the steering wheel too much. I really appreciated the helpful information in the manual (my bold) POSSIBLE CAUSE • Continuing the overloading steering (Sports driving in the circuit etc,) “DATA MONITOR” >> “C/M TEMPERATURE”. The rise of steering force motor internal temperature caused the protection function to operate. This is not a system malfunction. INSPECTION END So, basically the electric motor in the steering rack got to 150c, and it decided to shut down without warning for my safety. Didn't feel safe. Short term I'll see if I can duct some air to that motor (the engine bay is sealed pretty tight). Long term, depending on how often this happens, I'll look into swapping the povo spec electric/hydraulic rack in. While the rack should be fine the power supply to the pump will be a pain and might be best to deal with it when I add a PDM.
    • And finally, 2 problems I really need to sort.  Firstly as Matt said the auto trans is not happy as it gets hot - I couldn't log the temps but the gauge showed 90o. On the first day I took it out back in Feb, because the coolant was getting hot I never got to any auto trans issues; but on this day by late session 3 and then really clearly in 4 and 5 as it got hotter it just would not shift up. You can hear the issue really clearly at 12:55 and 16:20 on the vid. So the good news is, literally this week Ecutek finally released tuning for the jatco 7 speed. I'll have a chat to Racebox and see what they can do electrically to keep it cooler and to get the gears, if anything. That will likely take some R&D and can only really happen on track as it never gets even warm with road use. I've also picked up some eye wateringly expensive Redline D6 ATF to try, it had the highest viscosity I could find at 100o so we will see if that helps (just waiting for some oil pan gaskets so I can change it properly). If neither of those work I need to remove the coolant/trans interwarmer and the radiator cooler and go to an external cooler....somewhere.....(goodbye washer reservoir?), and if that fails give up on this mad idea and wait for Nissan to release the manual 400R
    • So, what else.... Power. I don't know what it is making because I haven't done a post tune dyno run yet; I will when I get a chance. It was 240rwkw dead stock. Conclusion from the day....it does not need a single kw more until I sort some other stuff. It comes on so hard that I could hear the twin N1 turbos on the R32 crying, and I just can't use what it has around a tight track with the current setup. Brakes. They are perfect. Hit them hard all day and they never felt like having an issue; you can see in the video we were making ground on much lighter cars on better tyres under brakes. They are standard (red sport) calipers, standard size discs in DBA5000 2 piece, Winmax pads and Motul RBF600 fluid, all from Matty at Racebrakes Sydney. Keeping in mind the car is more powerful than my R32 and weighs 1780, he clearly knows his shit. Suspension. This is one of the first areas I need to change. It has electronically controlled dampers from factory, but everything is just way too soft for track work even on the hardest setting (it is nice when hustling on country roads though). In particular it rolls into oversteer mid corner and pitches too much under hard braking so it becomes unstable eg in the turn 1 kink I need to brake early, turn through the kink then brake again so I don't pirouette like an AE86. I need to get some decent shocks with matched springs and sway bars ASAP, even if it is just a v1 setup until I work out a proper race/rally setup later. Tyres. I am running Yoko A052 in 235/45/18 all round, because that was what I could get in approximately the right height on wheels I had in the shed (Rays/Nismo 18x8 off the old Leaf actually!). As track tyres they are pretty poor; I note GTSBoy recently posted a porker comparo video including them where they were about the same as AD09.....that is nothing like a top line track tyre. I'll start getting that sorted but realistically I should get proper sized wheels first (likely 9.5 +38 front and 11 +55 at the rear, so a custom order, and I can't rotate them like the R32), then work out what the best tyre option is. BTW on that, Targa Tas had gone to road tyres instead of semi slicks now so that is a whole other world of choices to sort. Diff. This is the other thing that urgently needs to be addressed. It left massive 1s out of the fish hook all day, even when I was trying not too (you can also hear it reving on the video, and see the RPM rising too fast compared to speed in the data). It has an open diff that Infiniti optimistically called a B-LSD for "Brake Limited Slip Diff". It does good straight line standing start 11s but it is woeful on the track. Nismo seem to make a 2 way for it.
    • Also, I logged some data from the ECU for each session (mostly oil pressures and various temps, but also speed, revs etc, can't believe I forgot accelerator position). The Ecutek data loads nicely to datazap, I got good data from sessions 2, 3 and 4: https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-2?log=0&data=7 https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-3?log=0&data=6 https://datazap.me/u/duncanhandleyhgeconsultingcomau/250813-wakefield-session-4?log=0&data=6 Each session is cut into 3 files but loaded together, you can change between them in the top left. As the test sessions are mostly about the car, not me, I basically start by checking the oil pressure (good, or at least consistent all day). These have an electrically controlled oil pump which targets 25psi(!) at low load and 50 at high. I'm running a much thicker oil than recommended by nissan (they said 0w20, I'm running 10w40) so its a little higher. The main thing is that it doesn't drop too far, eg in the long left hand fish hook, or under brakes so I know I'm not getting oil surge. Good start. Then Oil and Coolant temp, plus intercooler and intake temps, like this: Keeping in mind ambient was about 5o at session 2, I'd say the oil temp is good. The coolant temp as OK but a big worry for hot days (it was getting to 110 back in Feb when it was 35o) so I need to keep addressing that. The water to air intercooler is working totally backwards where we get 5o air in the intake, squish/warm it in the turbos (unknown temp) then run it through the intercoolers which are say 65o max in this case, then the result is 20o air into the engine......the day was too atypical to draw a conclusion on that I think, in the united states of freedom they do a lot of upsizing the intercooler and heat exchanger cores to get those temps down but they were OK this time. The other interesting (but not concerning) part for me was the turbo speed vs boost graph: I circled an example from the main straight. With the tune boost peaks at around 18psi but it deliberately drops to about 14psi at redline because the turbos are tiny - they choke at high revs and just create more heat than power if you run them hard all the way. But you can also see the turbo speed at the same time; it raises from about 180,000rpm to 210,000rpm which the boost falls....imagine the turbine speed if they held 18psi to redline. The wastegates are electrically controlled so there is a heap of logic about boost target, actual boost, delta etc etc but it all seems to work well
×
×
  • Create New...