Borg Warner EFR Series Turbo's V 2.0

[Dose Pipe Sutututu]

1 hour ago, sneakey pete said:

Not sure why mines 700rpm later with the same cams 

Guess more tuning will help a little.

You can always pull out timing so the EGTs are hot "turn" the turbo on, but torque with low timing at that load point vs. the torque with less boost at that load point with more timing could be drastically different.

 

[Piggaz]

7 minutes ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

You can always pull out timing so the EGTs are hot "turn" the turbo on, but torque with low timing at that load point vs. the torque with less boost at that load point with more timing could be drastically different.

 

Bugger boost levels. Whatever gives the most Nm. 300 Nm and 2 psi is better than 150 Nm and 17 psi. But Boost is higher so must be better yeah? ?

 

[Dose Pipe Sutututu]

16 minutes ago, Piggaz said:

Bugger boost levels. Whatever gives the most Nm. 300 Nm and 2 psi is better than 150 Nm and 17 psi. But Boost is higher so must be better yeah? ?

 

hahahah depends on the user, some want instant boost for the head snaps, some what linear and flat torque to minimize wheel spin and get good lap times

Customer is always right!

[usmair]

For anyone who is interested

8374 with 1.05 rear on standard 2.6 engine on e85

Tyres with 275 Mickey Thompsons.

10.7 @ 133mph in Sydney summer. Was running 28psi on the night.

Will go again in winter and see how much of a difference the MPH makes.

 

[Lithium]

5 minutes ago, Dose Pipe Sutututu said:

hahahah depends on the user, some want instant boost for the head snaps, some what linear and flat torque to minimize wheel spin and get good lap times

Customer is always right!

Soft timing doesn't make the boost come on instantly or even necessarily much or any faster time vs psi, but yeah it does make for a more violent torque transition on spool which some people like.  Have to admit I've done similar things with valve timing etc where people wanted a slower car that they liked the feel of more.  Nothing wrong with that, either.

Edited January 19, 2018 by Lithium

[r32-25t]

8 minutes ago, usmair said:

For anyone who is interested

8374 with 1.05 rear on standard 2.6 engine on e85

Tyres with 275 Mickey Thompsons.

10.7 @ 133mph in Sydney summer. Was running 28psi on the night.

Will go again in winter and see how much of a difference the MPH makes.

 

What tyres were you running cause that’s a pretty good 60ft 

[usmair]

2 minutes ago, r32-25t said:

What tyres were you running cause that’s a pretty good 60ft 

fairly old 275 MTs all around. 

2step launch did the trick

[Griffin]

I'm just fitting a 26/30 in a cefiro. It's an r34 head that's been reco'd,  stock low km rb30 bottom end with head studs and new oil pump. 

I have a 9174 ewg 1.05 and twin 40 mm gates I was going to put on my gtr. 

Should I fit this to the cefiro now and buy another one for gtr later?

Is it overkill for a stock bottom end  as I was thinking 20 psi Max on this combo on p98 as I have the fuel system now to support 550 whp? 

Not sure how far to push the 2630.

 

 

[sneakey pete]

4 hours ago, Piggaz said:

How modified is your head?

How big is your exhaust? 

Where are the cams set? (Mine are 0/0) 

Finalise the tune and see what happens.

Whats holding the final tune up? It’s been ages!

 

 

1mm OS valves, 3.5" all the way, 0/0 also. 

In terms of getting the tune done, the usual. Work, Life, the oil squirter coming out the sump. those kind of things. Hopefully get closer to it by march.

[R377]

On 1/19/2018 at 1:51 PM, usmair said:

For anyone who is interested

8374 with 1.05 rear on standard 2.6 engine on e85

Tyres with 275 Mickey Thompsons.

10.7 @ 133mph in Sydney summer. Was running 28psi on the night.

Will go again in winter and see how much of a difference the MPH makes.

 

 

Thats a huge MPH - i always thought low to mid 120s would be a high 10

[Dose Pipe Sutututu]

1 hour ago, R377 said:

 

Thats a huge MPH - i always thought low to mid 120s would be a high 10

modern DSG, AWD, Launch Enabled cars yes - older things like our dinosaurs would need 130~140MPH to get it to boogie

[usmair]

this is a long shot but i may as well ask the question and get thoughts of the guys on here.

Currently have a 8374 w 1.05 rear on a custom CRG manifold. The manifold was designed specifically with my turbo specs in mind.

I'm contemplating upgrading to a 9180 w 1.45 rear (with eventual goal and having a stroked motor), however at this stage the upgrade only seems viable if the turbo is a straight swap.

The concern is the 9180 with the bigger rear housing may not fit on to the current manifold.

I wanted to check if anyone on here has had experience with both 1.05 and 1.45 rear housings and is able to comment if the bigger rear would work with current manifold. Don't really want to dick around with new manifolds etc etc so won't proceed if it is not a straight swap.

Appreciate it is not a straightforward answer, however thought I'd check anyway.

Cheers

[acsplit]

After seeing the size difference you really need to measure it ( won't be that hard). the dimensions should be online

[Piggaz]

It’s quite big. ?

[usmair]

3 minutes ago, Piggaz said:

 

[usmair]

woah! yeh dont think it'll fit haha

 

[Piggaz]

I believe the dump pipe has to move back 7-8 mm. Going to dummy fit mine soon. Seems like if you want to use all of the available compressor in both the 8374 and 9180 (moreso) the 1.45 is needed.

[usmair]

43 minutes ago, Piggaz said:

I believe the dump pipe has to move back 7-8 mm. Going to dummy fit mine soon. Seems like if you want to use all of the available compressor in both the 8374 and 9180 (moreso) the 1.45 is needed.

what about your manifold though? will it fit such a larger rear?

[Piggaz]

Just now, usmair said:

what about your manifold though? will it fit such a larger rear?

I’ve been told by 6 boost it will fit.

 

[Dose Pipe Sutututu]

Bring it to JEM, Sonny from Turbo1 (who works there) should easily be able to cut off the flange and modify the manifold to fit.

Or just buy a new one lol.