Borg Warner EFR Series Turbo's V 2.0

[usmair]

ill be cramming 37psi down my 9180s throat at GTR festival 

more boost, boost by gear and a sequential should increase the prior 141mph

9.8s pass is the goal

lets see

[reaper]

12 hours ago, usmair said:

ill be cramming 37psi down my 9180s throat at GTR festival 

more boost, boost by gear and a sequential should increase the prior 141mph

9.8s pass is the goal

lets see

Stock bottom end all over the dragway

[usmair]

34 minutes ago, reaper said:

Stock bottom end all over the dragway

I've been thinking that for the last 2 years - yet here we are

[SimonR32]

On 7/15/2019 at 3:56 PM, R32 TT said:

I wanted to 'surprise you'..   and now because I couldn't keep my mouth shut..  I've gone and ruined everything.

.......................You know about the Samsonas though yeah?

PS..   I can't believe you called me a mole...  

You're too sensitive for a box that loud!

[Lithium]

Finally, some testing of an EFR9280 and a whole heap of data from it compared to the EFR9180.

Overall it seems really encouraging compared to the EFR9180, but it seems pretty conclusive that even the 1.45a/r hotside is too restrictive to support the huge flow of the new 74mm compressor on a 6 cylinder.  The same car they stopped at 116,000rpm with the EFR9180, but with the EFR9280 they didn't reach 116,000rpm but got too much exhaust back pressure. Still, wouldn't be a bad unit!   

http://speed.academy/how-aem-performance-electronics-saved-my-900-whp-engine/3/?fbclid=IwAR31Gi1JxLfS38HAS9-CyaOwlcoNsqnxzwBHVXWtCfGhosCJhzY9-m1kvwA

Also, a dyno plot from a 1.05a/r EFR9280 on a 2JZGTE:

 

 

Edited July 16, 2019 by Lithium

[R32 TT]

4 hours ago, Lithium said:

The same car they stopped at 116,000rpm with the EFR9180, but with the EFR9280 they didn't reach 116,000rpm but got too much exhaust back pressure. Still, wouldn't be a bad unit!   

I didn't read it that way..     I read it as they made the same boost as the 9180 without requiring to go to 116,000rpm.

Also - why do you think 1.5:1 is 'too much' backpressure?   For a Circuit car knocking out near 900hp at the wheels and coming on down as low as it is - I would have thought that would be ok?      Maybe not for a drag car - but that's not really why you buy a twinscroll...

Edited July 17, 2019 by R32 TT

[Lithium]

On 08/09/2017 at 4:21 PM, MaximuSmurf said:

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.

 

On 08/09/2017 at 4:45 PM, MaximuSmurf said:

Just grabbed these off the GCG website.

EFR 8374 - 127,000 RPM

EFR 9174 - 125,000 RPM (taken from Full-Race website)

EFR 9180 - 116,000 RPM

 

 

On 08/09/2017 at 5:12 PM, Lithium said:

Those are clearly pulled from the compressor maps - unless there is info which answers what I was asking (ie, that the compressor map factors in turbine speed) however if you look at the EFR6258 and EFR6758 ratings, those speeds are clearly not to do with turbine speeds given they run the exact same turbine.   

I'm talking about something actually official and definitive, from Borg Warner and stating that it is about the *turbine*.

Just to dredge a topic that comes up a bit, I have gone around in circles MANY times with this kind of thing with people regurgitating the "max turbine speed" of EFR thing and while I was pretty confident of my theory, I finally asked Borg Warner techs directly for confirmation on what I feel has been long provided misinformation by people selling EFRs.

This is straight from the horses mouth:

Both the 9174 and 9180 has the same compressor stage and is technically limited by the compressor wheel. You can run the 74mm turbine wheel faster than the 80mm, but in both cases the compressor wheel is what determines the limit. 

Which matches up exactly what I've been saying.  Yes, the 74mm turbine can be spun faster than the 80mm turbine - but that is irrelevant as the max rpm for the compressor is actually lower, and that is what all of the turbos should be limited to.

So the rough "maximum speeds" for the EFR range based on the BW UredC (560m/s tip velocity) numbers are:

EFR 6258 - 173,000 RPM

EFR 6758 - 160,000 RPM

EFR 7163 - 151,000 RPM

EFR 7670 - 141,000 RPM

EFR 8374 - 129,000 RPM

EFR 8474 - 127,000 RPM

EFR 9174 - 118,000 RPM 

EFR 9180 - 118,000 RPM

EFR 9274 - 116,000 RPM

EFR 9280 - 116,000 RPM 

The max turbine speed for all of these turbos are higher, so there isn't much need to publish max turbine speeds as if you are hitting them then you are already pushing the turbo outside of it's recommended operating range.  The numbers here however are not going to be hugely aggressive, so drifting a little past them is unlikely to cause an issue - it's where you let the turbo speed spiral out of control where issues are likely to occur and I'd guess there is a good chance that most overspeed related failures are to do with boost leaks.

Edited July 23, 2019 by Lithium

[Lithium]

On 15/07/2019 at 11:51 PM, usmair said:

ill be cramming 37psi down my 9180s throat at GTR festival 

more boost, boost by gear and a sequential should increase the prior 141mph

9.8s pass is the goal

lets see

Good luck, man.  Hope everything holds together! 

[Lithium]

A mate has gone for a 1.05a/r T4 EFR8474 for his R32 GTR.. going on the side of his built RB26, running Kelford 274/10.5mm split duration cams and Hypertune manifolds.    Will update with results when that is done, hopefully before summer.

 

[Lithium]

Not sure if FB links work or appropriate but I'll give it a go...

 

[burn4005]

im starting to worry about these turbos, not a single result anywhere on the internet for over 6 months!

 

lots of gunnas though! (including me lol)

[Lithium]

7 minutes ago, burn4005 said:

im starting to worry about these turbos, not a single result anywhere on the internet for over 6 months!

 

lots of gunnas though! (including me lol)

For some reason I thought I have posted a couple in here.  There aren't many but people have run them.   So far I have not seen much to convince me that the EFR9280 is worth singing about, the results I have seen seem to consistently show them as being laggier boost threshold wise (however transient response apparently at least equal, I will post the BMW article on the EFR9180 -> EFR9280 upgrade) and none of them that I have seen have made more power than the EFR9180s could.

The few people I am aware of with EFR8474s however all seem happy, they seem actually to spool at least as well and definitely make more power.  I hopefully have shared enough stuff in here transparently to make it clear I will share good or bad regardless of my preference or expectation to make it clear I am pretty unbiased - unfortunately there are results I've seen for the EFR8474 which I can't share directly due to the owner wanting to keep it quiet (that is the case for more than just this one) however I *do* know of one which was running an EFR8374 and is now running an EFR8474.    It's on a "good" RB, runs a 1.05a/r hot side and it picked up nearly 10% more power at 23psi on E85 - and it was reaching full boost slightly earlier too, more or less in proportion with what was seen on the prototype EFR8474 that was tested on "Ernie's EVO" a couple of years ago.

I think the EFR8474 is very much the golden child of the range, and am pretty confident results will reflect that as they creep out into the public.   The EFR9280 may still prove to be a worthwhile improvement over the EFR9180, however I am pretty sure it has more compressor than the turbine will support and that may become evident on bigger motors which use them - even with the 1.45 housing (again, check the link I provide at the end of this ramble).   I don't even know what the hell Borg Warner were thinking with the EFR9274, I'm not sure what the point of that is.   

Some pretty good data on the EFR9280 - VVT isn't dialled in properly for the EFR9280 while it was with the EFR9180 this testing which probably is selling the EFR9280 slightly short, but hard to know how much until he gets it back on the dyno.  I was going to wait until he does that before posting here, but here it is: http://speed.academy/how-aem-performance-electronics-saved-my-900-whp-engine/3/?fbclid=IwAR2vrR6KnVz4Wzm6j7Nn0F91FxQfvlskPvkZ0_r0BZgEMcySL26VSHvgurY&doing_wp_cron=1564547612.0661499500274658203125

 

 

 

[burn4005]

yea it was specifically the 8474 i was talking about lack of results, I had assumed they weren't performing as nobody seemed to be bragging, I hadn't considered people being coy about good results (ie Papadakis posting about getting one but then hearing nothing further about how it went). Ive still only seen a dyno plot of RT/Ernies one from 2016 I think, otherwise i would have pulled the trigger already!

Anecdotally it looks like they're proving to be a solid performer over the 8374 (and reading between the lines of your post they are definately meeting expectations amounst the hush-hush crowd).

looks like I need to get off my ass and order one then!

 

[Lithium]

11 minutes ago, burn4005 said:

yea it was specifically the 8474 i was talking about lack of results, I had assumed they weren't performing as nobody seemed to be bragging, I hadn't considered people being coy about good results (ie Papadakis posting about getting one but then hearing nothing further about how it went). Ive still only seen a dyno plot of RT/Ernies one from 2016 I think, otherwise i would have pulled the trigger already!

Anecdotally it looks like they're proving to be a solid performer over the 8374 (and reading between the lines of your post they are definately meeting expectations amounst the hush-hush crowd).

looks like I need to get off my ass and order one then!

 

There are very few results that I know of, if you aren't in a rush then I suspect there will be a few coming through in the next few months as they are just builds in the process where the turbo was acquired while there is still much left to do.  I will definitely post anything I can if I get some results which are ok to share.  

[Kinkstaah]

I think it's just the nature of these turbos and the people that buy them - They aren't a bolt on affair and the people who decide to research a cutting edge turbo are rarely cutting corners in other areas... which means a lot of fabrication, and time, and cost, usually on built motors, on cars that are rarely driven... and so on.

[R32 TT]

I've just been playing with video and Motec Logging to overlay some gauges onto my videos.  Now the hard work is done, should be easy to add this for future videos.   

So here is my 8374 on 3.0L at a recent event.  Running around 23psi. (260kpa)

Will be good to get the 8474 on for comparo in some weeks - will definitively do a back to back test.

(I should add that we do have boost by rpm - so we are not trying to make full boost at 3500rpm, hence you'll see a more gradual rise in boost with revs)

 

 

Edited August 1, 2019 by R32 TT

[R32 TT]

You can see on this Dyno sheet how we are bring on boost gradually. (for those wondering why its not snapping to full boost immediately)

[burn4005]

that looks like a much friendlier torque curve as far as drivability goes. looks more like a supercharger delivery.

 

[Piggaz]

https://turbosource.com/products/turbosource-variable-a-r-efr-turbine-housing

[burn4005]

interesting. I remember borg had their own prototype on display a few years ago. was on an EFR turbo starting with a 7 though. would be cool to see this in action. I wonder if they're buying EFR housings from Borg to modify or if they are casting their own (investment casting stainless is no small feat!)

Edited August 2, 2019 by burn4005