Borg Warner EFR Series Turbo's V 2.0

[Shoota_77]

4 hours ago, brian_s30z said:

Nah, I doubt it. I already see the meme of the disappointed kid looking at paper (car meme is dyno sheet). “Spends $4k to improve response by 1,000rpm+, only gets 400rpm difference.” 

 

You're not sprinkling fairy dust on it, they're mechanical modifications that are proven to work. The variable turbo side of it isn't proven as a specific product yet but the concept is to make it a smaller turbo (which is well proven to add response) until you need it to be a bigger turbo once its spooled up.

Even if it was "only" 400 rpm lower in the rev range that will make a massive difference to your response. Arse dyno can definitely feel the difference! 

[Full-Race Geoff]

i have a set of the borgwarner VTV housings if anyone is wanting to do a similar setup.  They did not work well for me in twinscroll configuration, despite my initial expectation.  I hope turbosource has got it figured out, but it definitely does work in open volute/singlescroll 

[taijohnsen]

Hi Geoff, can you explain in more detail what did and didn't work well? Are these for the 74mm turbine? And how much would you want for one?

[RB335]

My EFR9180 and EFR8474 on 2.8 with Vcam Step II / ex HKS 272 8.7

Absolutely visceral to drive 

 

 

Edited October 29, 2020 by RB335

[Mick_o]

17 hours ago, RB335 said:

My EFR9180 and EFR8474 on 2.8 with Vcam Step II / ex HKS 272 8.7

Absolutely visceral to drive 

 

 

So which is which? 

[Mick_o]

Here's my 7670 with a little more boost added in. We are at 129K now. Pretty much going to leave it where it is now. 

Highest power I have seen here in Oz is 418kw ALL IN (on an evo too) that power was made on 235s. My car runs 265s and I have actually back to back tested my car from 235s to a 265 on the exact same tyre (Hankook RS4's) and I lost almost 15kw between the 2 sizes lol.  

[R32 TT]

1 hour ago, Mick_o said:

So which is which? 

Surely the bigger number is the 9180...  (but yes, that could be wrong).      I bet the 8474 must be different to drive though.

[Mick_o]

1 hour ago, R32 TT said:

Surely the bigger number is the 9180...  (but yes, that could be wrong).      I bet the 8474 must be different to drive though.

8474 flows more than the 9180 lol 🤷‍♂️

[Piggaz]

2 hours ago, Mick_o said:

8474 flows more than the 9180 lol 🤷‍♂️

But it doesn’t exhale as much 🤷‍♂️👍😂

[RB335]

Red line is 9180, Blue line 8474.   From limited street driving I can't tell a real difference at all in most conditions, no turbo is the clear winner but im inclined to feel the 9180 better suits my engine so far.  I'll do some more testing with high lift cams and a 9280
 

Edited October 30, 2020 by RB335

[Mick_o]

15 hours ago, Piggaz said:

But it doesn’t exhale as much 🤷‍♂️👍😂

This is true lol. 

[Piggaz]

On 30/10/2020 at 12:40 AM, RB335 said:

My EFR9180 and EFR8474 on 2.8 with Vcam Step II / ex HKS 272 8.7

Absolutely visceral to drive 

 

 

At what turbine speeds? Both of those look far from “all in”. Considering an 8374 will piss in 600 whp, why are a 8474 and 9180 which flow far more only touching those numbers? 

Have you you got a decent exhaust on it yet or does it still have that 2.1 inch thing you said was on it a while ago? If that has not been addressed you are wasting your time.

[Piggaz]

So Benny carried out a turbine housing touch test. After a 20 minute drive he touched the compressor housing, that was cool enough and then dropped a finger on the turbine housing. Even the 1.05 T4 was hot. This was the result. 
 

🤣

[BakemonoRicer]

Lucky I didn’t end up in the ER

can confirm it wasn’t as Luke warm as I thought it was gonna be 🤣

[Ben C34]

Wow you are special 🧠

[etang789]

On 10/29/2020 at 9:40 PM, RB335 said:

My EFR9180 and EFR8474 on 2.8 with Vcam Step II / ex HKS 272 8.7

Absolutely visceral to drive 

 

 

Awesome figures! Im glad I got EFR 8474 as well !

[Timmaz300]

I should have 9274 1.05ar results in the next few months. My 3 liter build is nearing completion.

[taijohnsen]

Semi off topic, but Geoff. Is there any way if getting some of the EFR 3D models that I have been seeing used (SEMA shows, Papadakis exhaust manifold video etc) I have searched, but found nothing really. 

 

I have no commercial interest with it, I'd just love to print one

[burn4005]

14 minutes ago, taijohnsen said:

Semi off topic, but Geoff. Is there any way if getting some of the EFR 3D models that I have been seeing used (SEMA shows, Papadakis exhaust manifold video etc) I have searched, but found nothing really. 

 

I have no commercial interest with it, I'd just love to print one

you've been watching the latest papadakis manifold vid havent you!

[MotHot]

@Timmaz300 looking really good so far, keep up the good work!

 

@all: A friend of mine is collecting parts at the moment to go for about 600 (engine) hp and has snacked up a 8374 IWG.

What are the options for the wastegate actuator on the IWG EFRs?

Electronic actuator (with supra parts) as suggested in this thread in late August will probably be too expensive for him (500+ $/€ ?), because he just spent loads of money on parts. Are there even any complete kits available now or is it still "do it yourself"-style?

The OEM actuator on the EFRs are the known weakpoint on the IWG EFRs, at least thats what this thread and similar threads on other forums suggest. So I wouldn't recommend this to him. If he does go this route, he will definetely need the high boost canister, because otherwise he wouldn't even be able to reach around 15 psi?!

This leaves us with conventional aftermarket actuators, for example from turbosmart.

Twin Port is probably the way to go here, because the price difference is not that big. Right?

What about the position sensor? Is this necessary on a road car or similar to the BW turbo speed sensor (not a must, but very nice to have) or not necessary at all?

Is there a noable difference in performance between the GenV and the IWG-75 twin port turbosmart actuator?

Thanks guys 🙂

And regards from Germany!

Edited January 4, 2021 by MotHot