Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Butters said:

Don't think the g35-1050 will get there ?   

I am pretty close(720rear) on 26psi with scope for more boost and rpm.  

Very happy with the repsonse on a 2.6 with vcam, on a 3.2 it would be amazing. 

800-850 is a pretty big step up from where you are, imho you'd need to go up an exhaust housing size (or two) to support the extra power - especially on a 600cc larger donk.   That's going to take a lot of steam out of the response, and while it's not going to be rubbish still... it imho will shift it outside of EFR league (well, further outside of).    So I wasn't saying it's rubbish or not a valid option, just when we're talking about an EFR8474 then imho it's definitely a step backwards.   That's because EVERYTHING is a step backwards, nothing against the G35.

 

 

Edited by Lithium
1 minute ago, Lithium said:

800-850 is a pretty big step up from where you are, imho you'd need to go up an exhaust housing size (or two) to support the extra power - especially on a 600cc larger donk.   That's going to take a lot of steam out of the response,

Agree on a bigger motor a bigger rear would be the go.     I do wish I had a built bottom end to throw the extra 10psi at it to see what it would do. 

 

3 minutes ago, Lithium said:

That's because EVERYTHING is a step backwards, nothing against the G35.

It's very tempting to test this out. You can get them in a vband flange turbine side which would make it near direct swap. 

1 minute ago, Butters said:

It's very tempting to test this out. You can get them in a vband flange turbine side which would make it near direct swap. 

It wouldn't really be a valid test, my statements assume someone is running a native twin scroll housing.   Any observations I (and pretty much anyone else here) offer relating to EFRs assume twin scroll housings.  Any data for them and suggestions relating to them apply to the housings they come with.   

For it to be realistic it'd have to be a typical G35 setup and typical EFR setup, matched appropriately for the car they're going to be running on.

58 minutes ago, Butters said:

Agree on a bigger motor a bigger rear would be the go.     I do wish I had a built bottom end to throw the extra 10psi at it to see what it would do. 

 

It's very tempting to test this out. You can get them in a vband flange turbine side which would make it near direct swap. 

this is what I'll be doing - G35 - 1050 with 1.01 v band rear with rb27 and 35 psi would think be around mid/high 800 hubs still think

  • Like 1
  • 1 month later...

Something else to consider with all the 9180 vs 8474 talk is that the 80mm turbine is the biggest culprit for flying out the back of the exhaust. The 74mm wheel is certainly the more "proven reliable" option. Even whilst over speeding.... But obviously if kept happy they are proven to be of OEM reliability. 

Just an update. I have the 8474 on the engine now (8374 previously)

It's about 100-200rpm laggier and makes an absolute sh$t tonne more power up top. The 8374 topped out at 650rwhp at 30psi. 

This 8474 is just f$c%ing dumb. At 26psi, it's making well and truly over 750rwhp and just keeps going. It doesn't fall over. 

RB28 with Vcam (264/272), 6boost manifold, 3.5inch exhaust, E85, Emtron KV8 etc etc 

  • Like 2
1 hour ago, The Mafia said:

Just an update. I have the 8474 on the engine now (8374 previously)

It's about 100-200rpm laggier and makes an absolute sh$t tonne more power up top. The 8374 topped out at 650rwhp at 30psi. 

This 8474 is just f$c%ing dumb. At 26psi, it's making well and truly over 750rwhp and just keeps going. It doesn't fall over. 

RB28 with Vcam (264/272), 6boost manifold, 3.5inch exhaust, E85, Emtron KV8 etc etc 

Well that's exciting news!  Can't wait to finally test mine out at some point!

Do you have a dyno chart?  Love to see her curves. 😍

16 hours ago, burn4005 said:

goddamit. now I've got to upgrade.

only question is Iron or Aluminium CHRA

I also pondered the same when ordering, but couldnt be bothered, so went iron. Mines a 9180, and its not really heavy either. 

21 hours ago, burn4005 said:

goddamit. now I've got to upgrade.

only question is Iron or Aluminium CHRA

GCG said there is about 5kgs difference, and no difference in strength. I went the iron core and haven't had any issues. Wasn't heavy either. Iron would handle heat better though I would say?

21 hours ago, Shoota_77 said:

Well that's exciting news!  Can't wait to finally test mine out at some point!

Do you have a dyno chart?  Love to see her curves. 😍

I don't unfortunately, I'm just looking at the calculated HP / torque in the Emtron which is about 5-10hp within the dyno readings. 

Plus, I have ID1300cc injectors running at 4bar so about ~1600cc and they were hitting 95% duty on E85. That is a dead giveaway to output. 

The 8374 at 30psi was only at 82% duty.

  • Like 2
11 minutes ago, The Mafia said:

I don't unfortunately, I'm just looking at the calculated HP / torque in the Emtron which is about 5-10hp within the dyno readings. 

Plus, I have ID1300cc injectors running at 4bar so about ~1600cc and they were hitting 95% duty on E85. That is a dead giveaway to output. 

The 8374 at 30psi was only at 82% duty.

A screen shot of boost / rpm log showing where target boost is hit would probably be pretty meaningful, I've already posted dyno plots of these things pushing 800+hp to the hubs on a 3litre - the flow potential of them shouldn't really be in question at this stage, but how it comes on with an RB28 would be pretty good data to see.   There is always talk about how good these come up between gears etc, but not that much data for people and I can fully see why people develop an attitude that the enthusiasm for these turbos are just fanboism, as opposed to earned respect for being that good.

  • Like 1
On 01/11/2022 at 3:31 PM, burn4005 said:

goddamit. now I've got to upgrade.

only question is Iron or Aluminium CHRA

Aluminium. It weighs 5kg without a turbine housing. Also Aluminium dissipates heat quicker so probably better on bearings etc. Also it won't rust and look old and Daggy like an iron core will eventually 

On 01/11/2022 at 7:21 PM, Shyboy said:

That sounds exciting👍Any graph ? I should get mine back in few weeks 

About time lol! How long ago was your car at my shop? 😆

Look forward to seeing it! 

I also wanna hear my exhaust! 😎

I would never have bought or recommended an EFR9280 for this kind of power level (helped by the fact I've seen less impressive results from them), there is not much info on exactly how hard this one is being pushed, but I still feel like this result is worth knowing about if you hadn't already given GameOn aren't unheard of or anything.

EFR9280 on a VVTi 2JZGTE making 1130hp @ hubs with respectable spool is a solid result no matter how you cut it

https://fb.watch/gA5azNc8fg/

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

    • If as it's stalling, the fuel pressure rises, it's saying there's less vacuum in the intake manifold. This is pretty typical of an engine that is slowing down.   While typically is agree it sounds fuel related, it really sounds fuel/air mixture related. Since the whole system has been refurbished, including injectors, pump, etc, it's likely we've altered how well the system is delivering fuel. If someone before you has messed with the IACV because it needed fiddling with as the fuel system was dieing out, we need to readjust it back. Getting things back to factory spec everywhere, is what's going to help the entire system. So if it idles at 400rpm with no IACV, that needs raising. Getting factory air flow back to normal will help us get everything back in spec, and likely help chase down any other issues. Back on IACV, if the base idle (no IACV plugged in) is too far out, it's a lot harder for the ECU to control idle. The IACV duty cycle causes non linear variations in reality. When I've tuned the idle valves in the past, you need to keep it in a relatively narrow window on aftermarket ecus to stop them doing wild dances. It also means if your base idle is too low, the valve needs to open too much, and then the smallest % change ends up being a huge variation.
    • I guess one thing that might be wrong is the manifold pressure.  It is a constant -5.9 and never moves even under 100% throttle and load.  I would expect it to atleast go to 0 correct?  It's doing this with the OEM MAP as well as the ECU vacuum sensor. When trying to tune the base map under load the crosshairs only climb vertically with RPM, but always in the -5.9 column.
    • AHHHH gotchaa, I'll do that once I am home again. I tried doing the harness with the multimeter but it seems the car needed a jump, there was no power when it was in the "ON" position. Not sure if I should use car battery jump starter or if its because the stuff that has been disconnect the car just does send power.
    • 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. 
×
×
  • Create New...