I'm sure your engine has loads done to it so you would best suit with a Borg Warner EFR, 8374 twin scroll, external waste gates. They're reasonably priced considering they're have serious jam and are reliable.

-Opinion

 

Thanks for answer
And what you think about Turbonetics Hurricane 7268-4 BB Sylvia? Its the cheapest, EFR8374 and GTX35R cost over 2000$ I can get Turbonetics for 1200$ And Precision for 1600$

 

The HKS TO4Z spools pretty well, it made a comfortable 700BHP on my R34.

Now running a Borg EFR9180. Bigger turbo, but spool up is defo quicker, and makes more torque at the same rpm.

I am however running an RB30 engine with a step 3 head, so the addtional capacity and flowed head will have some impact on the turbo's performance.

I'd suggest having a look at what the big power scoobies and Evos (time attack cars) are using, as those are smaller engines than the RB26, and need fast spool for this type of event?

cheers

Tal

 

The HKS TO4Z spools pretty well, it made a comfortable 700BHP on my R34.

Now running a Borg EFR9180. Bigger turbo, but spool up is defo quicker, and makes more torque at the same rpm.

I am however running an RB30 engine with a step 3 head, so the addtional capacity and flowed head will have some impact on the turbo's performance.

I'd suggest having a look at what the big power scoobies and Evos (time attack cars) are using, as those are smaller engines than the RB26, and need fast spool for this type of event?

Do you have any dyno results for it, especially a comparison with the T04Z? Any more info on how it compares with the T04Z would be awesome!

 

I will switch single soon and my choice will be BW s362 fmw.
some poeple run it on rb26 hit full boost between 4200-4500 for 600whp
and all for less than 1000$

 

EFR

Also interested in EFR results for a RB30.

Am running a T51KaiBB also step 3 head and reading results people suggesting EFRs are way to go but can't find any dyno data to support.

Regards

 

Also interested in EFR results for a RB30.

Am running a T51KaiBB also step 3 head and reading results people suggesting EFRs are way to go but can't find any dyno data to support.

Regards

RB30/26, EFR8374 IWG .92a/r twin scroll, 20psi full boost by 3400rpm, BP98 fuel. 470wkw (630whp) at the hubs
Would get more out of it with only a small reduction in lag with the EWG 1.05a/r hot side.

http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/154737-sub-boys-r32-gt-r-then-now-46.html

 

Watch this link bw efr v precision,the bw is really not worth the money


http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iVqiUhAv01c

 

How do you figure that? They put a twin scroll Borg Warner on a single scroll manifold which was intended for the Precision and yet the Borg only falls a bit short of the Precision in power and out spools the Precision? Imagine if it had a proper divided manifold.....

 

Twin scroll turbos have been proven to be more responsive even on a open scroll manifold competed to open scroll turbo on open scroll manifold. If you actually follow the link a read the full comparison it says when the precision dbb was tested it was a lot hotter and a lot more humid meaning the spool and peak power off the 6266 was effected. Let's face it the bw spooled 70rpm earlier then the 6266 is that really even worth considering? Not in my eyes, that test just shows the efr turbo range isn't as good as it's people have been lead to believe in my opinion

 

In your opinion, sure... But in terms of my logic, having a twin scroll housing with a single scroll manifold is going to be hurting it's power and spool versus a twin scroll manifold. If it had a single scroll housing I suspect it would perform equal or better on both fronts. It is disappointing that the comparison there is shown and taken as worth something as really it is all speculation and the only way it would be fair is if it was a twin scroll Precision turbo on a twin scroll manifold, or a single scroll EFR.

 

Yes I no what your saying but any twin scroll turbo performs better no matter if it's a open scroll manifold or not. It would have been a better comparison if the efr was single scroll but then I would imagine the precision would have performed even better.

 

Graphs only show half the story of my EFR, the response of the turbo is awesome, it seems to produce boost from near on idle

 

I'm no expert so I'm only going on the test I see on the net, in your case have you tried a precision or garrett with your engine spec as it is now? I'm not biased in any way I don't think any one will go wrong with any of them weather it's a pte, gtx or efr but the gains and differences are marginal between all of them in my opinion and unless you try yourself you can never actually say for sure. That's then why a dyno graph is all you can go by.

 

If you're able to log then you could test how long it takes for the boost to come.
Say you start the log and your at 6k rpm with 0% throttle. Then floor it and see how many milliseconds it takes to reach full boost.

There you compare responsiveness.

 

GTX4088R

 

very useful discussion as I am trying to figure out which single turbo to go with also - for a good response and more power

 

Well I'm aiming for 700bhp I have a garrett gt4094r what's having a billet wheel fitted so basically will be a gtx4094

 

I get 6266 DBB .84 divided
It seems to have full boost near 4000 rpm ( user Natbrat300 have it and it's very impressive )

 

Joe if you can get a turbonetics much cheaper why not do that then? I'm sure the difference in cost is not that noticeable in performance. But in a perfect world you'd be asking for the more expensive turbos (based on wants). I run EFR turbos but am not sold on the fact that they're better. Still today there are no many straight up comparisons or much actual results that people can use against say Honeywell turbos

 

wow! single it is then! although efrs are quite expensive... just seen turbonetics on ebay are the cheapest being new...

 

any single with a 62-64mm compressor inducer

 

i purchased the EFR 9180 on my stroked rb30 cost me 1500+ vat
so with the fitting kit and delivery was just under 2k.

cant wait to try it with the v-cam setup hopefully great responce

 

How much power you aiming for mate?

 

around 700 torque
that would be great for now

 

I'm sure that will be easily acheivable. How much power will that take 800-850?

 

tbh i dont know, but the heads all ported and polished with oversized valves.
so should pull nice and hard

 

if you want to make over 800 hp with an efr 9180 you will need alot of boost over 2 bar im sure.

heres some plots anyway


BorgWarner EFR 9180 Turbo - Full-Race.com

 

the evo in the plots in the link is a 2.2 motor.
at 1.4 bar it made 600 hp, 1.9 bar it made 707 hp and at 2.5 bar it made 808 hp !

it needs a lot of boost evidently to move the air but from those results doesn't seem to loose any efficiency as the boost gets right upto 2.5 bar with 100hp increase with every 0.5 bar of boost, I wonder if there still as efficient up at 3 bar ?

 

my -5s on a 2.6 did feel a little lazy, made good power though at just 1.2 bar of boost





as long as it was kept in boost threshold though it was very responsive.

 

You've seen a 4cylinder engine designed originally to develop punchy midrange power fitted with a 900hp+ turbo and surmised that needing a lot of boost to make 800hp is because of the turbo?

If you are going to be making authoritative statements on how a turbo is performing you should look at the compressor maps at least... Or for amusements sake have you pondered what kind of rpm and VE a 2.2 litre would need to spin up 800hp on under 2.5bar in petrol? At a quick glance it looks like on the right engine it should be capable of hitting 800bhp at anything over 1.3bar... Or less depending on the fuel.

 

whatever the comp maps say that's 2 results now one on a 2.2 and one on an rb30 this side of the pond that have needed a lot of boost to make the numbers, the evo made 707 at 2 bar, the rb30 made 770 at 2 bar im almost certain my gt40 would make 770 at 2 bar on an rb30, im only 60 hp off now with my rb27 at 1.5 bar !

also that evo engine is built by mad and will be built for the task at hand and to get the best from that turbo.


id like to see an engine capable of 800 hp with an efr 9180 at 1.3 bar ....

 

lag is not cool, neither is a turbo that has to be taken to such a PR to flow the highest amount of air mass, that requires everything to be up to the task, hoses, map sensor, etc.
I would prefer a comp map that flows good on a lower PR. on which turbo that is? I dont know... I see pt doesnt show comp maps but most people take it to high pressures to flow enough, this efr to 2bar is on the edge for my liking...

 

lag is not cool, neither is a turbo that has to be taken to such a PR to flow the highest amount of air mass, that requires everything to be up to the task, hoses, map sensor, etc.
QUOTE]

People are forgetting the most important thing... FUEL (or specifically, octane)