What the EFR turbos should have been

[jamg]

i'm loving all this info on a 2871 sized turbo... but does it sure come with a premium.

[PoorMans180SX]

Originally Posted by LuckyX2

Yeah, that'd be cool if you wanna. I don't think that guy has the best setup to be comparing 2871 setups to though. He basically just slapped a 6258 on a stock SR but most 2871 guys are gonna have cams and other supporting mods. So it's gonna be difficult to draw any kind of conclusion from it. I just thought it was incredible that he got 400whp from such a small turbo. I know Borg's billet wheels really help at higher pressure ratios but still.



Man, you gotta love the way rotaries can spool big turbos.



Is it? A 6258 is way off the map at 27psi on a 2L at 7K rpm. I wouldn't expect such a small turbo to hold boost like that to redline.



Mmmm yes, a VE head. One of a few long term upgrades I still have left to do to my SR. I also have some GTi-R ITB's that I'm gonna throw on one of these days. I'll probably lose some top end but should be worth it for the low/mid and throttle response.

The graph he posted is not the 27psi graph, it is the ~18-19psi graph... It's the wastegate.

Motary says his SR with 6258 has naturally aspirated-like throttle response.

[LuckyX2]

The graph shows him hitting 26.75 on "Analog 1". I assume that is the boost pressure.

I think what he was saying was that he hit 27psi but by 7500rpm was down to 18psi.

[PoorMans180SX]

Okay, I'm dumb. That's what I get for not looking at it again. But still, it's the gate. Look at the Borg Warner charts for desired pressure and what canister you should run. No way the soft canister is holding 27psi. There are people running 35psi on the B1 frame turbos.

[Def]

Originally Posted by jamg

i'm loving all this info on a 2871 sized turbo... but does it sure come with a premium.

They're really not that much more, especially when you factor in the extras that come with the turbo.

In fact, I'd say street pricing the EFRs are really starting to get quite a bit cheaper than GTX turbos - which is their real competitor.

Of course a billet wheel GTX will destroy a 2871R pretty much everywhere.

[RalliartRsX]

Originally Posted by Def

..........
Of course a billet wheel GTX will destroy a 2871R pretty much everywhere.

How do you think the billet wheel GTX stacks up to a similar EFR??

[LuckyX2]

Originally Posted by RalliartRsX

How do you think the billet wheel GTX stacks up to a similar EFR??

The billet wheel, on the 7163 at least, is very aggressive. BW can get away with doing that because of the extra torque at low blade speed ratios offered by the new turbine. The other EFRs have slightly less aggressive aero and are comparable to the stuff coming from Garrett except for higher pressure ratios where the BW parts win out.

However, the real advantage to EFR's is the Ti-Al turbine, that's one thing Garrett can't touch.

[DRFT180]

Let's not forget the redesigned internal wastegate flow paths for single and twin-scroll. Larger bearings and metal cases, dual compressor and turbine piston ring seals.

[Mannykiller]

Originally Posted by LuckyX2

The billet wheel, on the 7163 at least, is very aggressive. BW can get away with doing that because of the extra torque at low blade speed ratios offered by the new turbine. The other EFRs have slightly less aggressive aero and are comparable to the stuff coming from Garrett except for higher pressure ratios where the BW parts win out.

However, the real advantage to EFR's is the Ti-Al turbine, that's one thing Garrett can't touch.

Gtx turbos are great. But fact is that they're just not as light as the EFR wheels. Response really is night and day difference. I was skeptic when Geoff from full race told me about the EFR's...but after seeing dyno vids and charts with back to back differences... it really is night and day.

[Def]

The GTX stuff ranges from just ok to pretty good IMO. Some of their wheels don't really put up good results for the overall response/spool IMO (GTX2867R comes to mind... the entire GTX30 lineup as well). I think most of this is using pretty old turbine technology and only being able to get so much out of a billet wheel that offers a bit more flow for a little higher RPM and slightly lower inertia of a cast wheel.

The main thing that really makes sense on the EFRs is that a twin scroll turbo setup starts to financially make sense vs. a single scroll. The IWG adds very little cost next to the cost of a full EWG manifold + 2 good external gates and fabbing dump tubes.

I still think IWGs do offer some compromises in boost control (really have to get your canister spring pressure in the right range) - but they can be worked with when they have enough flow area and canister spring pressures to chose from - which the EFRs do.

[LuckyX2]

Originally Posted by Def

I still think IWGs do offer some compromises in boost control (really have to get your canister spring pressure in the right range) - but they can be worked with when they have enough flow area and canister spring pressures to chose from - which the EFRs do.

Stiffest spring or go home

[RalliartRsX]

Originally Posted by Def

The GTX stuff ranges from just ok to pretty good IMO. Some of their wheels don't really put up good results for the overall response/spool IMO (GTX2867R comes to mind... the entire GTX30 lineup as well). I think most of this is using pretty old turbine technology and only being able to get so much out of a billet wheel that offers a bit more flow for a little higher RPM and slightly lower inertia of a cast wheel.

The main thing that really makes sense on the EFRs is that a twin scroll turbo setup starts to financially make sense vs. a single scroll. The IWG adds very little cost next to the cost of a full EWG manifold + 2 good external gates and fabbing dump tubes.

I still think IWGs do offer some compromises in boost control (really have to get your canister spring pressure in the right range) - but they can be worked with when they have enough flow area and canister spring pressures to chose from - which the EFRs do.

Also, to add to this

1) What about those manifold that although are TS, have the two dump tubes merge to one to negate the price of twin piping, twin gates, etc?? Do those inhibit wastegate flow or is is insignificant enough that for a majority of the setups, its a very minor issue??

2) Also, you can simply change out the canister for a proper one from Turbosmart. They are fairly inexpensive (cheaper than a full EWG) and I am not entirely certain I am sold on the plastic setup. Actually, you can purchase both metal versions of both the wastegate and BOV from turbosmart for about the price of one 44MM EWG.

I am liking the EFR stuff

[Def]

A fully divided merged WG tube is fine - it's just hard to fabricate it to where it's fully divided.

The turbosmart gate looks pretty nice since changing the spring rate is easy after that. Anybody know the part number to that one? Turbosmart's website doesn't really seem to say "this p/n is for EFRs."

[LuckyX2]

Originally Posted by Def

A fully divided merged WG tube is fine - it's just hard to fabricate it to where it's fully divided.

The turbosmart gate looks pretty nice since changing the spring rate is easy after that. Anybody know the part number to that one? Turbosmart's website doesn't really seem to say "this p/n is for EFRs."

If I were buying another IWG for it, I wouldn't get the Turbosmart one, I'd get THIS.

$40 cheaper than the Turbosmart and is dual port capable. In dual port setup you can run the boost as high as you want and not have it crack open until exactly when you want it.

I was contemplating getting this but I think I'll just stick to the stiffest sprung canister. At full preload it cracks open at 19.6 psi. I'm gonna be running 25psi or so, which isn't much more than the spring pressure. With my electronic controller making sure it doesn't see any pressure until I want to start controlling, my flapper ought to stay closed right up to 22psi or so when the controller opens.

[Def]

Originally Posted by LuckyX2

If I were buying another IWG for it, I wouldn't get the Turbosmart one, I'd get THIS.

$40 cheaper than the Turbosmart and is dual port capable. In dual port setup you can run the boost as high as you want and not have it crack open until exactly when you want it.

I was contemplating getting this but I think I'll just stick to the stiffest sprung canister. At full preload it cracks open at 19.6 psi. I'm gonna be running 25psi or so, which isn't much more than the spring pressure. With my electronic controller making sure it doesn't see any pressure until I want to start controlling, my flapper ought to stay closed right up to 22psi or so when the controller opens.

Stay away from Forge WG actuators. I have one for a GT2871R and it's kinda crappy IMO - bad design decisions overall. I couldn't even sell the thing on here for like $30.

[LuckyX2]

Originally Posted by Def

Stay away from Forge WG actuators. I have one for a GT2871R and it's kinda crappy IMO - bad design decisions overall. I couldn't even sell the thing on here for like $30.

Ah, I wasn't aware of their quality issues. Are there any non Forge dual port models available?

[LuckyX2]

Found some more info from the Subaru guys HERE.
What's most interesting to me is the bottom graph where the 7163 outdoes the 6758 everywhere.

Found some numbers on the Jager racing STI also, 540whp/494ft-lbs.
You can see their build and dyno run HERE.

[Def]

Originally Posted by LuckyX2

Ah, I wasn't aware of their quality issues. Are there any non Forge dual port models available?

I haven't seen any. I thought Turbosmart was developing one, but can't find any info with a quick search. Maybe I'm imagining things.

IMO, I'd go single port of an appropriate spring pressure.

Not sure how well your engine will flow, but you might not be able to hold 25 psi up top just because you'll be falling off the compressor map.

[LuckyX2]

Originally Posted by Def

I haven't seen any. I thought Turbosmart was developing one, but can't find any info with a quick search. Maybe I'm imagining things.

IMO, I'd go single port of an appropriate spring pressure.

Not sure how well your engine will flow, but you might not be able to hold 25 psi up top just because you'll be falling off the compressor map.

Yeah, I'm just going to be running the 19psi stiff spring.

And it ought to do 25psi fine. I plotted it to 25psi at 7500rpm in the first post:


30psi at 7500 is where it hits the edge of the map.

[Def]

What VE are you using up top? From dyno charts it seems even a DET gets over 100% VE up top.

[Mannykiller]

I don't know if it'll be as apparent on rotaries......but Honestly although BW is leading development... I still don't trust the internal WG as much as I'd trust dual External units. Funny though. Piston motors usually runner much higher boost levels than rotaries. Rotaries utilize much larger exhaust A/R's than piston motors. Rotaries can use the larger A/R's just as efficiently as Piston motors. Yet Rotaries generate more exhaust gas volume. I'm wondering if the Internal Wastegate EFR's will favor piston motors in terms of boost control just because they generate less exhaust gas volume. I just don't see an IWG EFR holding say 25-30lbs on a two rotor solid enough. I'm building a long runner turbo manifold for my external 1.05 EFR8374. I'll only be running 20lbs of boost on E85 and 14lbs on 91 Octane/race gas. But I'm building the long runner with the best possible Wastegate placement in order to hold boost as solid as possible everywhere...from 2500 all the way up to 8900 if I want. I'll keep you guys updated but I expect great things from this turbo with the high exhaust gas volume!

[Def]

You've got it all wrong - IWGs control high boost easier. Low boost on a "large" engine needs lots of flow area. High boost is cake to hold, especially if you're not going to run really high turbine inlet pressures - which rotaries do not tolerate at all (which is why people run huge A/Rs and deal with lazy spool and run low boost).

The BW EFRs have plenty of WG flow area to run >15 psi or so on a reasonably sized engine, and even low boost on most engine sizes as well. You just need the proper spring rate WG canister and the proper amount of WG canister preload.

IWGs do have issues - on piston engines with a "small" turbo on an engine it's keeping the boost up when the turbine inlet pressure rises and forces it open. But that's almost a problem of too much valve area for your WG canister pressure/preload.

A lot of the IWG problems you see are there are because people are stupid and do things like run 0 mm preload on the WG canister rod then complain of lazy boost pressure (minimum preload is 2 mm, something like 4-5 mm is more reasonable).

[LuckyX2]

Originally Posted by Def

What VE are you using up top? From dyno charts it seems even a DET gets over 100% VE up top.

I have a link in the original post that will take you directly to my settings. I used 105% VE for everything above 6500 rpm. Ambient is 75F, I upped the intercooler efficiency (per my datalogs of IAT) and reduced exhaust backpressure since I have a straight through 3".

[FullRaceGeoff]

Originally Posted by RalliartRsX

Also, to add to this

1) What about those manifold that although are TS, have the two dump tubes merge to one to negate the price of twin piping, twin gates, etc?? Do those inhibit wastegate flow or is is insignificant enough that for a majority of the setups, its a very minor issue??

if you run a single WG on a twinscroll setup, the inner tubes must be fully divided to retain all the twinscroll benefit. Typically the difference from a dual-EWg twinscroll vs a single-EWg twinscroll is 300-400rpm spool. Fabricated single-EWg manifolds, with dividing walls will almost always crack at the divider (especially on drift or road race cars) hence the reason FR does not do this. With regards to the EFR wastegate tube, it is cast as a divided section and is aerodynamically optimized, so it does not have the stress risers or thermal stresses that a welded/fabricated part would (will not crack.)

Originally Posted by RalliartRsX

2) Also, you can simply change out the canister for a proper one from Turbosmart.

the turbosmart IWg's are great actuators, and excellent spring selections. just be aware you can not give it much preload

Originally Posted by Mannykiller

I don't know if it'll be as apparent on rotaries......but Honestly although BW is leading development... I still don't trust the internal WG as much as I'd trust dual External units. Funny though. Piston motors usually runner much higher boost levels than rotaries. Rotaries utilize much larger exhaust A/R's than piston motors. Rotaries can use the larger A/R's just as efficiently as Piston motors. Yet Rotaries generate more exhaust gas volume. I'm wondering if the Internal Wastegate EFR's will favor piston motors in terms of boost control just because they generate less exhaust gas volume. I just don't see an IWG EFR holding say 25-30lbs on a two rotor solid enough. I'm building a long runner turbo manifold for my external 1.05 EFR8374. I'll only be running 20lbs of boost on E85 and 14lbs on 91 Octane/race gas. But I'm building the long runner with the best possible Wastegate placement in order to hold boost as solid as possible everywhere...from 2500 all the way up to 8900 if I want. I'll keep you guys updated but I expect great things from this turbo with the high exhaust gas volume!

from a theoretical standpoint - the best wastegate is no wastegate. if your concern of not holding boost up top occurs, its because the turbo is too small or the A/R is too small. Not because of the IWG.

Originally Posted by Def

You've got it all wrong - IWGs control high boost easier. Low boost on a "large" engine needs lots of flow area. High boost is cake to hold, especially if you're not going to run really high turbine inlet pressures - which rotaries do not tolerate at all (which is why people run huge A/Rs and deal with lazy spool and run low boost). The BW EFRs have plenty of WG flow area to run >15 psi or so on a reasonably sized engine, and even low boost on most engine sizes as well. You just need the proper spring rate WG canister and the proper amount of WG canister preload. IWGs do have issues - on piston engines with a "small" turbo on an engine it's keeping the boost up when the turbine inlet pressure rises and forces it open. But that's almost a problem of too much valve area for your WG canister pressure/preload. A lot of the IWG problems you see are there are because people are stupid and do things like run 0 mm preload on the WG canister rod then complain of lazy boost pressure (minimum preload is 2 mm, something like 4-5 mm is more reasonable).

great post... too bad you dont drive a subaru, some of the clowns on nabisco could benefit from your explanations.

Originally Posted by Def

I still think IWGs do offer some compromises in boost control (really have to get your canister spring pressure in the right range) - but they can be worked with when they have enough flow area and canister spring pressures to chose from - which the EFRs do.

one more thing to consider: traditional IWG canisters are a boost actuated device whereas the traditional EWG are vacuum actuated devices. an External-WG is fully sealed on the "close" side, but leaks on the "open side". Conversely the 2-port turbosmart or forge actuators are exactly the opposite. They are fully sealed on the "open" side, but leak on the "close side" <<let me know if this makes sense??>> - the conclusion i drew from doing a ton of WG testing - was that an external WG (which has a leaky bottom port) would function similarly to a 2port vacuum actuated canister (with similarly leaky bottom port). long story short: I am suggesting that exh manifold backpressure is what opens the valve on a traditional EWG (considering the bottom port leaks down so much.).

I have turbosmart sending their latest variation of 2 port IWG to me to try out but I am still unsure if we can do exactly what we need, will be interestign to find out

Originally Posted by LuckyX2

Stiffest spring or go home

Originally Posted by Mannykiller

Gtx turbos are great. But fact is that they're just not as light as the EFR wheels. Response really is night and day difference. I was skeptic when Geoff from full race told me about the EFR's...but after seeing dyno vids and charts with back to back differences... it really is night and day.

agreed, the garrett turbos are a known quantity - proven reliable and will fit many existing installations. Garrett is selling a ton (and profitably) so there is not much reason for them to change... However the EFR's reduction of rotating mass in half, combined with a high end ceramic ball bearing are 2 major features that are difficult to overcome with traditional GT infrastructure

Originally Posted by LuckyX2

the real advantage to EFR's is the Ti-Al turbine, that's one thing Garrett can't touch.

Originally Posted by Def

The GTX stuff ranges from just ok to pretty good IMO. Some of their wheels don't really put up good results for the overall response/spool IMO (GTX2867R comes to mind... the entire GTX30 lineup as well). I think most of this is using pretty old turbine technology and only being able to get so much out of a billet wheel that offers a bit more flow for a little higher RPM and slightly lower inertia of a cast wheel.

The main thing that really makes sense on the EFRs is that a twin scroll turbo setup starts to financially make sense vs. a single scroll. The IWG adds very little cost next to the cost of a full EWG manifold + 2 good external gates and fabbing dump tubes.

agreed! this thread has some great info in it, keep it going

[khmerpimpin]

I wish we still had Geoff on the evo forums, nice to see more EFR stuff, once I get everything sorted out with full-race hopefully I can get another EFR unit.

[FullRaceGeoff]

^thx i love my evo! my all-time favorite daily driver, evoM banned me because a vendor complained my build thread was unsolicited advertisements.. oh well I thought i had some good info posted in it. im planning to pull the twinscroll 8374 off the car and try a twinsroll 7163 soon should really liven up the lowend tq curve. i run it on E85, there is a taxi refill near the shop, so I plan to keep iwg slammed shut at all times lol

[PoorMans180SX]

[QUOTE=FullRaceGeoff;5622255 I plan to keep iwg slammed shut at all times lol[/QUOTE]


That is the secret to happiness.

[Def]

Originally Posted by FullRaceGeoff

great post... too bad you dont drive a subaru, some of the clowns on nabisco could benefit from your explanations.

I think I'd have to get more flat brimmed Ken Block hats to join that crowd... Plus I enjoy not trying to spin my turbo up with exhaust gasses that have travelled 7 ft by the time they hit the turbine.

one more thing to consider: traditional IWG canisters are a boost actuated device whereas the traditional EWG are vacuum actuated devices. an External-WG is fully sealed on the "close" side, but leaks on the "open side". Conversely the 2-port turbosmart or forge actuators are exactly the opposite. They are fully sealed on the "open" side, but leak on the "close side" <<let me know if this makes sense??>> - the conclusion i drew from doing a ton of WG testing - was that an external WG (which has a leaky bottom port) would function similarly to a 2port vacuum actuated canister (with similarly leaky bottom port). long story short: I am suggesting that exh manifold backpressure is what opens the valve on a traditional EWG (considering the bottom port leaks down so much.).

I have turbosmart sending their latest variation of 2 port IWG to me to try out but I am still unsure if we can do exactly what we need, will be interestign to find out

Makes sense on the IWG vs. EWG. I never had any luck with a 2 port IWG actuator, as the bottom port will usually leak so badly that you lose the delta P on that side of the actuator in a hurry.

I'm interested to see how the Turbosmart does. I do wish their IWG actuators were a bit more reasonably priced... they're near the price of an EWG...


BTW - I'm on the wait list for a couple of TS T4 7163 at Full-Race. It still looking like "who the hell knows" on the ETA?


Glad you're finding the time to post here occasionally, as it's nice to get lots of first hand experience chiming in.

[FullRaceGeoff]

7163 singlescrolls are starting to show up with a little more regularity, however twinscroll 7163s are barely trickling in. they are gun-shy on ETA, the rumours are that things are going well and it wont be an eternity. you are not alone, im dying to get one for myself

[Def]

Originally Posted by FullRaceGeoff

7163 singlescrolls are starting to show up with a little more regularity, however twinscroll 7163s are barely trickling in. they are gun-shy on ETA, the rumours are that things are going well and it wont be an eternity. you are not alone, im dying to get one for myself

I wonder what the hold-up is? Seems like they should be using the same housing casting as the xx58 B1 turbos and machining for the slightly larger turbine.

At least they have some turbos coming in...