3rd gear had a a few counts of knock, 6 tapering to 2 from 4300 to 5800rpm's.

I agree, however that is basically what I was stating. Two different ways to measure HP/TQ/Datalog and two different cars and too many variables. However I still think we need to keep wishing for a turbo that will make the same amount of power in a 3rd gear pull and a 4th gear pull at such low RPM and on the street.

 

that little "4 door sedan" looks so innocent! lol

 

You guys are really dense. This isnt the only car with EF4 that has lag problems. Virtually all EF4 graphs look bad to me. Then I show you what normal "nice" looking graph for that power level looks like and you say its different car setup different with different goals. under different conditions, How the hell we supposed to make comparisons??? of course they will be differences.

No body chooses a laggy turbo on purpose. It happens from having limited knowledge and trusting the advice of the vender selling it.

there are are hand full 700whp turbos out that make prettier power bands than the EF4. FAR prettier from what I have the seen. prolly have seen 500 4g63 graphs by now. maybe 50 in the 600-700whp range. maybe I dont know what I am looking at and maybe I do.

maybe I should change my posting style and start sugar coating poor results. yeah thats cool. will just make the true fast cars that much faster. lets do that instead.

 

That's great, no one is denying the fact that you could have a "nicer" looking graph with some of the T3 frame turbochargers on the market. The stock turbine housing was obviously designed around a much smaller wheel, and even though its twin scroll it is certainly becoming a restriction at these power levels. We're simply stating that the customer (you know, the guy actually driving the car) is very happy with the end result regardless of what this virtual dyno graph shows or what your opinion is. My opinion is that there is no better option on the market when it comes to stock frame turbochargers if you're looking for 550+whp. Here's a couple graphs I compiled quickly of two Evo 9's that have been through here, both have stock manifolds on E85. The one that spools faster is our "turd" EF4, the other is an FP Black. We won't talk power differences based on the difference in boost pressure Flame on!

 

when do you say any body has a nice graph unless they run "torque down low" setups? You clearly commended the HKS turbo, FP RED, BBK and Green. I don't hardly see you saying anything positive to the larger turbos, regardless if one is laggier and turdy or less laggy and less turdy. To you they are both turdy because "lag is a dull boy" and they all are laggy if they aren't the 4 turbos mentioned above

 

I don't feel like mine is too laggy at all, plenty of punch and still lots of stock stuff I could upgrade. This is only 27psi, low timing on spool up and up top to keep it very safe, mid 11's AFR's on E70. 2.2L.



If that is a laggy turd then you won't get a non laggy turd that spools pre 4k and pulls to 9k.

 

Very well said. And I totally agree.

 

Here is what an Ef4 looks like when the wg has to much preload and the wg doesn't open at all or very little.



Here is what it does fixed running 32 psi on e85 on stock block.



Now I have been told many of times that this thing is way to laggy. One person who said that did a pull with me one day starting 3k up to 9k in third gear and I asked him again how laggy was it and his reply was holy **** thats awsome I retract my statement. Mind you my roads suck out here and there are dips and unevenness everywhere so this is part reason why the pulls look so bad.

 

And I forgot to say this but your car sir is exactly what I want out of my car. Very impressive and good job.

 

so when someone is very happy with the car that makes the turbo a good choice?

you guys are like the blind leading the blind.

when I do a build I set a HP goal. nothing more nothing less is really needed.
then I choose the best turbo for the job. because I want the broadest power band possible for the setup. this will give you the fastest drag car. the fastest street car. the fastest autocross car. the most fun for your money. why would you want to settle for anything less? I know I dont.

I know for sure when I see good dyno graphs I get excited. If its better than what I have I will have to have it. If its better than what others in this area have I push them to have it as well.

I will not be selling the EF4 to anyone. Its a bad joke at this point if you ask me.

 

Chris your comparison graph of black verses EF4 is down right stupid.
low boost on twin scroll turbos is always very laggy. that is simply due to the fact the twin scroll effect is lost early due to flapper coming off its seat early.

the black is at 5psi less than the EF4. thats huge when doing a so called comparison. it would be okay if the EF4 was 5psi less. but making a comparison with black at 5psi less makes you stupid if you ask me. now you are really just trying to sell turbos to the uneducated.

they are different cars on different days and a whole host of different variables.
both those setups are very laggy. as they should be for the boost levels.

 

Why doesnt some one invite Dave Buschur in here. I would love to hear his comment on this turbo.

 

And I am sure no one is telling you to. The point is you have something against this turbo because it doesn't fit your needs. I think its funny how everyone who runs this turbo likes it when it is configured correctly, but yet people look at the graphs and hate it. And if you feel this strongly why don't you stop tring to argue about how the turbo reacts and stop basically bashing it after someone says they like it. What do you expect to see on a stock frame turbo that is more like a 35r rather then a fp black. And here comes the bashers to that saying oh an hta this or an hta that yadda yadda blah blah. Point is my turbo isn't clipped, its not hta, it isn't any of that. Point is for what these turbos are, you can't be disappointed (well maybe you can 94) with the performance with them.

 

Why we all know what he would say there garbage because there not his products. Why don't we get other tuners, shops, and anyone else who has used them to give feedback on what they think of the turbos instead.

 

Jerry makes some very valid points. For the cost of these stock replacement turbos there isnt a big price cut on high horsepower setups. At that point you just need to look at what setup has the best powerband for the power goal. If the turbine housing is such a huge problem why use it? Then adding tubular manifolds and FF mani's for stock replacement turbos kills the whole draw. Now if it is a budget thing than I understand because I am on a tight budget so whatever is affordable is what I am doing. I may not have an optimal setup but it is what I can afford. So I may want something better but cant have it I will admit it isnt optimal and not act like it is perfect.