CurseDSM

iTrader: (3)

I drive one on a 2 liter and I don't think its all that laggy at all. I mean 3800 rpms for 300 tq and about 2000 rpms for 500 ft lbs of tq i don't really see it being that bad. I make 300 tq at about 4200 rpms 443 tq at about 5633 rpms and I started the pull at 3k. That isn't to bad at all and when you drive the car even on a 2.0 it really doesn't seem laggy at all unless your starting from 1000 rpms per pull. Like someone suggested what turbo are you compairing to this because I would like to know as well?

94AWDcoupe

iTrader: (125)

sorry I have no desire to debate the lag on this turbo. people dont want to read through that crap. most people have clearly shown they dont know how to read a dyno graph anyway. so there is no point in debating using dyno graphs.

mrboost05

iTrader: (25)

can you atleast tell us what turbo you are trying to compare it to so some of us can go research on our own then ? what stock frame turbo.

E-Spec@Tach Motor Works

iTrader: (11)

Please don't take my comment the wrong way. I'm not looking to turn this into an x-turbo is better than y-turbo discussion.. Only looking to determine clearly what evo owners should look for in the "grey line" of laggy or not.

I respect your opinion as an individual, but also value your opinion based on experience. Take it from me, I've been running 67mm turbos since 2005-- I love the rush of a big laggy turbo, so maybe my opinion generally sways towards the right of a power curve. It seems to me you favor the left side. I find this turbo to be a good middle ground for what we both enjoy.

Please post a graph for what you consider a 'responsive' turbo. I'd like to get these graphs together and examine the 2 for the pros/cons.

Again, this is not intended to be a classic 'evom battle royale',,, just good information from 2 evo enthusiasts that can maybe help newbs towards making educated decisions.

BigT

iTrader: (8)

I'm sure none of us on here have no idea what you're talking about. I usually enjoy your posts, but i'm on the fence with this one.

I found a VD post of a stroker on e85 and BB FP Black and it hits peak torque (around 500ftlbs) and just shy of what this EF4 is hitting at. So, I am very interested in hearing of what turbo you are referring to that makes 600whp and isn't "laggy".

cul8tr

iTrader: (19)

You made your point on your last post and you just said that you have "no desire" to debate lag on this turbo. So please leave this post and let other people post other perspectives on this turbo (positive or negative). I understand that everyone has a right to an opinion. I made sure that I used a dynojet to reduce the variables and NOT a virtual dyno. You also need to understand that yes the turbo is going to be a hair "laggier" than a black since it is physically larger. To just come out without any technical proof that is turbo is just plain laggy is very premature. Back it up with some real data please or you just come off like a plain hater.
Just remember that I sold a perfectly good brand new FP Black for this turbo for several reasons other than just spool. Haters may think I am just plain stupid and the newbies are still watching on how this plays out. I just wanted to try something different and I have no regrets. It is just nice to have more choices in the market for stock replacement turbos. I think that is a win for everyone in my book.


Enough said... lets move on with the discussion. Lets keep it civil

CurseDSM

iTrader: (3)

I don't know and I am interested to hear about what turbo he is talking about but lets compair apples to apples. This is a stock frame turbo, not a t3 or t4. Maybe he is tring to compair turbos with different platforms and the ef4 makes it seem laggy being he has a better flowing hotside. Who knows

Svendiesel

iTrader: (25)

I opened a can of worms, you see?

I too also find 94awdcoupe to be a wealth of accurate info, but considering the S3's, I too cant say I consider this laggy.

Compared to my FP Black with S2's on the 2.4, I definitely notice a little more lag. But, Im on a base map right now and the turbo still hits hard and pulls very hard all the way up the RPM range with S3's. This turbo with some S2's would definitely hit harder for sure.

cul8tr

iTrader: (19)

Correct. When I first came to Erkl he first questioned me about this choice of turbo. At first he was also very skeptical and he thought I was a little nuts to go with an untested product. He has also heard a lot of rumors that this turbo was laggy. He told me "hey how come you didn't just go with a 6262". After tuning on it for a couple of days I think he was quite impressed and saw that with the right built motor this turbo can make a lot of power especially on a 2.3 or 2.4. Honestly if you have a stock head and motor I would suggest a FP Green or EF3. It is a lot more responsive and it would be a lot more fun on the street. However if your motor can use the boost it really makes big numbers when you push it. He really saw it wake up around 35psi. That is when the clutch let go.

E-Spec@Tach Motor Works

iTrader: (11)

Just some "fun facts" about this test vehicle in order to put the spool-up into perspective.......

A-) This is a 2.4l motor. This assists spool tremendously.

B-) This motor has a Magnus intake manifold--- this works against spool but helps upper rpm.

C-) This motor has s3 cams --- this works against spool but helps upper rpm.

D-) The cams were dialed in to fight the "fall off" that I see in so many 2.4l applications --- this works against spool but helps upper rpm.

E-) This is a shep tranny with 4.11 final drive --- Loads the motor more in 3rd and assists spool-up

Basically, what I would love to see is spool-up on a stock 2l motor with some 272's , a standard 5 speed transmission, and a stock ported im and stock tb. That would be a good "control" car to examine this turbo's spool-up characteristics vs other units.

At some point we have to realize that this stock frame turbo made 600hp at 30psi. What are evo owners willing to give up to obtain that? 500rpm? 800rpm? 1000rpm?

Open for discussion.

94AWDcoupe

iTrader: (125)

the bold above pretty much defines why I call this turbo laggy. look around at other graphs and see 150-200tq increases in a 500rpm. this turbo doesnt hit hard. I would like to give more information but I dont know how big this turbo actually is. I only know whats been posted that its bigger than a black.

Svendiesel

iTrader: (25)

Ill agree with that ^ for sure, that's rather laggy..not 6765 laggy, but still all things considered. These stock frame turbos, especially the "bigger" ones really need the bigger displacement motors for them to fully make sense. 2.3 or 2.4 is the way to go on them. My Black made peak torque of 550 on Buschur's Mustang Dyno at around 4500rpms, but that was with S2's.

I wish I had S3's then to make a more accurate comparison for myself between the Black and EF4, it would have lost a few hundred rpm's.

CurseDSM

iTrader: (3)

I can't speak for anyone else who runs this turbo. I have the old sst intake side of this turbo and if memory serves me correct ( although I am getting old) it flows 15% more then the stock mitsu housing. Anyone from Map who sees my post please correct me if I am wrong. With this said I did notice it being a little more laggy then some of the other graphs I have seen. Even my tuner said man this thing doesn't spool like a black. Well make a long story short this turbo is as you said bigger then a black. If I can get some flow #s for you on what this turbo or my particular turbo flows I will be more then happy to pass them along to you so you can make a better judgement on it. I would love to help everyone who has questions about it and the way it actually flows.

CurseDSM

iTrader: (3)

Ask and you shall recieve



Here is my build thread of what my car has in it hope this helps you some.

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/ev...usa-tuned.html

VRSF Tiago

iTrader: (138)

Great results guys! Keep up the good work