GT4094R, nobody has tried it on a evo yet?
Jun 27, 2007, 11:38 PM
#46
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
im considering this for my car as well.. going to do a little more research.. i have made 643whp on my busa thats only a 1.3L with the 4094 and thats with 8:1 compression as well.. its tough to compare lag though on a bike cause its 1/4 of the weight so you dont feel the lag as much..
heard of a GT35r being used on one (made over 500bhp) but a 4094! thats mad. got and more info/pics/anyhting on it??? was it for a bike or somethign else???
Chris.
Jun 28, 2007, 04:12 AM
#47
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Puerto Rico
Posts: 892
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having decided to change my T3 manifold/GT35R combo with something bigger, i would have decided to go for a T4 divided manifold with, probably, a 4088R turbo, as i consider 42Rs too big for having still some streetable powerband.
Looking at Garrett catalog i've seen a new turbo, the 4094R, that seems a conjunction between 4088 and 4294, and i would be tempted to try this....
Has somebody any experience on this turbo? I'm afraid it could bee too laggy, even with a stroker, but i'm also interested in 850 hp capability as declared on Garrett web site.... Thanks....
Looking at Garrett catalog i've seen a new turbo, the 4094R, that seems a conjunction between 4088 and 4294, and i would be tempted to try this....
Has somebody any experience on this turbo? I'm afraid it could bee too laggy, even with a stroker, but i'm also interested in 850 hp capability as declared on Garrett web site.... Thanks....
I am doing the same thing, bu t with something new from presicion, it SHOULD spool up faster than a 4094, we'll see, I had a GT35r with T04 housing and got 634whp out of it ALL BOOST and 488whp (with modest tunning) on pump gas.
The GT4094 is one of my favorites, but I think is a little to big for ALL boost performance, so I'll stay with the prototype from presicion and let you guys n=know how it goes on Tuesday...
Jun 28, 2007, 11:56 PM
#49
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
here is a 35R on one! looks tiny compeard to yours (the turbo!)! lol
http://www.lancerregister.com/showth...ight=1.3+turbo
thanks Chris.
Jun 29, 2007, 03:05 AM
#50
Evolving Member
the question here really is comparing both a GT4294R vs a GT4094R,on both a .91 A/R turbine side, is the spool and max power capability the same? Have recently ran a 2.18 litre on a 4294R and the power it makes so easily is just hard to go back to a T67 anymore. the 4294R makes over 800 WHP easily even at higher boost. The 35R and 67 is close with the 67 making a touch more but much laggier. the 42R is laggier but kicks real hard on boost.
Jun 29, 2007, 05:53 AM
#51
Account Disabled
iTrader: (30)
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: miami
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i am dying to try out the 4094 on my car,i just need to get rid of my gt4067r 1st.i dont want to have to come out of my pocket completly for it.......
should be intresting...
should be intresting...
Jun 29, 2007, 06:26 AM
#52
Newbie
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Chile
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi
You got a 2.0 or 2.3 motor? how does it make fullboost the 4067? what a/r ,can you give a little brief about this turbo?, what other mods you got if you dont mind to share.
Sorry for to many questions thanks.
sorry about the offtopic.
Last edited by JPSR20DET; Jun 30, 2007 at 08:58 PM.
Jun 30, 2007, 06:59 AM
#53
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the question here really is comparing both a GT4294R vs a GT4094R,on both a .91 A/R turbine side, is the spool and max power capability the same? Have recently ran a 2.18 litre on a 4294R and the power it makes so easily is just hard to go back to a T67 anymore. the 4294R makes over 800 WHP easily even at higher boost. The 35R and 67 is close with the 67 making a touch more but much laggier. the 42R is laggier but kicks real hard on boost.
Chris.
Jun 30, 2007, 07:02 PM
#55
We'll see I'm very interested in Full-Races new offerring.
Jun 30, 2007, 07:52 PM
#56
Slowmotion Motorsports here in Columbus Oh just built a Honda EK Hatch with a K24 bottom end with a K20 head (Acura 2.4L bottom end and RSX-S head) with that turbo on it which would be comparable to a 2.3L Mitsu and it spooled very quick (4500rpm) and made 600whp on only 21psi. So I would love to see this turbo on an Evo...I say go for it!
Jul 1, 2007, 11:50 PM
#58
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've always felt that way too, but so far the results have told a different story. Talk to some of the vendors and not too many like the 40R variants. The lag seems to not be worth the power over a 37R and if you going to go that big everyone loves the 42R variants.
We'll see I'm very interested in Full-Races new offerring.
We'll see I'm very interested in Full-Races new offerring.
as you said, maybe full-race will beable to get something out of the 4094s.
how about a 4002??? could that really work???? would it reduce spool up much????
Chris.
Jul 3, 2007, 08:12 AM
#59
the 40-02 would be possible however it would work very poorly due to the massive turbine to compressor mismatch. It would make a lot of dyno power but it would be terribly lazy with poor throttle response
Jul 3, 2007, 11:55 PM
#60
Evolved Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 1,074
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i think the main reason most people didnt like the 40R is becuase they used it with the wrong manifold configuration/design and the wrong turbine setup. The 40R is very sensitive to this, but when you get it right it works incredibly well
the 40R setup we are about to release will definately change some minds about 40Rs. We will have a 42R setup as well.
the 40-02 would be possible however it would work very poorly due to the massive turbine to compressor mismatch. It would make a lot of dyno power but it would be terribly lazy with poor throttle response
the 40R setup we are about to release will definately change some minds about 40Rs. We will have a 42R setup as well.
the 40-02 would be possible however it would work very poorly due to the massive turbine to compressor mismatch. It would make a lot of dyno power but it would be terribly lazy with poor throttle response
thanks for clearing that up!
Chris.