New BW EFR Turbo Thread
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,675
Likes: 132
From: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR
I still dont know why more people haven't tried the 7064 option yet.
The inducer size is much smaller than the 7163 resulting in quicker spool.
And it'll still make 500whp on kill mode.
But with STOCK like spool with the twin scroll.
That will likely be what i'm doing
The inducer size is much smaller than the 7163 resulting in quicker spool.
And it'll still make 500whp on kill mode.
But with STOCK like spool with the twin scroll.
That will likely be what i'm doing
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 60
Likes: 1
From: Maryland, USA
From what I understand the 7064 didn't perform quiet what BW would have liked. A TS 7163 for a 2 liter would be a better option. For outright all kill mode, the 7064 will probably eek out about 20-40 WHP over the 7163, but loses a fair amount of midrange and spool.
Thats what I was wondering, would be helpful to know the general efficiency, whether its DI or not, and awd vs fwd/rwd. Although from 2.0L I4 and Eric's day job plus the stout numbers I'm guessing golf R or something else using a similar engine.
According to Full-Race the 7163 does everything better than the 7064.
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 60
Likes: 1
From: Maryland, USA
Actually, the IWG 7163 is much harder to fit to an evo and an EWG EFR. And no the IWG does not perform as well as a proper EWG setup.
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 60
Likes: 1
From: Maryland, USA
The second point I tend to disagree with. See below. A test done from FUll-Race. GT3582r-vs-efr-8374-undivided-t3s-back-back-dyno-k20-2889919/
See posted quote below. The EFR wastegates are exceptionally designed. The issue most people have is running the correct wastegate diaphragm. I had a litany of issues setting mine up until I just went straight to the hard canister. the turbosmart dual port is even better with a proper 3 port solenoid........or better yet, use the solenoid BW provides with each and every EFR! Settings are very close to the MAC solenoid everyone uses, so setting it up in the ECU is a breeze.
The diagram mentioned in the post is missing the correct link. However, a quick search on google will bring it up in a cache format you can view
Originally Posted by Full Race Geoff
That test compares the GT35R .82 a/r vs EFR 8374 .83 a/r - both singlescroll undivided T3. On paper, the GT35R is smaller with a 68mm turbine wheel and maxxes out around ~68lb/min whereas the larger EFR 8374 uses a 74mm turbine wheel and ~79lb/min compressor max flow. The interesting things to note are that the spool is very similar on the dyno, but on the street the owner of the car is amazed how much faster and smoother the 8374 transitions into boost. Also the 42mm internal wastegate has no difficulty controlling boost on a very high RPM and high-VE engine. The boost control is actually *better* than it was with the exernal wastegate and vent to atmosphere dumptube.
We may test a 7670 on this next for comparison. I expect it would have the same top end as the 35R, but much more low end. Ive been getting a lot of PM's asking us to test the 6262 and 6765 T3 .82
Quote:
This test compares the GT3582R .82 a/r (Purple line) vs EFR 8374 .83 a/r (Green line) 91 octane pump gas @ 15 psi.
The main objective was to compare spoolup and powerband between the two turbos, while ensuring the 42mm Internal WG does not creep. Test car belongs to Jun Masculino (Ikon671 on clubRSX)is an RSX-S, powered by a built K20 . K20 engines are notorious for uncontrollable boost, so in this case it's incredible to see the EFR controls boost *better* than the externally wastegated setup he previously used. High boost and race gas next week
That test compares the GT35R .82 a/r vs EFR 8374 .83 a/r - both singlescroll undivided T3. On paper, the GT35R is smaller with a 68mm turbine wheel and maxxes out around ~68lb/min whereas the larger EFR 8374 uses a 74mm turbine wheel and ~79lb/min compressor max flow. The interesting things to note are that the spool is very similar on the dyno, but on the street the owner of the car is amazed how much faster and smoother the 8374 transitions into boost. Also the 42mm internal wastegate has no difficulty controlling boost on a very high RPM and high-VE engine. The boost control is actually *better* than it was with the exernal wastegate and vent to atmosphere dumptube.
We may test a 7670 on this next for comparison. I expect it would have the same top end as the 35R, but much more low end. Ive been getting a lot of PM's asking us to test the 6262 and 6765 T3 .82
Quote:
This test compares the GT3582R .82 a/r (Purple line) vs EFR 8374 .83 a/r (Green line) 91 octane pump gas @ 15 psi.
The main objective was to compare spoolup and powerband between the two turbos, while ensuring the 42mm Internal WG does not creep. Test car belongs to Jun Masculino (Ikon671 on clubRSX)is an RSX-S, powered by a built K20 . K20 engines are notorious for uncontrollable boost, so in this case it's incredible to see the EFR controls boost *better* than the externally wastegated setup he previously used. High boost and race gas next week
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 71
Likes: 2
From: Monmouth County, New Jersey
awhite,, 7064 is excellent turbo and unique. you see its lower EMAP pressure, 0.92 AR. also has a ported shroud.
7163 is excellent turbo but 0.8 AR means me EMAPs and not ported shroud, is possible to do some surging
7163 is excellent turbo but 0.8 AR means me EMAPs and not ported shroud, is possible to do some surging
Newbie
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 60
Likes: 1
From: Maryland, USA
For the lower power/smaller AR stuff, the IWG performs just fine IMHO. But yes, having larger housing options in regards to the EWG stuff is great in itself and I understand the reasoning BW didn't provide an internal option for the bigger AR housings.
Last edited by RalliartRsX; Aug 1, 2016 at 09:02 AM.