Just looked up the graph

I am seeing the same thing too. Boost is holding until redline, so it seems he is more than likely out of cam (still on S1 according to the spec sheet on a 2.3) considering how much it drops in the last 1000 RPM. Not sure backpressure is the issue here........

Seems like the S1s fall flat right around 7,000 RPM on a 2.0 stock block.

S1 vs S2 cam comparison

 

Ported head and either S2's, R2's or even S3's would help the fall off.

 

I suspect it's Autocross focused car, had HKS7460 before, power above 7000 on 2.3 is far far less important than midrange for the purpose - and type stroker.

 

The HKS7460 is a tough act to follow.

 

Not sure what you expected exactaly when you say your not happy with the results? Looks like a great power curve too me. Full boost by 4000rpm, 550 hp, yea it drops off after 7000rpm, but what did you expect with small cams, small turbo? S2's might have been a better choice but spool would probably suffer some, so ya get what you build for. If you wanted 600 hp you gotta get a turbo that can flow that much air, but obviously it's gonna have more lag. Results seem pretty impressive for single scroll, 2.3, small cams IMHO.

 

Since I drove Brian's Evo last weekend, I guess I can try to add some perspective. My general feeling is that the 7163 does not deviate from the trade-off between peak power and boost threshold, and for its max effort peak power of probably 575-590 whp on E85, a 4000 rpm boost threshold is about right for a well-designed turbo.

The other aspect is transient response within the powerband, and interestingly, his single scroll setup felt identical to my twin scroll BBK-3B setup. I think that's saying something good about the EFR and where it has the potential to shine. And of course the question is how much better would transient response have been with the T4TS. Based on what I read from the STi owner that tried both versions, I think the T4TS would have impressively better transient response, but at the sacrifice of some peak power because of the more restrictive turbine housing.

 

I suspect the disappointment stems from the performance per dollar of a setup like this. Lets face it, if it cost anywhere near the price of a stock frame we would all be singing its praises.

 

I think a bunch of you guys are reading into what he's saying more than is necessary. The 7163 is a hype machine right now with big $ entry price for an Evo. What he's probably talking about is the results for the cost, especially when he compared it to his old 3052 turbo on a 2.0 DSM (Maybe he'll post that graph of that car and this one here).


It doesn't seem to come on as fast as everyone acts like it will or hold as long. Certainly looks like a good power band, and I'm sure he'll run it for a long time. Maybe cams with some cam timing will shift the power band around, but that we'll have to wait and see.

 

I still don't see this being such a big ticket item. If I am not buying dual wastegates or a BOV, that is several hundred to close to a thousand dollars I am saving without those items (and the added complexity). People seem to think the internal gates on these are not what hey are cracked up to be (although I am one of a few on here to think they work just fine for the B1 frame turbos). I can easily source a TS 7163 for about $1500-$1600 shipped to my door. A manifold/downpipe is about $1200. And if I am upgrading (which there is a good chance of), I can sell whatever I had on the car to recoupe some of the expenditure.

In addition, 7163 was never supposed to be a dyno queen. So a 500+ WHP on a B1 frame 58/63mm mix flow wheel (that is theoretically supposed to be well out of it's efficiency range and should have stopped making power at 480-500WHP) a is pretty damn stonking for a turbo that small that will hold all of 500 WHP from 4000 RPM to 8000 RPM. It held all of 26 PSI all the way to redline. And of them all, the 400 ft lbs from 4K all the way to 7.5K is very impressive. I could get 5psi @ 2500 RPM on part throttle on my Old SR20DET lugging it up a hill with just a set of JWT S4 cams and a T25 housing.........and the 4G63 heads seem to flow much better than my old SR20DET blacktop could ever muster.

However, this turbo was never a dyno graph shiner and it was marketed for mostly a track day type where transient response was worth several tenths to a sec around certain circuits. It's tough to show that on the dyno without doing a multiple gear pull (which is seemingly rare) and able to load up the drivetrain similarly to what is experienced in reality.

I am just not sure what else people want from this turbo........

 

At least one person has done back-to-back testing of the V-band and T4TS EFR7163, albeit on an '07 STI. :

TS in red, SS in blue:



More graphs and details in the build thread here: http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2640508

The owner describes the difference between the two setups on page 3:

That STI setup produced some impressive numbers in both trims. The STI's 2.5L works out to be 9% more displacement than Brianawd's 2.3L Evo. The STI spools to higher boost (mid-30s psi) almost 500RPM earlier in both SS and TS on the STI relative to Brian's Evo. The STI crosses 300 Dynojet-torque-units at 3100RPM in SS and 2800RPM in TS vs. 3750RPM on Brianawd's Evo. The STI dynos are in 4th gear, FWIW.

The Evo setup does produce higher peak HP numbers with less boost than the STI setup, which isn't too surprising. But I was hoping that the spool on a 2.3L Evo wouldn't be too far behind the 2.5L STI setup.

 

A 1.05 A/R T4 Twin Scroll (EWG) option for starter.

 

sorry guys it was later last night and I was exhausted. Anyway for the $ per hp I don't
Feel this turbo is worth it. I did a lot of reading on this turbo before going with it. I compared every turbine housing option. In the end I pick the single scroll do to reports
Of it only losing a few hundred rpm's in spool compared to the t4Ts but would make more power out the top.
I know I'm on smaller cams. I stayed with the s1 do to wanting to keep
Power to the left as much as I could. I can still play with my cam gears to see if that will help spool and bottom/mid range a little more. I don't feel the cams are holding me back that much as people have made will over 600 on s1 cams.
Now as for the turbo itself. Transit response is great. But at the same time I don't think it's that much better then my old fp3052(30r). Maybe I'm looking at this all wrong. I Was thinking a 60lb/min turbo with a 64trim exhaust wheel should grossly out performs a 52lb/min 76trim exhaust wheel turbo. But they are close on hp and tq and the 3052 was on a 2.0.
Maybe I should not compare it to this dyno of my old car.

 

@Construct, the setup you mentioned was actually done on a Scooby local to me and the owner wanted more low end grunt for autox. This was discussed a few pages back. Also, Jager Racing did 424 AWHP on a 6758 on a single scroll 0.64 T25 housing if my memory serves me correctly. They eventually swapped to a 7163.

However, the Scooby has about 10 miles of exhaust piping before the turbo and the head flow is not quiet as good as the 4G63.........

It's tough to directly relate the Scooby's engine operation and flow to the 4G63. The intake manifold is terribly designed, long exhaust runners, head flow not that great,etc etc. but it sure is a good start and data point.

248.754.9200. Go ahead and give them a call........

 

This right here....

Thanks for posting the results however! Just more info to add to the stats

 

I'm still confused why people are talking about a 60#/min turbo not coming on fast enough when they're using a single scroll manifold.