Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

New BW EFR Turbo Thread

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 17, 2017 | 04:02 AM
  #4426  
03Ev0luti0n's Avatar
Newbie
10 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Georgia

Originally Posted by Toekneeng
I was expecting 450 whp as well but I'm anticipating a built block in the near future. For now I'm happy with how it feels on the road.
What did your timing curve look like? I have an almost identical set up on my 8 and made 418 at 22 psi on a mustang dyno in ATL, GA.... my phone is garbage but it looks like you were running 26 I would think that would be good for 450+ too..

Last edited by 03Ev0luti0n; Jul 17, 2017 at 04:09 AM.
Reply
Old Jul 17, 2017 | 07:52 AM
  #4427  
Toekneeng's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 36
Likes: 3
From: Portland
Originally Posted by 03Ev0luti0n



What did your timing curve look like? I have an almost identical set up on my 8 and made 418 at 22 psi on a mustang dyno in ATL, GA.... my phone is garbage but it looks like you were running 26 I would think that would be good for 450+ too..
I wasn't there when it was dyno'd and I didn't bother asking for any more info. I believe Aaron tuned it though.

What manifold are you running and what's your a/r?
Reply
Old Jul 17, 2017 | 08:02 AM
  #4428  
alpinaturbo's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 795
Likes: 54
From: California
DJDino

I suggest just traditional 3" exhaust, stock intake manifold, keep it simple.
There is a lot of "mystery" about intake manifolds, Magnus V5, AMS F1, and HKS, do work- but mostly on cars with lots of power on bigger laggier turbos (3582, 3586, 9180).
And nobody has shown a simple back to back independent dyno test on typical 400-500whp Evo with ported vs unported intake manifold, and shown gains. It's a lot of claims, some dyno's by vendors, no independent data.
Reply
Old Jul 17, 2017 | 09:50 AM
  #4429  
03Ev0luti0n's Avatar
Newbie
10 Year Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
From: Dallas, Georgia
Originally Posted by Toekneeng
I wasn't there when it was dyno'd and I didn't bother asking for any more info. I believe Aaron tuned it though.

What manifold are you running and what's your a/r?
Full-Race twin scroll stock AC and radiator manifold
1.05 A/R.

i was on Sunoco 93 pump. My timing Map is pretty conservative on stock bottom end and head. It comes on smooth at about 4* advanced and ramps up to 10* by redline
Reply
Old Jul 17, 2017 | 01:46 PM
  #4430  
LetsGetThisDone's Avatar
EvoM Guru
10 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2013
Posts: 15,973
Likes: 1,629
From: Las Vegas
Originally Posted by 211ratsbud
I would be seriously inclined to believe the BW chra would last longer. Stock chra turbos seem to have a weak spot after having 3, to serious abuse and in one case no perceived abuse. While we aren't moving to borg warner , I think the gains are what you anticipate or see on the dyno, but the benefits are far reaching.
Stock CHRA can be rebuilt 10x and you still won't approach the cost of an EFR turbo kit vs a stock frame setup.
Reply
Old Jul 17, 2017 | 05:02 PM
  #4431  
djdino's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
From: Australia
Originally Posted by alpinaturbo
DJDino

I suggest just traditional 3" exhaust, stock intake manifold, keep it simple.
There is a lot of "mystery" about intake manifolds, Magnus V5, AMS F1, and HKS, do work- but mostly on cars with lots of power on bigger laggier turbos (3582, 3586, 9180).
And nobody has shown a simple back to back independent dyno test on typical 400-500whp Evo with ported vs unported intake manifold, and shown gains. It's a lot of claims, some dyno's by vendors, no independent data.
Thanks AT, I have tried a "modified" 9 turbo and was seeing full boost at 4100rpm, the car is track only and on tight street/sprint events it was horrible, I put a stock 9 turbo back on and it was a different car. I'm really hoping this 7670 will spool in between the 2 at about 3600. I'm wondering if the 7163 may be a better choice ?
Reply
Old Jul 18, 2017 | 07:47 AM
  #4432  
alpinaturbo's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 795
Likes: 54
From: California
I think that 7163 might be better choice, given your experience and purpose, provided your tracks are tight and its a sprint race, as you pointed out.

If you even scroll around this forum, you'll find 7163 twin scroll on stock-block E9 making full boost by 3600rpm-while being tuned respectfully on pump fuel.

If you run E85 and have 2.2 liter, I cannot see why 7163 will not make full boost say by 3200-3300rpm, and make meaningful boost lower down.

However, if your tracks are not so tight...if they are more like Laguna Seca and Sonoma Raceway in California, than 7670 all the way for 2.2 liter.
In USA, Laguna Seca and Sonoma are considered medium speed tracks..tight race-tracks, because you have VIR for example (Virginia International Raceway) and new Austin F1 track COTA, which are much higher speed.

7670 on 2.2 liter is very sweet in all aspects, especially track application.
7163 is tremendous for more mid range and lower speeds, especially on say 2.0 liter which cannot spool as effectively a 7670 in lower rpm ranges.
Reply
Old Jul 18, 2017 | 01:57 PM
  #4433  
211Ratsbud's Avatar
EvoM Guru
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Oct 2010
Posts: 4,286
Likes: 43
From: Watertown, NY
Originally Posted by letsgetthisdone
Stock CHRA can be rebuilt 10x and you still won't approach the cost of an EFR turbo kit vs a stock frame setup.

if you're cool with that down time I guess...
Reply
Old Oct 28, 2018 | 06:08 PM
  #4434  
burn4005's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: gold coast
Grave digging this thread as Borg are about to announce their new 8474,9274 and 9280 EFR turbos at Sema this year. first saw a glimpse two years ago but looks like its happening. I was initially dissapointed with the efficiency of the concept versions so it'll be interesting to see if they've tweaked them.

https://www.borgwarner.com/newsroom/...2018-sema-show
Reply
Old Oct 29, 2018 | 11:32 AM
  #4435  
RWD4G63's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 153
Likes: 11
From: Mattawan, MI
Originally Posted by burn4005
Grave digging this thread as Borg are about to announce their new 8474,9274 and 9280 EFR turbos at Sema this year. first saw a glimpse two years ago but looks like its happening. I was initially dissapointed with the efficiency of the concept versions so it'll be interesting to see if they've tweaked them.

https://www.borgwarner.com/newsroom/...2018-sema-show

Very cool, and good to see! Thanks for the heads up.
Reply
Old Dec 12, 2018 | 12:18 PM
  #4436  
RWD4G63's Avatar
Evolving Member
 
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 153
Likes: 11
From: Mattawan, MI
New BW EFR Turbo Thread-dpysaosh.jpg

New BW EFR Turbo Thread-jbw6m42h.jpg

New BW EFR Turbo Thread-ijzuvbkh.jpg
Reply
Old Jan 24, 2019 | 11:59 AM
  #4437  
bsh's Avatar
bsh
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 261
Likes: 3
From: Norway
I have been thinking to swap my EFR 8374 T3 IWG (680 hp @ the hubs, Dynapack) to a 9180 T3 IWG trying to achive 800 whp. I have seen there is a 8474 coming with way more compressor flow, but it still seems it is using the same hotside. I want to keep the T3 IWG, will the 8474 be capable of 800 whp with the T3 IWG, or do I have switch to the 9180 to get the bigger hotside?
Thanks
Reply
Old Jan 27, 2019 | 11:29 PM
  #4438  
Mick_O's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 124
Likes: 2
From: Australia
Originally Posted by nemsin
The 7670 has never performed particularly well on our 2.0. Imo, the results don't justify the huge cost increase over running a 71HTA.
Have you ever driven 1 or just looked at lines on a piece of paper to make these claims?
Reply
Old Feb 13, 2019 | 12:32 PM
  #4439  
RalliartRsX's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 60
Likes: 1
From: Maryland, USA
I rarely post here, but have been lurking since 2002 (Yiiikkeeesss!) but struggling to find much info

Anyone have any experience, or better yet, seen this particular (be is 2.5 or 3.5 housing or the 0.63 or 0.84, whatever. Just the T3 setup) EFR 7163??

https://www.amazon.com/Borg-Warner-Turbo-11637105000-V-Band/dp/B07JVHT2MB/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=efr+t3&qid=1550089876&s=gateway&sr=8-1 https://www.amazon.com/Borg-Warner-Turbo-11637105000-V-Band/dp/B07JVHT2MB/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=efr+t3&qid=1550089876&s=gateway&sr=8-1
Reply
Old Feb 13, 2019 | 04:19 PM
  #4440  
RS200's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 622
Likes: 118
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
The T3 .64 A/R housing looks to be aftermarket, not a BW part. The turbocharger's part number correponds to the supercore (no turbine housing), so someone just slapped one on and is selling them. Since BW sells theirs at $500 or so, there is a lot of room for the aftermarket to make a cheaper one and sell a bunch of EFRs. I've personally never seen it used.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:04 AM.