GT4094R, nobody has tried it on a evo yet?
 

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....

if your gonna go that big stay 2.0. you will be able to rev much higher.

Dam that would be intresting to see i think it just to big.

+1 what he said!

Procco Evo has one ran a 9.2xx something like that with a 75 shot was it ...I know im not Right, but its something simliar to that.!

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!

Wow, spooling at 4500 rpms, what kind of safe redline were they seeing? Thats pretty impressive for a 2.4L motor. {thumbup}

go for it

I can't decide, the twin scroll configuration of that turbo combined with a proper divided manifold should help for spool, i know that it will give massive power, but i'm afraid of having too little powerband....
Mmmh, 4088R or 4094R?
Please, help me....:lol: :lol: :lol:

E-mail geoff@full-race.com he should be able to help you out.

Like I told you in a PM, the only thing I've heard about the 4094r is that it spools slower than a 4088r but makes more power. I cant say if they were using a true twin scroll setup though..

Geoff should be able to help you out though, he's helped me more than a few times.

Thank you very much for the info, i'll try to contact him...

The GT4294R doesn't spool THAT much later then the GT4088R.

If I recall correctly, when I mapped out the GT4094R, it looked like it would surge below 6000 RPM anyway. The GT4294R will be making enough power by 6000 RPM that you really won't care if it has a little extra lag.

The GT4094R does have the advantage of being a smaller (externally) turbocharger though. You can likely shoehorn in the GT4094R without doing a half width radiator.

Could you give me an idea about the full boost rpm on the 4094R, i'm a little worrying about lag, the car is not mainly for drag use...
If i could have a decent spool, starting to push hard starting from 4500 rpm or so, that turbo could be the ideal choice for me....
I would be thinking about a 1.06 exhaust AR, as it's a twin scroll turbo, is it a good choice, if combined to a twin scroll manifold?
Thanks...

I would look for a smaller a/r than a 1.06 that will surely be laggy even with a stroker!

yes Procco has a 4067 which is similar to the "gt37" or pt67 turbo this 4088 has been tried on 2.0 and 2.3 with not much success, too much lag, not enough power. I would go with what works.

You need to understand how a twin scroll setup works, you dont use standard sized housings. The housings need to be larger than what you would think. You also lose very little spool by going to larger twin scroll housings.

Both the gt4088r and gt4094r is available in .85 .95 1.06 and 1.19

With a divided manifold and divided T4 housing

a 2.0L would be best paired with the .95 a/r housing

a stroker would be best paired with the 1.06 a/r housing

You will always use a larger housing when doing a true twin scroll setup.

When people say the gt4088r spool's really slow and doesn't make enough power to offset the lag. They have tried using single scroll manifolds.

Every test I've seen when switching from a single scroll gt35r .82 a/r housing to a twin scroll/divided manifold and twin scroll T4 gt4088r turbo, it gained 75+whp and spooled very much the same.

The T67 P-trim/"37r" has to potential to make a little more power, but will spool slower than a true twin scroll gt4088r.

I was skeptical too when I was approached with this turbo option, but after doing some research, everyone who had negative things to say about the 4088r always used a single scroll manifold. It makes a huge difference.

The 4088r is a great option for someone who wants the power of a "37r" without giving up spool to a 35r. It just has to be done properly.

But, like I said before, I have no experience with the 4094r so I have no idea how much a difference it will make as far as spool and peak power goes.

Do it!

either thats a big turbo and your going to need some high revs to keep that thing in boost. i would suggest a 2.0 with a built set of pistons thats what all the fast cars use right?{thumbup}

This is pretty good advice, however I will note, we have not had much luck with keeping the 4088r steady on high boost. its not as large of a turbo as everyone thinks. I have never seen a 4088r break 700 whp.

the 37r isnt my favorite turbo by any means, id rather have a gt3576

OP, when you talk to Geoff post what he says/recommends, or maybe he'll post in the thread himself.....

is Procco really running a 4067? i thought he would have gone with the 4094.......?

I sent a email to Geoff yesterday, and he answered me after only 2 hours, confirming me what Frenchy4G63 says, a divided T4 configuration gives real and big gains in terms of spool, powerband and throttle response, now, as he had to know if i want to retain air conditoning on the car, i'm waiting for a definitive answer about the turbo i have to choose, i think, from his answer, he will suggest me a 4088R in a own Full race spec, on their web site there is one of these rated for 850+ hp.
When i will have this info, i will post it, i hope to have this answer soon, as i need all the parts for preparing for a track day in april, 10th, and i need some time for tuning the car properly, i'm only a little worried about delivery times for the manifold, as i think it's not a normal production for evos....
Btw i think that full twin scroll configuration gives great advantages in terms of spool, considering that in the past i owned cars similar to evo, like Lancia Delta integrale or Ford Escort Cosworth, that had non twin scroll turbos, and they spooled much later than the Evo, with similar engine specs, i understand that a direct comparison is not doable, but now, in Italy, a common upgrade for Lancia engines is a twin scroll manifold with a TD05-16G Mitsu turbo, anybody knows this unit?:lol: :lol: :lol:

Hey one more option for you I was just thinking about.

I dont know if you've seen the thread but Forced Performance developed a new wheel that spools faster than Garrett's, more low end and mid range with no loss up top.

From what I understand, when testing is done, Dave Buschur is testing the new wheel right now on a 35r, FP will be making the wheels in all of Garrett's sizes.

You could wait until testing is done, hopefully not too long, and get the gt4094r with the new wheel. The compressor wheel on the 4094 flows 82lbs/min so roughly 820-830whp (dynojet) and decent spool and midrange for street use.

Just something to keep in mind..

That's really interesting, where can i have some more infos? It could be a good choice for me.....Thanks a lot....

I did a little research, are you talking about this?
http://linux.forcedperformance.net/m..._Code=AllTurbo

Here's the thread: https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=246400

That's the same 4094r you can get from anyone, there's nothing listed on the site yet about the new wheel as it's still in testing.

Ok,, i'm going to read it, for having info on the new gt4094 is it a good idea to send a email to Forced Performance, for having some more info and release date?

You could, although I'm not sure if they will give you much info on the new wheel.

If you do make sure they understand your asking about the 4094r with the NEW wheel design they(FP) are making.

If they give you an estimate, post it here, I'm curious to see when they will be releasing the entire line of modified Garrett's.

Email sent, now let's wait when they will answer.....:) :) :)

Send me one and I'll dyno it compared to the t67. ;)

saw a couple of days ago.. a 2.4 liter, with a GT40R on the dyno.. starting numbers were 377 @ 19psi.. {OMG}

didnt stay long to find out what were the final numbers..

but looking at that turbo... DAMN.. that thing is Massive..

I received today an email from forced performance, they have not in calendar, as they said me, GT40R projects with different wheels, the only new product is the Gt4202RV, with tial housings, it's a piece of art to see, but i'm afraid it's a little too big for evo streetable uses..... Or not???

i used a 4088r and thought it was streetable. Actually thinking about going with the 4094r.

I'm not saying who but someone in MA has a built 2.0L and a custom GT4094R setup coming his way...:p

that was my car

Man just step up to a 42r 76mm and stop playing with the little 40r...
A shot of nitrous and all is good:beer:

I thought about that...I get pulled over enough, and if I had nitrous then it would be worse than what already happens. Plus having 800whp with out N2O is better bragging rights IMO.

I'm always trying to blow the welds off my intake manifold :beer:
800whp is awesome on the streets. I can tell you 750whp just about kills anything out there when i used to drive my car on the roads but now its about the rush of going down the track. Lately it seems like i get used to running my times and need more:( So 900whp with nitrous coming on at about 50mph would be rush for me:usflag:

+1 on that {thumbup} I can't wait!!!

ifarted2, what N2o shot are you planning on running??? are you just going to use it to spool the turbo (ie turn off once you have say 5psi posstive presure), or run it all the way to the redline???

thanks Chris.

The Procco Evo's 40r is a complete custom job anyway. You can't really compare that 40r to the normal one that everyone can buy.

^^ i thought his was the 4094

Theoretically isnt the 4094 supposed to be a 42 in a smaller housing? Other than prob a few horsepower shy under 30+ boost conditions.

No. A 4094 is a 67.x compressor wheel with a 40r turbine. Even the smaller 42r (4294) uses a 70m compressor.

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..

WTF!!!! thats insane! :) :) :)

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.

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...

here are some pics.. air/water plenum, 8 injectors w/ microtech and twin entry manifold w/ 4094.. I have a gear based boost control to tame her down..

http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b3...usalftside.jpg


http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b3...ltraplenum.jpg


http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b3...gt42turbo2.jpg


http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b3...ovatedl-32.jpg

that is simple stunning! did you do the work yourself or was it a kit??? also you got any dyno charts?? be nice to se when you are getting full boost! :)

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.

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.

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...

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.

i bet the 4094s would be amazing on a 2.3! the 4202s look to be spooling pretty quick on the tuners cars. can imagine what a 4094 on a t4 divided mani and antilag would be like!!! :)

Chris.

pm me.....{offtopic}

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.

got a link to this at all? sounds sick!

I highly doubt that maybe in 5th gear.....shoot they have 2.3's that don't spool
37R's that fast.

yeah, i have seen norris designs 4202 car and its just mental. makes you wonder why people bother with anything other than a 42 really! lol

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.

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

thanks for clearing that up! :)

Chris.

back from the dead:

i got my gt4094r installed and i have to say its not that much more laggy than my 4067r.i am running a 1.04 divided back housing with a dnp divided manifold.the car is on 20 psi and i have to say it is much faster than when it was on 25psi with the gt4067r.car pulls really hard all the the way to redline!!!putting it on the dyno on monday and race gas see what i will get.previous #s were 636hp on 34psi........all in all i dont think its that bad or maybe i am just used to lag.btw it makes 20 psi by 5600ish............but it hits HARD:thumbup:

cool info! ive heard great things about this turbo recently. sounds like it gonna be nasty once tuned. good luck bro.

yea bro,i am really excited to see what this will do.i also got rid of my gsc s2 and went with jun 272.

Looking forward to see some dyno numbers {thumbup}

any updates bro?

this is a repost from our other thread, but i thought i would duplicate it so that it can be easily found in the archives. I hope i dont offend any mods, feel free to delete this if its against the forum rules:

small update, although slightly OT b/c its a honda. We dynoed a customer car this weekend who went from a 37R (singlescroll) to a 4094R (twinscroll). Below are his dyno plots showing the twinscroll 4094 vs GT37R. Also, we overlayed the twinscroll 4094 vs another car with the identical engine build and a GT35R for reference The solid line is the 4094R.


http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g3.../4094vst67.jpg
solid line = twinscroll GT4094R 1.06 A/R
dotted line = singlescroll GT37R .63 A/R


http://i52.photobucket.com/albums/g3...094vsgt35r.jpg

solid line = twinscroll GT4094R 1.06 A/R
dotted line = singlescroll GT35R .82 A/R

These tests were not back to back. They were done within a year and on the same engine. This is not a 100% accurate comparison, but you can certainly see a trend.

yea car made 685hp@469 torque.this was at 38psi.i was hoping for over 700hp but i am still satisfied.i think my torque is a bit low,i see alot of evo with over 650 and 500 torque.anyone have any ideas or is my torque normal.....

u should buy it

Can you post a full mod list? I'm glad you are happy I would not be was this a low reading dyno? T3/37R's are putting down 600-650whp on Buschur's dyno and 700whp on dynojets.

I would expect a 85lb wheel to hit 750whp at least.

its a dyno jet,well its not that i am super happy about it but i just have to take it for what it is. my mods are the following,cp pistons,crower rods,stock head with ferrera valve train and jun 272,ams vsr,rc 1200 and few minor things i am forgetting.i am wondering if the stock head is hurting it or maybe this turbo is just a bunch of hype.alot of people say it is a mismatched turbo.my next move is to problay get a ported head and see what happens from there.if not i might just go to a more street friendly 37r.i mean the tune was very conservitive but i was still expecting more.

I think your torque may be just a little low. I have the same turbo on a SBR 2.1L and made 570 awhp and 434 awtq @ 30lbs. It leaned out on me at 30 because of my single walbro. I was just looking for 650@35lbs, which I should have no problem getting once I go to a dual pump setup.

yea your #s sounds similer to mines.i made about 650@35psi.i think a bit more.mayeb the turbo isnt all it was said to be.

hey nos51, 685whp while seeming a little low for the 4094 must be fun. It would be nice to see what # gains a ported head would produce as you have all the other supporting mods.

Hey maybe switch back to GSC cams! hahahaha

Post a power graph so it can be compared to a 37R.

I don't know either we need more graphs I haven't seen anything impressive from the single scroll 4094R's. I've talked to many vendors here and none have said anything good about the 4094R the lag was bad and power wasn't much better, so most just said go straight to a 42R divided.

This divided TS setup from Full-Race was supposed to help the spool dramatically the graphs he posted shows it does. I would like to see more on the power piece though. 750-775whp is what I would like to see.

It would be nice to know the gas and boost levels of the dynographs that Geoff posted too.

The stock head isn't helping things, and we don't know anything about your fuel system, exhaust manifold, turbo, and other odds and ends that may or may not make a difference.

can you post your dyno plot? What turbine housing is on your GT4094R? I think i know the problem, but i need to see the dyno graph

yea i will post it up when i get home.i am using a divded 1.06 turbine housing.i am also running a dnp divided manifold,however it is only a single wastegate which i think would effect spoolup but i dont think it should effect overall power but i may be wrong.also i am running an intank walbro feeding 2 inline walbros feeding both side of a perrin fuel rail through -6 lines.the car is not having fuel problems.if you have any suggestion geoff it would be greatly apprecaited.i kinda bit the bullet and tried out this turbo since there wasnt much info out on it.i am disapponted and now i am wondering if i should have just jumped to the 42r.only reason i didnt go straight to it is because i though i would have gotten 750ish out of the 4094r and not taken up so much room like the 42r would have.mayeb a ported head would give me gains of 50hp?i dont know how much the stock head is good upto,can ted b fill me in......thanks for all your help we can all learn together by figuring this out.

I have a friend who just made 760awhp 539 ft/lbs on a 4094 with the small .85 hotside. Maybe consider changing out that large 1.06 to something that will help the spool better. Nevertheless, your power numbers are down for a reason other than the turbo.

is this also an evo?if it is do you know if it has a ported head etc and how much boost it was on?i am sure if i threw more boost at the car it would make over 700 but i thought it would have made that at like 35psi.i am going to start looking into a few things.

Evo VIII. 2.0l, ported head, 38PSI

hmm i wonder if the stock head is hurting me THAT much.

do you have any more info? what engine (crank and bore), what exh/int manifold, what cams, headwork?, boost level?

just like i posted above,

do you have any more info? what engine (crank and bore), what exh/int manifold, what cams, headwork?, boost level? What intercooler? charge piping? what throttle body? are there any possible boost leak?
it probably isnt a lack of fuel! going to a twin wastegate setup could help too...

there is no reason you couldnt hit 750 once you figure out whats going on

stock bore 4g63 (2.0) cp pistons stock compression,crower rods,ams vsr intake,mustang 75mm throttle body,dnp divided exhaust manifold,jun 272 cams,head is stock exept for valvetrain and cams,charge pipe is 2.5 on the hotside,3inch on the coldside,intercooler is 4 inches thick but i have to get the exact dimensions.also i have honda cbr 1000 coilpacks.this was on 39psi.i am going to check for boost leaks as well.i know the bottom end is solid,i am wondering if the stock head could make it loose so much power.the car isnt running out of fuel for sure.i am looking into just getting a ported head and going from there.

2.0l custom header, custom intake manifold, headwork=yes, custom comp grinds, 38PSI.

I'm going to stop there because he isn't a vendor on EVOm and the last time I posted about one of his cars I got flogged by the admins. My only point was that the turbo is more than capable of the numbers and his problems are elsewhere (as you're suggesting).

everything sounds pretty solid. some things to check for:

-boost leaks like you mentioned. We used to run those mustang tb's on the intake manis we fabricated but they tend to leak at the shaft.

-headwork definately can help but that isnt the only problem

-is it possible a muffler collapsed or a flex section collapsed blocking exh?

- if you know a good fabricator you might want to try putting a 2nd gate on the manifold.

-how did you dial in your cam gears

-are you blowing out any spark

-can you get your dyno plot up? Im interested to see the tq curve. make sure it is hp& tq / RPM not speed

dont want to piss off the mods! thanks for the info :thumbup:

yea i can try switching out the tb.also the cams were set to 0/0.i didnt really bother with them becasue usually there minimal gains everytime we adjust them.i will post up the plot tonight when i get off work for you.well i am going to go through everything now and see whats up.also another thing is we could not get the turbo to build boost past 40 psi no matter what.i tried a manuel boost controler and i even unplugged the vacum line to the wastegate to see how high it would go.it will not go past 40psi.so i think either i have a boost leak or maybe the turbo cant build past 40 psi which i doubt.

thanks for all the info man, i agree with you.

What are you tuning with? What kind of timing numbers and AFR are you running through the motor? What fuel?

aem ems,we are running about 11.2-11.5 afr,timing i would have to look at the map but it is not very high.i believe at like 39 psi it is running like 4-5 degrees of timing.i am not sure on this though so dont qoute me on it.this is on torco 118

I run Torco 118NOS and have found that the cars generally like higher timing numbers with it to make the power. You should be able to run SOMEWHERE in the neighborhood of 15-19* up top.

If you are really only running 5* of timing then you may be shocked at what the hp difference would be. Do you have an EGT setup? I would be a little scared to know what the EGTs are at with so much boost and so little timing.

very interesting. from what you're saying i doubt its a boost leak.. post the dyno plot when you get home, ill go into more detail later tonite

^^^ what he said

yea that is true but again i am not sure of the timing values off the top of my head since i didnt tune the car.i would have to look at the map when i get home.

Whatever the .85 A/R TS hotside delivered, the 1.06 should do better, so that shouldn't be an issue.

The stock head is likely somewhat of a limiting factor, but I can't say to what extent. Logic implies that the greater the power potential, the more significant a limiting factor it would be.

I agree that the turbo isn't the problem. There is something else amiss. A pressure test is always a good first order of business.

What WG spring set are you using?

I agree that with only 5* of ignition advance, there is either power left on the table, or, if preignition was encountered near that point, there is something amiss that is aggravating the knock threshold. Again, make a pressure test to verify that you don't have a leak.

i am using a 19psi spring or springs rather.i am going to pressure test it but now that i think about it if i am correct on the timing which i think i am it would explain alot of things.i know my tuner was very conservitive.def power to gain there.i remeber on my old k20 turbo teg 2* of timing would give it like 30hp,but it was a 11.1 compression motor also.

you guys are a huge help,thats why i love evo m!!!:beer:

Saw this video testing a FP GT4094 produced 760whp 536tq. Its really hard to see the dyno graph, but it is posted.

Anyone know how much boost this evo was running?

http://videos.streetfire.net/video/d...90000a3c71.htm

I just dynoed 629/490 on the GT4088R (.95 A/R) on E85 Pump Gas at 25 PSI last weekend.

It will do 700-725whp on C16, however I am not trying to max out this setup.

I have decided to go to a GT42 or GT45R, as I plan to drag race the car next year.

I paid $1800 for it back in June, and will take $1400 for it as it sits. It has approximately 500 miles on it, and is in perfect shape.

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w...se85pump-1.jpg

http://i175.photobucket.com/albums/w...8/DSC01202.jpg