Borg Warner EFR 9180
01-31-15, 06:21 PM
#51
I think so to.
Just for ***** and giggles i put another 2 psi in it and it immediately picks up another 20HP (and then ***** itself even earlier(Ignition just can't handle it)
I think if I could put 40psi in it and get the tune in the right place 700rwhp is not out of the question.
So far compression is good. Customer is itching to get his car back so not sure how much more playing I can do with it. Time will tell.
If I can find a set of IGN-1A coils on monday I will Get them installed and put it back on the dyno and see if it helps my cause much.
Just for ***** and giggles i put another 2 psi in it and it immediately picks up another 20HP (and then ***** itself even earlier(Ignition just can't handle it)
I think if I could put 40psi in it and get the tune in the right place 700rwhp is not out of the question.
So far compression is good. Customer is itching to get his car back so not sure how much more playing I can do with it. Time will tell.
If I can find a set of IGN-1A coils on monday I will Get them installed and put it back on the dyno and see if it helps my cause much.
02-02-15, 07:00 AM
#52
Wastegate John
iTrader: (13)
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Long Island NY 11746
Posts: 2,979
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes
on
9 Posts
"Just made 542rwhp on 30psi and we are still only at 7k
car is on 93 Oct fuel and is blowing out spark
cranes not powerful enough
I'm fairly sure it'll make 600rwhp on the same boost
still climbiing before it blows out spark"
this is a 12A, right? if so, it is worthy of note that the motor is 1.3L rather than our normal 1.6.
car is on 93 Oct fuel and is blowing out spark
cranes not powerful enough
I'm fairly sure it'll make 600rwhp on the same boost
still climbiing before it blows out spark"
this is a 12A, right? if so, it is worthy of note that the motor is 1.3L rather than our normal 1.6.
HUH?
02-18-15, 03:16 PM
#57
Full Member
This looks interesting.. subscribed!
All these engines running this big EFR 91 turbo are ported right? I wonder how well this turbo would work on a stock port engine running E85. I know it depends on the rest of the setup, but i wonder if it would be "laggy"..
All these engines running this big EFR 91 turbo are ported right? I wonder how well this turbo would work on a stock port engine running E85. I know it depends on the rest of the setup, but i wonder if it would be "laggy"..
02-23-15, 08:31 AM
#60
Racing Rotary Since 1983
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
"Howard you got any news?"
the car is on the rollers and is currently in process of constructing a gas map off the spring. if that finishes today we will immediately switch to E85 and my Valvoline V-Pro premix. (i have a bunch of the summer blend E85 stashed)
i do have a brief initial log and so far am impressed w the ratio of exhaust back pressure V boost pressure, lowish EGTs as well as better looking IATs.
BTW, i am running a 1.05 and 3 inch exhaust and don't expect to have any flow problems.
i will share the data once we get further into the process.
howard
the car is on the rollers and is currently in process of constructing a gas map off the spring. if that finishes today we will immediately switch to E85 and my Valvoline V-Pro premix. (i have a bunch of the summer blend E85 stashed)
i do have a brief initial log and so far am impressed w the ratio of exhaust back pressure V boost pressure, lowish EGTs as well as better looking IATs.
BTW, i am running a 1.05 and 3 inch exhaust and don't expect to have any flow problems.
i will share the data once we get further into the process.
howard
02-28-15, 03:33 PM
#63
Racing Rotary Since 1983
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
we are just working thru some small items and have finished w pump/meth. we are now on E85 and the FFS is giving us sporadic "off" readings. no biggie.
i do have some interesting data but will wait til we have a more complete picture.
HC
i do have some interesting data but will wait til we have a more complete picture.
HC
03-01-15, 06:38 AM
#65
Arrogant Wankeler
Flex fuel sensor I would assume.
Given numerous people have proven the value of at least going to 3.5inch exhaust surely it would make more sense to be running something of that size, it will completely throw off a genuine representation of EMP:IMP at decent boost for comparison purposes vs a low back pressure exhaust? Are you dumping gates straight to atmosphere? I don't get it, people run 3 inch intake pipework and then add fuel mass and turn it all to gas and heat the lot to 4 times the absolute temperature and think it should go out in a pipe the same size?
Dyno graph for pump AI?
Given numerous people have proven the value of at least going to 3.5inch exhaust surely it would make more sense to be running something of that size, it will completely throw off a genuine representation of EMP:IMP at decent boost for comparison purposes vs a low back pressure exhaust? Are you dumping gates straight to atmosphere? I don't get it, people run 3 inch intake pipework and then add fuel mass and turn it all to gas and heat the lot to 4 times the absolute temperature and think it should go out in a pipe the same size?
Dyno graph for pump AI?
03-01-15, 09:59 AM
#67
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,792
Received 2,573 Likes
on
1,829 Posts
03-01-15, 11:03 AM
#68
Racing Rotary Since 1983
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
a gas dyno sheet will have to wait as we just did driveability and verified most everything was working at very conservative settings. since time is once again closing in it is E85 straight ahead.
while we weren't looking for a lot of power off the spring w AFRs in mid 9s and -1.5 IGL there were a couple of interesting things...
the only comparative logs i have come from my GT4094r which gave a good account of itself.
turbo efficiency is an under-apperciated but first tier metric:
i log temp immediately out of the turbo w a thermocouple (which makes it accurate to the mS)
at 20.4 psi the 9180 delivered air at 179 F
at 21.1 psi the 4094r delivered air at 325 F
a significant difference in efficiency. cold air =s more Oxygen.
the other interesting metric was EMP (exhaust manifold pre turbo pressure)
EMP was less than boost pressure until 6000 rpm.
at the highest rpm (7566) -20.4 psi boost- it was 26.6, a 1.30 ratio.
of course as we raise boost and rpm i expect it will widen a bit but those are good numbers.
i purposely run a 3 inch exhaust as the car is dual purpose and i will give a bit to maintain a reasonable profile around town. it will be interesting to see what EMP we have once tuned out. my wastegate feeds into my DP.
while we weren't looking for a lot of power off the spring w AFRs in mid 9s and -1.5 IGL there were a couple of interesting things...
the only comparative logs i have come from my GT4094r which gave a good account of itself.
turbo efficiency is an under-apperciated but first tier metric:
i log temp immediately out of the turbo w a thermocouple (which makes it accurate to the mS)
at 20.4 psi the 9180 delivered air at 179 F
at 21.1 psi the 4094r delivered air at 325 F
a significant difference in efficiency. cold air =s more Oxygen.
the other interesting metric was EMP (exhaust manifold pre turbo pressure)
EMP was less than boost pressure until 6000 rpm.
at the highest rpm (7566) -20.4 psi boost- it was 26.6, a 1.30 ratio.
of course as we raise boost and rpm i expect it will widen a bit but those are good numbers.
i purposely run a 3 inch exhaust as the car is dual purpose and i will give a bit to maintain a reasonable profile around town. it will be interesting to see what EMP we have once tuned out. my wastegate feeds into my DP.
Last edited by Howard Coleman; 03-01-15 at 11:10 AM.
03-01-15, 03:25 PM
#69
a gas dyno sheet will have to wait as we just did driveability and verified most everything was working at very conservative settings. since time is once again closing in it is E85 straight ahead.
while we weren't looking for a lot of power off the spring w AFRs in mid 9s and -1.5 IGL there were a couple of interesting things...
the only comparative logs i have come from my GT4094r which gave a good account of itself.
turbo efficiency is an under-apperciated but first tier metric:
i log temp immediately out of the turbo w a thermocouple (which makes it accurate to the mS)
at 20.4 psi the 9180 delivered air at 179 F
at 21.1 psi the 4094r delivered air at 325 F
a significant difference in efficiency. cold air =s more Oxygen.
the other interesting metric was EMP (exhaust manifold pre turbo pressure)
EMP was less than boost pressure until 6000 rpm.
at the highest rpm (7566) -20.4 psi boost- it was 26.6, a 1.30 ratio.
of course as we raise boost and rpm i expect it will widen a bit but those are good numbers.
i purposely run a 3 inch exhaust as the car is dual purpose and i will give a bit to maintain a reasonable profile around town. it will be interesting to see what EMP we have once tuned out. my wastegate feeds into my DP.
while we weren't looking for a lot of power off the spring w AFRs in mid 9s and -1.5 IGL there were a couple of interesting things...
the only comparative logs i have come from my GT4094r which gave a good account of itself.
turbo efficiency is an under-apperciated but first tier metric:
i log temp immediately out of the turbo w a thermocouple (which makes it accurate to the mS)
at 20.4 psi the 9180 delivered air at 179 F
at 21.1 psi the 4094r delivered air at 325 F
a significant difference in efficiency. cold air =s more Oxygen.
the other interesting metric was EMP (exhaust manifold pre turbo pressure)
EMP was less than boost pressure until 6000 rpm.
at the highest rpm (7566) -20.4 psi boost- it was 26.6, a 1.30 ratio.
of course as we raise boost and rpm i expect it will widen a bit but those are good numbers.
i purposely run a 3 inch exhaust as the car is dual purpose and i will give a bit to maintain a reasonable profile around town. it will be interesting to see what EMP we have once tuned out. my wastegate feeds into my DP.
That's a ridiculous difference.......
03-02-15, 06:29 AM
#72
Racing Rotary Since 1983
Thread Starter
iTrader: (6)
my apologies here... with the start of the 2015 session we upgraded to the latest ViPEC software and the tags changed a bit. i really should have caught it given such a large difference.
it doesn't help to have really good instrumentation (which i have) if it isn't read correctly (which i didn't.)
the correct comparative turbo exit air temps then are:
GT4904r 21.1 psi 163 F
9180 20.4 psi 179 F
it will be interesting to see if the billet 9180 pulls away from the 4094r at higher boost levels.
howard
it doesn't help to have really good instrumentation (which i have) if it isn't read correctly (which i didn't.)
the correct comparative turbo exit air temps then are:
GT4904r 21.1 psi 163 F
9180 20.4 psi 179 F
it will be interesting to see if the billet 9180 pulls away from the 4094r at higher boost levels.
howard
03-02-15, 08:22 AM
#73
^ That makes more since because when I read the above, I found it hard to believe that two similar size compressors could make that much difference in temp. Howard, do you have spool characteristic comparisons between these two turbos? I'm sure that's were the 9180 will blow away the 4094r.
