This doesn't make sense. I cannot respond to people because I don't care about HC? Curious



Anyone want to chime in on the different housing coatings available for the 9180 or EFR line?

Benefits?

Longevity?

 

I would try a coating, but definitely not a blanket.

On my EFR set up my car got "omg never smelled the resin cooking out of the carbon fiber and saw my finger print oil burning off the UIM" hot in the engine bay with just 3 minute full boogy 26psi sprints.

I saw the IRL EFR turbos have some chalky black coating- you probably want that coating.

 

I always hear turbo blankets are terrible never run one myself. I know they smell terrible.

I see they have a black and silver 2000° coatings.. Nothing on what type of coating it is I am going to assume ceramic. Anybody chime in on what type of coatings they are?

Edit: Hmm some offer a 2200° coating...

Still cannot find anything on what type of coating it is.

Found says Techline Ceramic Coating..


Here is a link for Tech Line Home for the DIYer

http://www.techlinecoatings.com/index.html

Exhaust Coatings

http://www.techlinecoatings.com/hi-p...-coatings.html

 

I have coated several and run our Inconel shields without issues( inspected post race season too). I have seen I believe it was an Indy car engine with inconel based heatshields on the turbine housing too( new 2015 BW catalog).

 

Ah you're a "last word" type of guy. I get it.

 

No.

I seriously don't understand this sense so please elaborate your vague position to me in a PM.


I am having PM conversations with multiple people at the moment to do my merits of not having oh just everything they can come up with to try and make me feel bad or how I have no forum "CRED" blah blah. So whatever you want to gripe at me about head on over to my PM box and we can take it up over there.

 

Are these solid or weave type Inconel shields?


Edit: Like this one here? Doesn't look to have the burny weave to it.

 

No need for pm. Your attempt at condescension and continuous replies to me prove my point.

Or you can just ignore it.

 

From what I can find these are press molded no weave. Me likey!

 

Results are in... 25 psi on pump gas + water/meth. Could have probably made more power if I leaned it out a bit since the wideband was showing 9's but I figured it was good enough and safe.



thewird

 

Do you have a graph with engine speed instead of vehicle speed? Nice numbers btw

 

how quick does the boost come on?

 

Looks like there is a small dip at 85 mph mark, could be too much water, or turbo being close to the surge line. nonetheless solid numbers on pump gas

cant wait to start installing the efr8374 kit. its stuck at customs since 3 weeks now

 

+1

 

Making more torque down low than the sequential twins and NA20b cars Results are great, would love to see them with RPM but just glad to see results. What porting is on the engine?

 

Are you familiar with what the mph correlates to in rpm?

 

Awww, you didn't start the pull till 3,000rpm in 4th (55mph w/ 4.10) and 3,000rpm power is my benchmark for how responsive a turbo is

I know firsthand, its impossible to please everyone with your results.

Your power looks great!

 

Making more torque down low than the sequential twins and NA20b cars Results are great, would love to see them with RPM but just glad to see results. What porting is on the engine?

Well no, sequential twins make 120rwhp/210ftlb to 150rwhp/262ftlb @ 3,000rpm/55mph 4th stock and with bolt-ons and full boost on primary turbo get up to ~175rwhp/306ftlb @ 3,000rpm.

My stock hybrid 60-1 did 120rwhp/210ftlb @ 3,000rpm, my EFR 7670 did 171rwhp/300ftlbs @ 3,000rpm.

I mean, maybe he DOES make more torque down low than sequential twins (and yes NA cars 2, 3 or 4 rotors don't make torque), but we need him to make a dyno pull starting at 2,000rpm to show us.

The chart DOES show he starts making more peak torque than my EFR 7670 at the same boost starting 5,000rpm.

Rpm per rpm his torque eclipses my EFR 7670 by 4,500rpm (since the little 7670's torque starts dropping here and the big 9180's starts to come on).

 

There are a lot of calculators to find rpm from mph, but for the lazy peanut gallery I will dump this here.

Engine Speed (RPM) MPH 4.1 Gear
8000 RPM 145.12 MPH
7500 RPM 136.05 MPH
7000 RPM 126.98 MPH
6500 RPM 117.91 MPH
6000 RPM 108.84 MPH
5500 RPM 99.77 MPH
5000 RPM 90.70 MPH
4500 RPM 81.63 MPH
4000 RPM 72.56 MPH
3500 RPM 63.49 MPH
3000 RPM 54.42 MPH
2500 RPM 45.35 MPH
2000 RPM 36.28 MPH
1500 RPM 27.21 MPH
1000 RPM 18.14 MPH

 

^ which makes that pull a 3000rpm start 8000rpm finish.

 

Yeah, but we don't know if he went WOT at 2,000rpm and started logging at 3,000rpm or if he went WOT 3,000rpm and started logging or what.

 

It's making 240ish rwtq at 3500 rpms. This is phenomenal no matter how you dissect on a turbo that is capable of 600rwhp. Most sequential twins struggle to make that torque on the primary though it does come on sooner with the sequentials. The NA 3 rotor comment was just a jab at the delusional NA 3 rotor guys following this thread who at one time used the down low torque to justify their swaps. I don't want that argument here so ill move on.

I too would like to see a dyno plotted with rpm and started sooner but in all honesty anyone who has played with 2 rotors a long time can see how impressive this is. I don't think anyone is trying to compete nationally at AutoX with a 9180 on a 2 rotor but its pretty impressive for damn near every other application it's a no brainer for me for my next FD project. Seeing pump gas numbers at 18-20psi would be great as well but ill take what I can get.

 

Speaking of delusional, you think a dyno chart showing a power band that starts at 3k rpms is a good measure of low end?

 

 

Haha. Who you racing from 40mph in 4th gear? The facts are there that the stock sequential twins, BNRs, old school 56mm turbos, and the EFRs all make the 20b NA low end torque look laughable. This isn't the place to argue with those not really interested in separating fiction and reality. I think that has been made obvious by now.