0110-M-P

iTrader: (10)

I'd be interested to see the 0.91 vs. 1.10 EGT temps.

Neutron

iTrader: (10)

Unfortunately I'm not able to log egt's yet. The egt's I'm using have a 5 volt out for data logging but the FD series 1 AEM box is hard wired for AEM egt sensors. There is usually a jumper to switch between the AEM sensor or a 5 volt input.

RiceFx306

iTrader: (7)

So the 1.10 is the way to go at the sacrifice of 200 rpms?

Neutron

iTrader: (10)

At least for my set up it is a no brainier. Once i get a half way decent IC core, I can at least get a better idea of the top end benefits.

Jobro

iTrader: (2)

That is unreal boost response!

20psi gauge at 4100rpm from the 0.91 A/R 9180 aka 366?
20psi gauge at 4375rpm from the 1.10 A/R 9180 aka 366?

I have to ask the question are we talking about the same turbo 66mm compressor inducer 91.4mm exducer? Basically that is a T66 wheel of old on a massive turbine wheel in a tighter housing than normal.

That turbo is meant to have a 73mm turbine exducer, 80mm turbine exducer. A full GT4202 uses a 75mm / 82mm wheel.

That wheel is a good 8mm larger than the modern aggressive p-trim on a T04Z. How on earth are you achieving the same boost threshold rpm.

I have quality plots I've found online from 1.0 A/R T04Zs doing similar tests and they typically achieve similar boost at 4000rpm as to what you are getting at 4000 with your 0.91A/R, but your turbine is massive in comparison.

I must admit I am skeptical. Are you sure you aren't using the 3.0" inducer 2.66" exducer turbine (basically a Q-trim)?

Neutron

iTrader: (10)

This is the standard out of the box S366 purchased from Turblown along with his latest manifold design. Turbine is the 80mm inducer and 73mm exducer. This is the only S366 Elliot from Turblown sells. E85 has a little to do with it. Maybe 200rpm or so. The rest is the manifold design, thermal coating and ports. Honestly response may improve when it cools down. It was really hot out during my tuning session. August in Arizona is no joke!

The only problem with switching to the 1.10A/R is it is not a 100% direct swap. If you already have fabricated the DP then work will need to be done. The discharge tube is much longer on the 1.10A/R, similar to the EFR line. The one good thing is the housing is very inexpensive. I found mine for $150 brand new.

Here is what the housing looks like S366 1.10A/R . This is the same vendor that sold me just the housing for $150 as well.

Jobro

iTrader: (2)

That is very good value. Does your one have the back cut / /clipped / cupped turbine wheel?

I'm not into back cut wheels.

Neutron

iTrader: (10)

I'm not sure. The turbine wheel is just how it came from the factory. I don't think so.

Full-Race Geoff

The S300SX 9180 aka 's366' in question is an outstanding turbo, incredible bang-for-the-buck. We actually had this turbo with 1.10 a/r on the 2nd place car at World Time Attack 2012 last year.. 2.3L motor at 35psi boost, it was by far the simplest and least expensive turbo in the field but the performance speaks for itself.

BorgWarner turbos have some of the best turbine wheel aerodynamics in the world. This particular 80mm turbine is an excellent unit which uses their 'J-type' turbine wheel blade shape and that was actually carried over to the EFR series. This is a very large and high flowing wheel design, yet it has high efficiency (especially in twinscroll config) so it spools like a much smaller turbine wheel - definitely a nice match for rotary 13B engines.

FYI - the old p-trim T04Z turbine wheel is an antiquated 11blade design, good for its time (early 1990s) but definitely not modern tech any more. much better turbine wheel selections available now IMHO

There is no "one-size-fits-all" answer for this, that's why we (Full-Race) offers all the different housings (0.88, 0.91, 1.00 and 1.10). Even though it only shows up as 200rpm on a steady state dyno plot (or drag race application) - the larger A/R can feel lazier especially during transient driving conditions experienced (during real world driving or road course/time attacks stuff). for a high power street car the 1.00 could be a good in between.

thats because youre using the wrong 1.10!! it works and obviously you found it inexpensively, but it is not the one we recommend for plug-and-play-fitment

the borgwarner J-type turbine wheels ALL are machined on the outlet, but it is not a clip!!

RiceFx306

iTrader: (7)

Hi Geoff, just curious but would you prefer the FMW design to say a BatMoWheel design? Also do you see a benefit to running the billet wheel on your standard rotary application (~16-22 lbs)?


My apologies on my comment earlier as I didn't realize that I was looking at a s366 and thought I was looking at an S362 which is more along the lines of what I'm in the market for. Did we conclude that he was having issues with his boost controller and it wasn't compressor surge? I recall on someones s362 setup that you recommended a .91 AR for them and it sounded like a lot of fun to me - being a stock port car. Would you still suggest the .91 on the s362? Do the other turbine housing have the same dimensions (as far as downpipe fitment is concerned)?



Just curious but going by your site:

Perhaps it was just that guys application, but on these turbos would you suggest a 1.10 for most of the rotary guys on a smaller turbo?

And this Marmon flange?

Is there a real benefit to V-band vs Marmon for your average car owner who doesn't plan to swap turbos for years down the road? And if not do you guys sell the Marmon adapters?


-Sorry for the barrage of questions, but they've been building up for quite awhile and a lot of people have just look at me puzzled when I ask them about it or they give me answers in theory without actually looking at the product (or perhaps thinking of an older product by the name name). Thank again Geoff you've been so helpful through the years and between you and Tony I don't know who is out there on multiple forums more.

Neutron

iTrader: (10)

Forgot to mention that the compressor surge is completely gone now. We also had a boost control issue as well which is what I was experiencing on the street after my initial tune. There was a little surge on the dyno with the .91 that is not there any more.

Full-Race Geoff

wow those are some questions! ok, ill try to knock them out:

FMW vs batmowheel: FMW is 100% genuine OE borgwarner. This is the way to go IMHO. Top quality usa made turbos by actual engineers. on the other hand, bullseye buys BW turbos from distributors then installs their own compressor wheels... these comp wheels are not gas stand tested or compressor mapped nor are they burst tested. In my experience they do not perform as advertised, and i prefer to keep it 100% bw.

billet vs cast: borgwarner's latest generation compressor wheels are billet, and they do offer a performance improvement (due to blade aero) over the older cast compressors. The 61.4mm inducer "S300sx fmw" is a great turbo and it's compressor map fits the 13b nicely up to 500-550hp level The billet wheels do have a price increase and the older cast models still hold the "bang-for-the-buck" crown

The most significant thing to consider outside of compwheel is that the OE Borgwarner Airwerks turbos with billet compressor wheels also have their latest 6-pad "severe duty" bearing system - which is not seen on any of the other cast wheel bw turbos nor any aftermarket company turbos

which size compressor? If you need more airflow than the 61.4mm FMW can deliver, my opinion agrees with howard coleman ... For the best value and performance in an off-the-shelf turbo, the S300SX 88-75 is probably the single best fit to the 13B for sub600whp range. This is not a billet nor is it a 6pad, but it hauls the mail, at a great price

which size turbine housing? This depends on how much boost you plan to run and what is your power target and intended use for the vehicle? If its a street only car yes id suggest 0.91 a/r. If its street/track 1.00 a.r is a good spot and if its just to go really fast then 1.10 a/r... 13B's like to exhale, and that means a big turbine housing. The cupped tip turbine wheel comes standard on the 8875 and is what i recommend on the FMW so thats a given to use here. 0.91 will spool a tiny bit quicker but higher rpm and higher boost levels will drop power. the 1.10 a/r might spool only 200rpm later on the dyno comparison attached but every application is different and a steady state dyno is not always a true representation of the real world.

marmon vs vband -- marmon works well and keeps cost down. Vband is faster, more convenient, more precise and easily allows you to swap turbos in the future. I personally prefer vband and recommend it when its an option - but it is not necessary. We can supply you with the marmon flange and clamp no problem at all. If you plan to stay with the BW turbos there are a LOT of different turbos that use the identical housing (no changes) ie: 83-75, FMW, 88-75, and the upcoming FMW2. you could use the same turbine housing and only swap the center sections and comp cover..

lots of options with the bw hope this helps


that is good to hear your setup is running so well with the larger 1.10 a/r turbine housing. I suspect you may be correct, that 0.91 spooled the 66mm compressor just a little quicker. Its unlikely to surge in real world driving conditions as you noted, but UMS has dynapack dynos which can really load the engine up, and get the turbo spooled earlier than realistically... its almost impossible to duplicate the load and spool that the dynapacks can generate in the real world (without a load like a trailer or long, steep incline hill)

WANKfactor

iTrader: (1)

Hi, im looking at BW turbos for my mild-extended-turbo-port 13b, im chasing maximum spool up and mid range, and id be happy with 400 - 450 rwhp, on an engine that is fresh, and has a decent 3" exhaust, large fmic, plenty of fuel ect, ie its pretty efficient. Would the 83-75 with 1.00 housing be sufficient? And would I be better off with a t4 divided or sticking with my t3 manifold? And what effective advantages would I see using an FMW? Please be gentle, I need some insight. Thanks in advance!

WANKfactor

iTrader: (1)

And how would a cupped tip .91 compare to a flat tip 1.00? Thanks!

RiceFx306

iTrader: (7)

Your time and knowledge is always appreciated! I was really impressed with your products when I had a friends make 493 whp on a stock block RSX using the Full-Race turbo kit. I've been a fan ever since! I notive your FD manifolds slowly creeping down in price. Hopefully I'll be able to save up enough for it eventually.

Just read your link to the turbo diesel website on these on SupraForums and will not be going this route now or ever.

Perfect.

The only reason I've been following these turbos at all is due to the high praises spoken of it on the Full-Race website. I've been scouring RX7Club ever since to try to see some other people's results. I was really looking more towards the PT 6266/6766

It is a 6-pad is it not? Perhaps you mean ball-bearing?

Intended use:

Power Target: as close to 500 as I can get on e85 93 octane and water the rest of the time.



fmw2? Now I'm intrigued. Haha, no but I'm really appreciative of you taking the time to answer my questions. You've always been super helpful to all communities and have been enjoying your continued participation in the RX7 world.

Now time to start saving up for a Full-Race manifold.

Full-Race Geoff

the 83-75 is definitely a good fit for the <450whp range 13B. 0.91 a/r would be a great match for the 400-420ish level and then for 450+ the 1.00 would be the call.

I encourage you to use a twinscroll T4 manifold with dual WG, this generates the fastest spool, broadest powerband and most area-under-the-curve. Twinscroll also has the best selection of turbine housing A/R's to choose from. Of course you can use the t3 turbine housing and your current manifold to keep things simple.

the FMW is basically the updated S300sx 83/75. It features an EFR style compressor wheel with a slightly better fitting compressor housing and more robust bearing assembly. the same selection of turbine wheels and housings as the other s300sx's applies


^^We had really good results with justin pawlak running the s300sx 8375 turbo @450whp on his FormulaD / falken tire FC rx7, it lasted the entire season and never skipped a beat. (We were planning to test the FMW on his car but he got sponsored by Ford to drive a v8 mustang and then the car+trailer got stolen in california, sad deal)



a cupped tip 0.91 is pretty comparable to the flat tip 1.00. I tend to favor cupped tip for the rotary engines, because there is so much exhaust energy compared to a traditional piston motor


this power target is pretty much a perfect fit to the S300SX FMW... and you could go either way on the 0.91 or 1.00 - just figure out which fuel youre using the most and what boost level to optimize for and work backwards. feel free to post up ideas i can add my 2 cents and hopefully it helps someone else too

WANKfactor

iTrader: (1)

Thanks for that geoff

BLACK MAMBA

iTrader: (58)

Is the 1.0 and 1.10 direct fit or would I have o modify my downpipe ?

Full-Race Geoff

there are 3 different fitments available for these housings

a) standard borgwarner S300SX 'marmon flange': this comes standard on most airwerks turbos. The marmon is the least expensive and easiest to swap between with best availability. and


b) Extended snout s300sx: The extended snout is the hardest to fit for most applications but depending on your manifold may work on the 13B


c) Full-Race Vband: Full-Race machines the standard s300sx housings marmon to a locating nub then we preheat and perform a special tig weld between the cast housing and the steel vband. This makes the BW share the same fitment and footprint to garrett andrecision turbos like GT40R or T04Z... or blown up PTEs that dont want to change the DP or anything else - just turbo swap and go

trueimport

iTrader: (8)

Hi guys I'm in the market for a new turbo and have been looking at the s366 for quite some time now but have been hesitant on pulling the trigge for one reason. A friend of mine has a gt4088r and I've fallen in love with it. The response and low end is insanely quick and pull very hard all the way to the top end. The car is specifically set up as a street car with occasional track use (drag).

My goal is upper 500s to mid 600s with half bridge and e85. Would the s366 or s363 be able to achieve this? How would either of these turbos compare to the gt4088r? What a/r would you recommend? Obviously the 1.10 would seem to be the right choice but I don't want it to be laggy.

Thanks in advance.

Full-Race Geoff

ive got years of experience with the gt4088R, ran it on my personal car for 2.5 years in fact. It is a good turbo, reliable, spools well. It was ahead of its time especially for 2000-2004 but there are a lot better turbo choices now IMHO. When you 'fell in love' with your friend's car - did it have a 'twinscroll' divided exhaust manifold? -- Combining the right manifold with the right turbine housing makes a huge improvement on these engines (especially on the GT40R turbine wheel, undivided it is lagggy!)

here are my suggestions:

-borgwarner's 'S300' answer to gt4088R killer is the S300SX FMW: BorgWarner S300SX FMW Turbo - Full-Race.com -- both turbos flow the same 75lb/min airflow however the BW spools earlier, responds quicker and makes more power than a gt4088R due to the 83mm od compressor wheel (lower inertia) and J-type 'cupped tip' turbine wheel. below is a customers fully built STI with both of these turbos, back to back comparison (solid line = FMW, dotted line = GT)



*neither the BW turbo nor the gt4088R will be able to get to a true mid-600hp target (which requires ~80+lb/min airflow on the 13B)

--the S363: BorgWarner S300SX 8875 Turbo S362 - Full-Race.com 88mm OD compressor wheel -same diameter as the GT4088R - so it has comparable inertia, but is higher flowing. This is the turbo howard coleman is experimenting with and many <600hp 13B's use as a "bang-for-the-buck" turbo. When i took my gt4088R off, this turbo went on. Same spool, much more power I loved it... however soon after i got spool hungry and went to EFR8374

-- the S366 BorgWarner S300SX 9180 Turbo S366 - Full-Race.com spools remarkably well and is about the same as the GT4088R. really impressive.


all that being said... Im a turbo engineer and work with ford and BW on many different projects. The latest generation BW turbos are their EFR series, if you are considering a gt40R dual ball bearing turbo, i strongly encourage you to do some research on the EFR turbos - they truly are THAT good. We usually have a long backlog, but currently all EFR are in stock (first time in 3 years)

EFR 8374 1.05 a/r : BorgWarner EFR 8374 Turbo - Full-Race.com -- this turbo makes S363 power with spool and response comparable to a small t3/t4

and EFR 9180 1.05 a/r: BorgWarner EFR 9180 Turbo - Full-Race.com -- this turbo makes more power than the S366 and S467 but spools like an S360

i hope this helps lmk if you have any other questions

WANKfactor

iTrader: (1)

How good are the wastegate and bov on the efr turbos? Are they effective on a rotary engine?

I was considering getting a wastegated EFR as it would work out fairly cost effective not having to also buy a wastegate and BOV and also a little bit less fab work, plus making it all a bit more "legal" looking to the "powers that be", not to mention the amazing spool and flow claims.

Cosmo_TT

iTrader: (11)

+1

BLACK MAMBA

iTrader: (58)

Pm sent on the 1.0 -1.10 back housing

Full-Race Geoff

the CRV (compressor recirc valve) aka 'BOV' works extremely well. the simple design vents charge air (high pressure) directly to the compressor's inlet (low pressure). I have not seen any issues or failures. there are already aftermarket options available but Im dubious of any benefit

the internal WG also works very well. It is the largest diameter internal WG ever used in a production turbo. Keep in mind the restriction for you guys is the turbine housing A/R size, not the WG. I like divided twinscroll exhaust manifolds for 13B rotary engines and the 0.92 a/r is a little bit small if you plan on boost levels above 28+ psi. In some instances people blame the dropoff in performance on the IWG but its usually backpressure and A/R related. I asked BW to make a larger A/R IWG housing but they said no, larger housings would be ewg only for maximum performance

compared to traditional turbo kits with wastegates, dumps/flanges/clamps, external bov, etc ... the engine bay looks clean and uncluttered with the EFR in place. here is a photo of the EFR install just completed on the nemo racing time attack evo