Borgwarner EFR 8474 Dyno Thread
10-10-19, 04:06 PM
#126
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Please, with your great wisdom, try contributing more than just this. I'm on here every day fixing **** on ECUs by other "tuners", trying to support a community that I love. I post up a corrected Matchbot and can confirm it is flawed. I'm asking for real data for those of us who have running cars (I do not) with turbo speed sensors so we can plot things out mathematically and correct these calculations on Matchbot using REAL WORLD **** (Ideal Gas Law).
I think instead of helping others, I need to simply go work on my car... Why should I care that you're wrong? Too many ***** have been given out for this forum with zero gain.
I think instead of helping others, I need to simply go work on my car... Why should I care that you're wrong? Too many ***** have been given out for this forum with zero gain.
The following users liked this post:
RW Atelier (07-09-22)
10-10-19, 05:12 PM
#127
Performance Veteran...
I guess EFR turbo's and TurboBlown don't help this community or know the same basic Gas Laws that you do either lol... get over yourself bud.. that's all.
10-10-19, 09:56 PM
#128
How overly adult of you. You've now thrown both law and fact aside for name calling.
Someone ban me, this is a neverending waste of my time
Skeese
10-10-19, 10:03 PM
#129
I've been told that a 1-1 emap is an unrealistic goal while making big power in a rotary.
There have been logs posted of smaller than 1.45 (1.15) rears showing absolutely no difference in emap on the 9180 vs going to a 1.45.
Not trying to disagree, but I was 98% sure I was going with a 9180 and followed nearly every build on here related to that turbo. I've since committed to the 9280.
There have been logs posted of smaller than 1.45 (1.15) rears showing absolutely no difference in emap on the 9180 vs going to a 1.45.
Not trying to disagree, but I was 98% sure I was going with a 9180 and followed nearly every build on here related to that turbo. I've since committed to the 9280.
I shared my results using that housing.
Its not hypotheticals, or maths . It is actual data.
The following users liked this post:
Viper GTSR (10-11-19)
10-10-19, 10:25 PM
#131
Full Member
The combination of the compressor size and the turbine size allows for 130hp more. As stated by someone previously, the fact that it is capable of flowing more air (110 lbs) means that it actually is a more efficient unit after the crossover.
High emap occurs mainly beyond a turbo chargers efficiency limit, example, stock twins being pushed past 15psi, although the stock exhuast manifold on the twins adds to the emap as well.
Why would you not trust Borg Warner' s compressor map?
Also, that 1-1 emap at a high horspower/boost level is virtually unheard of in a Rotary engine with boost, especially with the massive overlap on Bridge/Pports.
10-10-19, 11:23 PM
#133
Someone just do a back to back with sensors hooked up to log the data and post it. I tend to agree with the gas law, but it's been more than a decade since I took engineering classes haha.
I will send a brand new shiny 9280 to contribute. Who has a 9180? And who has a running car hahahha.....
I will send a brand new shiny 9280 to contribute. Who has a 9180? And who has a running car hahahha.....
The following 2 users liked this post by Narfle:
MrGoodnight (10-12-19),
Viper GTSR (10-11-19)
10-10-19, 11:36 PM
#135
Mods should really not be instigating members of the community. It's not right because the mod can ban the member of the community for saying anything back and frame it as "picking a fight with a mod".
I don't think Skeese has actually done anything wrong in this thread. Looks like there are 4 different opinions or so. Who cares. Mods should stay out of it unless a rule has actually been violated.
I don't think Skeese has actually done anything wrong in this thread. Looks like there are 4 different opinions or so. Who cares. Mods should stay out of it unless a rule has actually been violated.
The following 3 users liked this post by TwinCharged RX7:
10-11-19, 07:26 AM
#136
Yeah bro
Would allow us to skip the caveman test and know the answer up front. Or in my case, be right when someone goes and physically does this.
Unless its someone with a bias who uses the tune to alter the egt and mass flow to suit their opinion. You do a back to back test on the same setup, the laws of physics will be right, every time.
Bro.
Skeese
Would allow us to skip the caveman test and know the answer up front. Or in my case, be right when someone goes and physically does this.
Unless its someone with a bias who uses the tune to alter the egt and mass flow to suit their opinion. You do a back to back test on the same setup, the laws of physics will be right, every time.
Bro.
Skeese
10-11-19, 07:29 AM
#137
Mods should really not be instigating members of the community. It's not right because the mod can ban the member of the community for saying anything back and frame it as "picking a fight with a mod".
I don't think Skeese has actually done anything wrong in this thread. Looks like there are 4 different opinions or so. Who cares. Mods should stay out of it unless a rule has actually been violated.
I don't think Skeese has actually done anything wrong in this thread. Looks like there are 4 different opinions or so. Who cares. Mods should stay out of it unless a rule has actually been violated.
Skeese
10-11-19, 09:32 AM
#138
Mods should really not be instigating members of the community. It's not right because the mod can ban the member of the community for saying anything back and frame it as "picking a fight with a mod".
I don't think Skeese has actually done anything wrong in this thread. Looks like there are 4 different opinions or so. Who cares. Mods should stay out of it unless a rule has actually been violated.
I don't think Skeese has actually done anything wrong in this thread. Looks like there are 4 different opinions or so. Who cares. Mods should stay out of it unless a rule has actually been violated.
As a mod, I disagree. Most of the mods are enthusiasts and some have a very vast knowledge of these cars. We are here to help but we are also here to be a part of the community. As long as the mod can keep from getting their feelings hurt they should be afforded all the same joys as a regular member. Trolling(to some degree) and debate is as big of a part of motor sports as racing itself. Its unfortunate some have fragile egos and I will say unless someone posts some crazy over the line attack on someone I welcome the ribbing and passion that comes from these debates.
The following 6 users liked this post by djseven:
Brettus (10-11-19),
Carlos Iglesias (10-05-21),
KNONFS (10-11-19),
MrGoodnight (10-12-19),
Narfle (10-11-19),
and 1 others liked this post.
10-11-19, 11:16 AM
#140
Yeah bro
Would allow us to skip the caveman test and know the answer up front. Or in my case, be right when someone goes and physically does this.
Unless its someone with a bias who uses the tune to alter the egt and mass flow to suit their opinion. You do a back to back test on the same setup, the laws of physics will be right, every time.
Bro.
Skeese
Would allow us to skip the caveman test and know the answer up front. Or in my case, be right when someone goes and physically does this.
Unless its someone with a bias who uses the tune to alter the egt and mass flow to suit their opinion. You do a back to back test on the same setup, the laws of physics will be right, every time.
Bro.
Skeese
Same team dude! I been against EMAP from day 1!
10-11-19, 11:37 AM
#141
Yeah bro
Would allow us to skip the caveman test and know the answer up front. Or in my case, be right when someone goes and physically does this.
Unless its someone with a bias who uses the tune to alter the egt and mass flow to suit their opinion. You do a back to back test on the same setup, the laws of physics will be right, every time.
Bro.
Skeese
Would allow us to skip the caveman test and know the answer up front. Or in my case, be right when someone goes and physically does this.
Unless its someone with a bias who uses the tune to alter the egt and mass flow to suit their opinion. You do a back to back test on the same setup, the laws of physics will be right, every time.
Bro.
Skeese
But, you do seem to put out more hot air when you're under increased pressure...Maybe the next time you get ready to climb up in that ivory tower and say a bunch of things you don't actually understand, you could not instead?
It's entirely reasonable to expect that the larger compressor would reduce emap at higher flow rates, where it is more efficient.
The following users liked this post:
Viper GTSR (10-12-19)
10-11-19, 11:41 AM
#142
I post up a corrected Matchbot and can confirm it is flawed. I'm asking for real data for those of us who have running cars (I do not) with turbo speed sensors so we can plot things out mathematically and correct these calculations on Matchbot using REAL WORLD **** (Ideal Gas Law).
10-11-19, 02:25 PM
#143
Full Member
IE : BSFC , volumetric efficiency and engine displacement.
The following users liked this post:
RW Atelier (07-09-22)
10-11-19, 11:19 PM
#144
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
It's actually just wrong. Call them and ask or talk to their engineers on the floor at SEMA. They'll admit it's simply a tool used to visualize and the math can be skewed.
10-12-19, 03:53 AM
#146
Arrogant Wankeler
As per below just saying "ideal gas law" then claiming one compressor "flows more at the same boost" ignoring required engine rpm/VE characteristics is a joke. It is a system, the engine displacement/VE doesn't magically change with a different compressor, what does happen on the far side of compressor maps is lower required shaft power for the same flow on the larger compressor meaning less EMP & temp at the upper limits of the 67mm inducer's range meaning VE improves. Beyond that the comparison is mute as you approach the limits of the larger as it is making significantly more power at a point the other can't reach, a rising EMP:IMP will happen but if you are making 15% more power who cares.
By the way, the ideal gas law assumes a closed system and doesn't account for fluid velocity or pumping efficiency. It's a complete overgeneralization of a very complicated system. Bernoulli is rolling in his grave, for one.
But, you do seem to put out more hot air when you're under increased pressure...Maybe the next time you get ready to climb up in that ivory tower and say a bunch of things you don't actually understand, you could not instead?
It's entirely reasonable to expect that the larger compressor would reduce emap at higher flow rates, where it is more efficient.
But, you do seem to put out more hot air when you're under increased pressure...Maybe the next time you get ready to climb up in that ivory tower and say a bunch of things you don't actually understand, you could not instead?
It's entirely reasonable to expect that the larger compressor would reduce emap at higher flow rates, where it is more efficient.
Last edited by Slides; 10-12-19 at 04:06 AM.
10-12-19, 12:40 PM
#147
As per below just saying "ideal gas law" then claiming one compressor "flows more at the same boost" ignoring required engine rpm/VE characteristics is a joke. It is a system, the engine displacement/VE doesn't magically change with a different compressor, what does happen on the far side of compressor maps is lower required shaft power for the same flow on the larger compressor meaning less EMP & temp at the upper limits of the 67mm inducer's range meaning VE improves. Beyond that the comparison is mute as you approach the limits of the larger as it is making significantly more power at a point the other can't reach, a rising EMP:IMP will happen but if you are making 15% more power who cares.
I mentioned this in the other thread. I think you're confusing isentropic efficiency of a compressor with work efficiency of a system.
Last edited by dguy; 10-12-19 at 01:12 PM.
10-12-19, 02:48 PM
#148
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Sorry, I gotta change my forum name to WRNGBrainDesign before I can reply in seriousness.
10-12-19, 09:06 PM
#149
By the way, the ideal gas law assumes a closed system and doesn't account for fluid velocity or pumping efficiency. It's a complete overgeneralization of a very complicated system. Bernoulli is rolling in his grave, for one.
But, you do seem to put out more hot air when you're under increased pressure...Maybe the next time you get ready to climb up in that ivory tower and say a bunch of things you don't actually understand, you could not instead?
It's entirely reasonable to expect that the larger compressor would reduce emap at higher flow rates, where it is more efficient.
But, you do seem to put out more hot air when you're under increased pressure...Maybe the next time you get ready to climb up in that ivory tower and say a bunch of things you don't actually understand, you could not instead?
It's entirely reasonable to expect that the larger compressor would reduce emap at higher flow rates, where it is more efficient.
Skeese
The following users liked this post:
Viper GTSR (10-13-19)