My 8374, stock port REW dyno results
#51
Junior Member
#52
Rotary Freak
iTrader: (15)
Ended up at 462/400 on pump/water meth at 21-22psi and 400/321 on 15.5 psi and no water/meth. I picked the car up last Thursday and put about 30-40 miles on it this weekend. Throttle response is insane and at 21-22psi its pretty damn quick. The car has about 100 other things I need to fix and it needs to head to paint soon as well. Unfortunately, its not even close to top priority at the moment.
#53
Original Gangster/Rotary!
iTrader: (213)
I'd be curious to see how a nice DJ/Goodfella street port would wake up the high end on this setup......... lose a little low rpm juice but seems like you've got enough to give
500 rwhp with a killer powerband would be the bee's knees IMO
Congrats homeboy
500 rwhp with a killer powerband would be the bee's knees IMO
Congrats homeboy
#55
Rotor or no motor
iTrader: (24)
Sounds very similar to my setup David... and i have been extremely happy with the overall behavior of the car.. main difference is that im running 29psi and a full 3.5inch exhaust.. i have full boost by 3200rpm and the car wont go straight in forth gear. I kept stock intake ports and ported the exhaust only..
Good job man. Congrats
Good job man. Congrats
#57
Full Member
iTrader: (4)
Steve Khan turned my car almost two and a half years ago. It was on 93 pump gas and AI. I had very good results. I'm using the 8374 with internal wastegate and completely stock ports; untouched. At the time I had problems with Boost creep and ignition breakup at high RPM. I was able to get 480hp with 377 tq on its 2nd pull. Steve finalized at 475hp. This was on a motor that had 105 PSI on all the faces. Since then I've upgraded the entire ignition system. Ported the wastegate so I no longer have Boost creep. Rebuilt the engine and threw away those garbage are ra classic seals that were hard on my housings. Im pushing 115+psi on all faces now and no longer have ignition breakup. I'm confident that I'm getting well above 500 now. The 8374 and stock ports go together like peant butter and jelly. Lol
The following users liked this post:
Warrior777 (05-09-23)
#59
Rotary Motoring
iTrader: (9)
rotaryfreak3
Nice, what boost level are those numbers at?
The dyno sheet shows the boost.
Creeping to 18.87psi boost by the time the run ended at 5,750rpm on Blue trace. 368hp/335tq
Creeping to 19.65psi boost by the time the run ended at 6,250rpm on Green trace. 426hp/358tq
Creeping to 25.86psi boost by the time the run ended at 6,900rpm on the Red trace. 480.5hp/378tq
The boost trace is the faint dotted lines starting under the AFR traces and using the same scale #s.
Boost peaks at 10-11psi boost at 2,750rpm which holds to 4,000rpm where it starts to creep to 26psi by 6,750rpm.
#60
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
The dyno sheet shows the boost.
Creeping to 18.87psi boost by the time the run ended at 5,750rpm on Blue trace. 368hp/335tq
Creeping to 19.65psi boost by the time the run ended at 6,250rpm on Green trace. 426hp/358tq
Creeping to 25.86psi boost by the time the run ended at 6,900rpm on the Red trace. 480.5hp/378tq
The boost trace is the faint dotted lines starting under the AFR traces and using the same scale #s.
Boost peaks at 10-11psi boost at 2,750rpm which holds to 4,000rpm where it starts to creep to 26psi by 6,750rpm.
Based on the power output, I'd suspect turbine housing was undersized AND exhaust undersized for this particular 2.5yr old setup. That's a lot of EMAP and creep.
#62
Full Member
What did you upgrade your ignition to if you don't mind please. Cheers
Steve Khan turned my car almost two and a half years ago. It was on 93 pump gas and AI. I had very good results. I'm using the 8374 with internal wastegate and completely stock ports; untouched. At the time I had problems with Boost creep and ignition breakup at high RPM. I was able to get 480hp with 377 tq on its 2nd pull. Steve finalized at 475hp. This was on a motor that had 105 PSI on all the faces. Since then I've upgraded the entire ignition system. Ported the wastegate so I no longer have Boost creep. Rebuilt the engine and threw away those garbage are ra classic seals that were hard on my housings. Im pushing 115+psi on all faces now and no longer have ignition breakup. I'm confident that I'm getting well above 500 now. The 8374 and stock ports go together like peant butter and jelly. Lol
#63
Full Member
iTrader: (4)
Darryl, I upgraded to the smart coils. I mounted them where the a/c pump used to reside. That enabled me to make very short custom wires. I'm using the $40 each NGK plugs. I can' t remember the number off the top of my head. Elliott sells them. I'm pushing about 24psi on 93 octane and I dump roughly 20% water/meth in.
The following users liked this post:
Darryl C (12-09-17)
#64
You would have to find dynos at similar boost levels. Probably be easier to use the 15psi graph turblown posted to compare. It's easily more torque across the midrange than the stock or 99 twins. I'd love to see someone dyno a 9180 on a 3 rotor as I still believe that would be an incredible setup. LS setups will easily make more torque across the majority of the powerband, especially down low.
Note, both dynos are in the UK and converted to crank horsepower with 15% drivetrain loss correction as that's the norm for how they display power here. Also, our dynos are usually less optimistic than US dynos.
Both cars on stock ports, 3" exhausts and 15 PSI.
First chart is twins with a stock air box, Greddy SMIC, water injection and 3" Knight Sports twin tube downpipe, 3"with high flow cat and 2.75" cat-back.
Second chart is 8374 EWG twin gates manifold to 3" downpipe, 3" mid pipe to RB cat-back.
Converted to wheel horsepower and 15% drivetrain loss the twins car makes 340 whp at 6000 RPM and 300 lb ft. by 3200 RPM, and holds that torque (aside from the sequential dip) to 6000 RPM.
By contrast the 8374 at the same 15 PSI makes similar torque of 300 lb ft by 6000 RPM but at 3200 RPM where the twins made 300 lb ft the 8374 is only making 230 lb ft. It makes power longer though and tops out at 380whp at 7400 RPM.
Obviously, we all know the 8374 can make much more power and typically only starts making good power when you get above 20 PSI as it likes boost, but I thought this was a very interesting comparison between two similarly spec'd cars minus the different turbos.
Twins at 15 PSI, stock ports, 3" exhaust
EFR 8374 at 15 PSI, stock ports, 3" exhaust
Last edited by cib24; 04-21-20 at 04:14 PM.
The following users liked this post:
pd_day (04-21-20)
#66
Senior Member
Those are some interesting dyno numbers. On the twins side of things, it doesn't seem very feasible that the first turbo alone makes more torque than the engine makes total bhp. The EFR dyno on the other hand does seem very realistic as far as numbers go. I've seen a lot of people making 400whp around 14psi (Right where the turbo starts to really shine). It's also good to keep in mind the twins made 340bhp versus the EFR making 440bhp at similar boost levels. The EFR genuinely feels like a v8 in the lower gears and has excellent mid range and a desirable wide power band. If you want more, smoother power, you definitely won't look back after doing the single conversion. The turbo is absolutely insane for a street car and not to mention, makes maintenance a lot easier with no more rats nest business going on lol.
#67
Those are some interesting dyno numbers. On the twins side of things, it doesn't seem very feasible that the first turbo alone makes more torque than the engine makes total bhp. The EFR dyno on the other hand does seem very realistic as far as numbers go. I've seen a lot of people making 400whp around 14psi (Right where the turbo starts to really shine). It's also good to keep in mind the twins made 340bhp versus the EFR making 440bhp at similar boost levels. The EFR genuinely feels like a v8 in the lower gears and has excellent mid range and a desirable wide power band. If you want more, smoother power, you definitely won't look back after doing the single conversion. The turbo is absolutely insane for a street car and not to mention, makes maintenance a lot easier with no more rats nest business going on lol.
Also, in crank horsepower terms the EFR made 443hp to the twins 398. Converted to wheel horsepower that is 380 vs. 340.
I don't disagree at all that the EFR is the better setup and has more potential. I was simply challenging the post I originally quoted that the twins can't make good power and torque compared to the EFR at 15 PSI. To me, the evidence suggests at that boost level with similar setups the EFR is worth 50 extra hp on the top end for £5-7k, so if you have healthy twins run them until you have issues or need to rebuild the motor before splurging on a EFR kit?
#68
Time or Money, Pick one
iTrader: (36)
That twins dyno does seem optimistic to me as well. I would just suggest going for a ride in someone's car similar to what you're looking to do and see how you like it. It really is the best way to know if that's what you want though not always feasible. To be honest I don't trust dyno's posted by a majority of shops, hell I don't even know if the dyno I was given is truly accurate. I just know my car is a blast to drive. My .02
#69
Senior Member
iTrader: (2)
You also need to look at longevity. The twins at those power levels won't last. It's well documented on the site. I had 99 twins (running 350hp at the wheels) for about 3 years and then went the 8374 route. Honestly i love the twins, but the 8374 is awesome, power band is huge and have almost instant response.
The following users liked this post:
Narfle (04-23-20)
#70
Rotary Enthusiast
iTrader: (8)
@cib24
Twins running that hard will be fun but they're not going to last, myself and acquaintances have nuked far too many (even upgraded) to have that even be a question. If you'd like to build a car that's on the knife edge of failure go for it, the EFR offers a synergistic solution to the 400+ horsepower goal while keeping lively spool. To me that's worth 8k, maybe not to you.
Twins running that hard will be fun but they're not going to last, myself and acquaintances have nuked far too many (even upgraded) to have that even be a question. If you'd like to build a car that's on the knife edge of failure go for it, the EFR offers a synergistic solution to the 400+ horsepower goal while keeping lively spool. To me that's worth 8k, maybe not to you.
The following 2 users liked this post by dguy:
knotsonice (04-23-20),
Narfle (04-23-20)
#71
@cib24
Twins running that hard will be fun but they're not going to last, myself and acquaintances have nuked far too many (even upgraded) to have that even be a question. If you'd like to build a car that's on the knife edge of failure go for it, the EFR offers a synergistic solution to the 400+ horsepower goal while keeping lively spool. To me that's worth 8k, maybe not to you.
Twins running that hard will be fun but they're not going to last, myself and acquaintances have nuked far too many (even upgraded) to have that even be a question. If you'd like to build a car that's on the knife edge of failure go for it, the EFR offers a synergistic solution to the 400+ horsepower goal while keeping lively spool. To me that's worth 8k, maybe not to you.
But of course, I totally get your point about the benefits of the 8374. My initial post was merely to point out that the twins do quite well against a 8374 if both are limited to 1.0 bar, stock ports and a 3" exhaust.
Last edited by cib24; 04-23-20 at 03:03 PM.
#73
www.AusRotary.com
To my mind, there's little point running around with a 8374 at only 15psi. It is a modern turbo designed to remain efficient at higher boost levels. I recall E85 is possibly not readily available in the UK, but this is where water injection comes in.
Also, 3" downpipe and cat will hold back the EFR from spooling down low as well as inhibiting top end power. 3.5"-4" is likely to perform much better, particular on an internal waste gate setup. The whole system doesn't need to be that large, but the size of the first few feet is very important for maintaining exhaust gas velocity.
Also, 3" downpipe and cat will hold back the EFR from spooling down low as well as inhibiting top end power. 3.5"-4" is likely to perform much better, particular on an internal waste gate setup. The whole system doesn't need to be that large, but the size of the first few feet is very important for maintaining exhaust gas velocity.