Jeff Perrin

Aug 202011
 

Chris finally got the his custom colored PERRIN FMIC installed just in time for the first annual Big North West Subaru Meet and we had some time to do some dyno testing and also have some fun retuning his STI.

No i am tuning, I swear, I am not just looking at the desktop…….

Since our last dyno session back in March (cold out as well) we had installed a PERRIN Header as well as the FMIC.  This is important to note because normally we see sligthly less response on the dyno after an Front Mount Intercooler is installed, but in this case that didn’t happen due to the header being installed.

Saying his boost tubes are turquoise sounds scary but they turned out really sweet and pretty much everyone at the show loved them.

The red line shows the old Stage 2 custom tune we did a few months back.  This tune was done with no header or FMIC installed.  This HP is lower than it was in March, but that is to be expected as that was in Febuary/ March and its now 85F out.    The turquoise line shows what Chris was able to extract from the car with the FMIC and header now bein installed.  Most important thing to see is how there is MORE response with our HEADER and FMIC installed which in turn makes for more torque at lower RPM’s.

By far Chris’s STI is making more WHP and TQ than any other stock turbo STI that has ever been on our dyno. Its even more than a couple of STIs done on Water Meth!   We still have the turbo inlet hose to install and the EBCS Pro to install, which means more power!!

 

 

 

 

 Posted by on August 20, 2011 Dyno Test & Tune Tagged with: , , , , ,
Aug 112011
 

Can a turbo exist that is as responsive as the stock turbo, but make more power?  Can a turbo like this make 400WHP ore more?

CRV/BOV Testing

During my dyno time i spent about 15 runs testing the Bov. I tested the stock cap, all the springs, and our own BOV along with 1 run of no BOV. I spent a lot of time looking over the data and comparing my data channel i made called turbo rate of change.  After all the testing there wasn’t a very drastic change in rate from one BOV to the next. There was a difference in the stock spring and modded CRV cap compared to no bov,  but it wasn’t that much different.  Here is a screen shot of what i would see.

I took my PERRIN BOV and left it installed with the BW CRV.  I had one vacuum hose setup that teed from one to the other. The PERRIN bov can be “turned off” by screwing the cap down all the way. That allowed me to test one the the other easily on the road.  So what i found was compressor surge all of a sudden.  I spent the next week messing around with things after work trying to figure out what was causing it.

Problem Found…..

Then i had an opportunity to test out some new tuning methods for the stock ECU and i re-installed it.  The stock ECU has all the normal Check Engine lights enabled and after i installed it i found that i had a CEL for a TGV housing (Bank2) fault. For those who don’t know what they are the TGV housings are little butterfly valves that block off about 66% of the intake plenum to speed up air at cold start (and other times on the 08+ cars).   My Cosworth ECU has no check engine light or fault detection  for this so i had no idea!

The one good thing,when it was plugged in, the Cosworth ECU defaults to them being open all the time so most likely the Bank 2 housing was opened for some period of time.  The problem is when there is no power to the TGV, airflow can close it over time.  Well funny thing is i left this unplugged when i cleaned my fuel injectors right after the EFR7064 was installed and just before i had to send it back.   Why does this matter?  This is a huge variable and for sure effected my dyno results for the worse.  With only half my engine getting limited air flow during the dyno runs the results were pretty damn good.  Below is a picture of the TGV housing and it being partially closed and one that is ported out.

Dyno Time

Needless to say, i didn’t know about the TGV issue and i still dynoed the car and had good results. I had tons of really cool graphs all ready to show off, but most all of them are a waste as there is more HP on tap that i found.  But below are a couple to give you an idea.

I dynoed the car 1 week after some road tuning to test a few things out like boost control with the PERRIN Prototype push/pull wastegate.  I did the same tuning as i did on the other turbos. 1.2, 1.5, 1.7 and 1.9bar of boost.  I knew that this was a much smaller turbo, and less efficient at higher airflow, so i expected to remove some fuel.  On the dyno i had to remove about 8% of the fuel to get my AFR back to where it was on the other runs with the other EFR’s.  The weird part was i was getting a litte knock like i hadn’t had before. It wasn’t bad, just something elevated compared to the last runs. Remember at this point i had no idea my Bank2 TGV housings were closed.

First off the response is almost exactly like the OEM turbo. Check out this graph.  What is amazing is the TQ and HP blow the stock turbo out of the water.  Mostly because i was running more boost almost everywhere compared to stock.  With the stock turbo this is not possible, but with the the EFR6758 and its larger capacity, it is!   Now during all these runs i was seeing 140K turbo speed which is way way off the compressor map. This could partially be from the closed TGV housing, but more likely from pushing this tiny turbo too much.

Above you see a typical stock STI turbo running almost 100% wastegate Duty Cycle. You get the super smooth 20-22psi peak boost dropping to about 15 at redine.  These turbos are very small and somewhat safe when maxed out because there is no danger of overboost at higher RPM.

Below you see the TQ and HP the EFR6758 does over the stock STI turbo.  We are able to run more boost and in turn make more HP and TQ.

I experienced was compressor surge during full throttle from 3000-4500 or so. This really only happened from 22psi to 30psi.  We see this all the time on the stock turbo when its pushed so i expected it to happen. It wasn’t bad enough to effect boost or fueling, it was more an audible thing.  I could see my MAF reading waver a bit, but that is about it.  This is a common thing we hear customers call about. They think its their BOV or the wastegate chattering or chipmunks or you name it. Its simply compressor surge.

I was overall pretty happy with the results.

I suspect that the TGV was closed during this dyno session after my discovery last week.   You could imagine how this would be if one side is opened and the other side is closed only letting 33% air flow through it. Also imagine if they were both open!

One really weird thing is the compressor surge (from lifting) i was constantly getting. From 0-10psi the CRV would blow off like normal.  But from 14psi on up it was constantly surging. Like i said, i spent hours diagnosing this.  So first off i swapped the Compressor cover back to one i bored out the CRV hole on.  This actually improved the surging a bit, but still was pretty bad at higher boost.  Looking back the one thing that could have been causing this is that TGV housing being closed causing a strange vacuum in the intake manifold.

This last weekend when i figured this TGV crap out, i plugged in the TGV motor and the stock ECU to ensure there were no other problems. I reinstalled the Cosworth Ecu and went out and did some pulls on the road.  Guess what, lean lean lean!  But ZERO knock.  I had CL fueling turned on and it was adding back in 8% more fuel!  This is 8% more fuel needed to run the turbo at 25psi, and with more fuel means more air flow.  You could argue 8% more HP which should push this close to  440WHP!  The other thing i found was turbo speed was much higher. On the dyno i was seeing 135-142K rpm, and on the road after i fixed the TGV housing issue, i am seeing 152K!!!  These numbers are all way off the chart and while its most likely not something BW recommends, it does make great power.

Here is a comparison of the EFR7064 and 6758 at 25psi.  The EFR7064 suffered from the stock actuator blowing open. This turbo is one that Borg Warner wanted back right after i dynoed it, so i never had a chance to install our Push/Pull WG Actuator.

 

And here is the HP graphs of that comparison.

 

Its really makes me mad that this happened. Normally I do a perfect job ensureing my cars tune before and after. Making sure that variables don’t play into results. Like, i always do a boost leak check and a few other little things, recalibrate my Wideband, to eliminate as many possibilities as i can.  Look for a retest on this turbo with the TGV’s wide open making tons of power!

 

Aug 022011
 

Thomas begged me for about a year to tune his car and I finally gave in a few weeks back, when I had some spare time. Thomas’s 07 WRX, as far as drivetrain and engine parts, is a typical Stage 3 car with a TMIC, but it has a gearbox with the JDM RA gear set installed. The gearing of RA gear sets makes it really fun to drive, lost of shifting, but super close ratios.  For sure a good upgrade over the stock gears in the 5spd boxes.

What is HellaFlush?  HellaFlush is a slang term to describe your car when you have wheels and tires that are literally flush with the body.  Like most things people take this to the extreme and do extreme things to make their car as “HellaFlush” as they can.   Once yo have a grasp on what this means, watch THIS VIDEO.  If you laugh like I did, your probably not cool :)           So Thomas’s car is 100% HellaFlush and for sure on the extreme side of things.

No, that groove is not built into the tire, its worn into the tire from it rubbing on the fender for a few months. I guess it not cool to roll you fenders, just let the tires self clearance things.  Next thing noticed was his car was missing some other under carriage pieces.

Why is this cool again….  Ok I am done making fun of Thomas’s car now :)

Like all our other tunes its vital to do a pressure check to ensure there are no boost leaks or vacuum leaks. Like many cars, there were leaks. We pressure test them all to 20psi and fix any leak we come across.  Like many cars I have tested over the years, there were a few little leaks in the intake system and boost system. A piece of paper used as a gasket for the BOV just doesn’t cut it. Not a big deal, easy to fix. Below you can see our simple test fixture. Using the dyno to measure boost and a typical air gun, this makes short work of the pressure check.

During this I found a crank case vent that I wouldn’t really consider a vent, more like a plug.  The main crank case vent from the PCV system was completely pinched flat! This is a main artery for crank case vapors to escape and it was freaking plugged!  Rookie!

I know I said i was done making fun of Thomas, but……

DUDE! Where is your IC diverter!  This is a major flaw with the performance aspect of the car. Your air flowing through the scoop is going right over the intercooler and not through it.  This is just not cool!  Luckily i had an STI one laying around that I just sandwiched between the IC and the hood.  Thomas bought what he thought was the best hood out there from Seibon, but they don’t even put in the holes to install the stock diverter.  FAIL!

Thomas has one of our old Signature series BOV’s which i hadn’t seen in a long time. This is what drove us to make our current ones in red.

___________HellaFlush = Cool

________Holes in fender = Not Cool

___________Worn Tires = Not cool

___________Boost leaks = Not Cool

___No Intercooler Diverter = Not Cool

___PERRIN Sig Series BOV = Super Cool

________Thomas’s 07 STI = Cool

Onto the dynoing.  Thomas had the Cobb Stage 2 map in his car and you can see below it made good power. But for sure there is tons of HP and TQ left on the table. Most all Stage 3 cars tune very similar in that you pretty much run the Wastegate Duty Cycle at 100% to get the 20-ish psi of peak boost and the typical falling boost curve.  As you can see I added 30whp and 40ft/lbs of tq. AFR’s were still in the low 11′s which makes this a very safe durable tune.   The one place that the most improvement was had, is at redline where his car made an additional 50WHP. That and the 40ft-lbs more TQ at 3000 makes this a really strong setup.

 

So what have we all learned from Thomas’s car?  Check for boost leaks, make sure you crank case hoses are not pinched, get a custom tune and go HellaFlush.

 

PS. Thomas is a good friend, so i can get away with making fun of him, and his car really does look awesome.

 Posted by on August 2, 2011 Dyno Test & Tune Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Jul 162011
 

There seems to be a cyclical debate about 3″ exhaust on the 1.6L Mini Turbo cars being too big, or too heavy, or not “Needed”.  My favorite argument is “its not needed so why do it?”  That could be said about any aftermarket part.  None of these things are needed so why do it at all!  Simple, people want to have more fun with their cars, which involves tinkering, customizing, making more HP and making the car handle better.  In a world where people do the tiniest things to get a few extra HP, it should be obvious why you would want a 3″ system for the R56 over a 2.5″ system.

Proven Wheel HP from 3.0″

Of all the things I see on the fourms, the one comment that stuck out was, “3in may make more HP, but there is a point of diminishing returns.”  I 100% agree, and for sure this is the case, but the point of diminishing returns is where?  All I see are people guessing, people saying “I heard this or that”, “Well this tuner SAYS 2.5″ is best”, but again ZERO proof of this.   We feel the answer to that question is 3″ for virtually any turbo car.  How can we say this? Simple, experience.

                          

Here is a dyno graph showing our 3″ dual cat system ran on our otherwise stock JCW and MCS.

First off, we are dealing with turbocharged cars not normally aspirated. So the rules of sizing really get thrown out the door.  Its a given in the forced induction world that bigger is better.  Read any book about turbo vehicles, they say if it fits and its not too loud put on a biggest size you can afford.  Turbos don’t want back pressure as this slows the turbos response.   Because turbo cars have lower compression, the sooner you get it making boost the sooner you have torque, the more torque at a given RPM means more HP.  For the last 10 years we have seen this over and over again, and today continues to be a rule of thumb.

We have actually done a test on 2.25″, 2.5″ and 3″ exhausts on a 1.6L forced induction engine.  We did dyno testing on our R53 with 15% SC pulley comparing stock to threes sizes.  The 2.25″ exhaust made about 3-5WHP, the 2.5″ system made about 10WHP, and the 3″ made about 12-13 WHP.  On this car we opted to push normal customers to the 2.5″ system because of sound more than anything. These cars are much louder than the R56 because there is no turbo in the exhaust killing some of the sound.   Keep in mind that during these tests, the boost on this engine was only 10psi at 3000RPM and 14psi at 6800, making only 190WHP.   On the R56, we are running 18-ish peak boost at 2000 and 16 or more at 6500 making around 220WHP. The turbo cars are making 50-80 more WHP at 4000 than the SC cars.  More HP means more airflow.

If the 2.5″ theoretical exhaust system is good enough, then why do we still gain more HP on cars removing a high flow 3″ cats from our 3″ exhaust system? Simple there is still a slight restriction on our 3″ (too big) turboback exhausts using two high flow cats.  When the JCW R56 came out we had customers asking for a single cat exhaust for them and of course some dyno numbers to see how much better it is.   You can see below the results we found.  Keep in mind this is showing the ALTA 3″ Turboback dual cat system versus the ALTA turboback single cat system.

This above graph was done on our JCW with intercooler and intake installed. We did nothing but swap out one of two cats for a straight pipe.

Lets take a fabricators approach.  Company X has been making exhaust for normally aspirated Euro cars for a long time. Now this new turbo Mini comes out and they are not tooled up for 3″.  The 3″ 304 SS tubing is about 25% more expensive than 2.5″ 304SS tubing.  Also its a big step up to be able to bend 3″ over 2.5″, this could require a new machine or new tooling.  Welding on flanges takes more time as there is 20-ish% more welding to be done.  The system needs to be finished somehow, and with 20% more surface area, you might have 20% more time wrapped up in finishing it.  Now add to that the overall system weighs more an cost more to ship materials from place to place.  All these things add up to more that just a couple of dollars.  Since its easier and cost less, the choice must be made to make a more affordable system, or make a higher performing system.

Lets take the “Engineers” approach to this for a second.  We always get told (by engineers) that the engineers designed this car perfect for the HP it makes.  So if the stock exhaust was perfectly designed for this engine making around 160 Wheel HP stock, then shouldn’t a 2.5″ system (13% bigger by internal volume) only be suited for 13% more airflow/horsepower??  So that means they are only good on cars up to 180 WHP?   So then a 3″ system (65% bigger internal volume) is necessary to hit the 220+WHP we typically get from MCS??   So if it was designed perfect then why do we gain more HP from installing bigger exhausts?   If the OEM exhaust is way undersized (proven by our 10+WHP gains) are you saying an exhaust only 13% bigger is good enough?  You can see how those arguments look silly to us.

3″ Is Too Heavy

We hear its too heavy going to a 3″ system. Lets use the stock JCW catback exhaust as an example. This system connects at the factory downpipe and is one really long single piece that weighs 31.2lbs. The ALTA JCW catback (AKA downpipe back system) weighs in at 34lbs. So adding 2.8lbs is too heavy? If we made our system in 2.5″ tubing for a weight savings we would only loose 3.6lbs. So is that still too heavy?

Turbo is Only 2.5″ So Why Make It Bigger?

The other argument we hear is, the outlet on the turbo is only 2.5″ so why make it bigger.  Using that argument, then why make it any bigger than 2″ as the turbine wheel is smaller than 2″??  Same goes for the turbo inlet or outlet. Why make any part of the system bigger?  Yet we see making a bigger intakes, bigger boost tubes and of course bigger exhaust all make HP. These rules just don’t apply.

I don’t understand why so many customers out there that just don’t believe us. On one hand, we constantly see competitors being shot down because they do not have dyno results. Since 2005 we have been providing all our Mini customers with dyno graphs backing up claims we make, yet still its not good enough.

We are all here because we want more power and to have more fun with our cars.  We all want that little edge over the other guy, so even if you don’t want to believe us, you at least should understand that 3″ will make more power. Even if its a tiny amount, its a more than the guy with the 2.5″ system.   If we can offer you a system that makes more HP, quiet enough to keep you happy and at a reasonable price, then why not buy it?

By far the Mini customer has been the toughest customer to please over the years, but also the most rewarding.  We feel like we have an opportunity to teach Mini customers about new things make the very happy.  Everyday we make more and more customers happy.  Everyday we get customers that call us thanking us for continuing to stick to our guns and have the constructive online conversations.  It shows how solid we are planted in the Mini world and that we know what we are talking about.

In these discussions,  we keep talking about our downpipe yet it has been discontinued.  We made this decision a while back because there is no way to keep it form throwing a Check engine light on stock cars.   After we discontinued the part, we have been getting lots of people asking about it.  It could be because customers cars are finally coming off of warranty are looking for these once again.  If you are interested in buying this from us, please let us know!  If we get enough people asking we will offer this once again.

 Posted by on July 16, 2011 Dyno Test & Tune, Forum Posts, MINI Only Tagged with: , , , , ,
May 112011
 

 

Until now, there have have not been many options for upgraded turbos. The newest and best option for a turbo upgrade is the new ALTA Billet 56 MCS Turbo. This has the benefits of the stock turbo in that it bolts on with no additional parts or modifications to parts. It makes more HP than the JCW turbo (roughly 15% more), the responsiveness is very similar to the JCW turbo, while costing only slightly more. The question is “Is the added cost worth the difference? The ALTA Billet 56 MCS turbo will flow about 30 more HP than the JCW turbo and with almost the same response. Meaning it will not have the typical trade off of response for power.

To give you an idea how these all stack up:

Turbo                                        Air Flow lbs-min       Est. Engine HP        Wheel HP seen

Stock MCS Turbo                            21 lbs-min                 210 HP                       210WHP

Stock JCW Turbo                            25 lbs-min                 250HP                        240WHP

ALTA Billet 56 Turbo                       28 lbs-min                 280HP                        ???

Garrett GT2560R Turbo                  30 lbs-min                 300HP                        280WHP

 

Remember bigger is not always better.  When we tested out GT2560 kit the one thing that was missing is the super responsiveness of the OEM turbo.  That is something we felt customers would not like even if it meant more HP.  When testing and tuning the ALTA Billet 56 MCS Turbo this was one of the most important features it needed to have.  We knew that it had the potential to make plenty of power, but if that meant the turbo wouldn’t reach full boost until 3000-4000 RPM(Tuned MCS reach full boost by 2200), then we felt this would NOT be a good trade off.

Above is a picture showing the boost response of our old GT2560R kit. What you can’t see here is the off boost TQ and power is gone until 3000.

Well as you can see from the pics below, turbo response is not an issue at all!

mcs-stg4-3-boost-compar.jpg


Test Case #1 our 2010 MCS Manual

This car started life as a Stage 3 setup (3″ Turboback Exhaust, Larger Intercooler and ALTA AccessPORT), and now in its Stage 4 form, we started to really pushing!  Going into this we knew that limits of the MCS MAP sensors could be an issue, and it was.  Even with us being limited to 20psi, its still a huge improvement!  This is JCW power but with more power up top!

mcs-stg4-3-compar.jpg

Below is a comparison of a local customers JCW we tuned a while back and the ALTA Billet 56 Turbo.  For all intensive purposes, its the same until 5500 where the larger turbo starts to make some big power!

dyno_turbo_mcsr56stg4vsjcwstg3

Look for future results with new MAP sensors on the MCS and then results on the JCW!

I know there are guys going, “why did this take so long for these kind of results to come out?”  That is easy engine management!  New Mini owners are never going to know the difference as they will have all these new choices to make. Old Minis owners have been sitting on the edge of their seats waiting for something new to do to their car!  With the release of the ALTA AccessPORT and its ability to tune Minis, and the growing group of tuners throughout the USA, custom dyno tunes, big turbos, and methanol injection systems finally being installed, Mini owners will no longer feel like they are held back.


Turbo Stats and comparisons:

Compressor Wheel comparison

-ALTA Billet 56 Wheel           56mm exducer with 59.32mm extended tips.

43.3mm Inducer size.  Rated at 28lbs/min

-K03 compressor wheel from MCS        50mm exducer with 53.77mm extended tips

37.8mm inducer size  Rated at 20-21lbs/min

K04-S4 compressor wheel       50mm exducer

39.77 inducer Rated at 23lb-min

Inducer is the smaller leading edge of the compressor wheel and exducer is the larger side of the compressor wheel.

Here is a picture showing the MCS compressor wheel next to the ALTA Billet 56 wheel.

compwheelscompare

Turbine Wheel Comparison

-ALTA Billet 56 Turbine wheel 50mm major exducer , 42mm exducer.

-JCW Turbine Wheel 45mm major exducer, 40.5mm Exducer

-MCS Turbine Wheel 45mm major exducer, 40.5mm Exducer

Here is a shot of the ALTA turbine wheel machined into the exhaust housing.

tech_turbo_billet56insideturb

 


Compressor Map Comparisons

There is a lot  to understand about a compessor map, but in simple terms it shows how efficient the compressor is at different air flows.  You can see how in the middle of the map the turbo is most efficient which means it pumping out cooler air.  For those who know what you are looking at below are the compressor maps that represent the turbos above.

At 65% eff, this map represents the ALTA Billet 56 compressor.  This is roughly 27.8 lb-min at .21kg/sec, call it 280 engine HP

tech_turbo_billet56

At 64% eff, this is the JCW compressor map. This is roughly 24.7 or .187kg/sec, call it 250 engine HP.

tech_turbo_billet56comptest

At 65%eff this is the stock MCS turbo compressor map.  This roughly flows 21.1lbs/min or .16kg/sec, call it 210 engine HP

tech_turbo_billet56comptest2

With this kind of data you can clearly see that the ALTA Billet 56 MCS turbo is a great choice for any MCS customer looking for more power.  That and the fact its a rather simple install anyone with normal tools and a little mechanical know how can do this install.   Look for more info very soon on pricing and availability.

 

tech_turbo_billet56front

Below is a 2010 MCS that started life as a Stage 3 setup (ALTA turboback, FMIC, intake and boost tube) indicated by the blue line, and then got an ALTA Billet 56 turbo installed, indicated by the green line.  You can see that there is very little change to turbo lag with this larger turbo and with a boost limit of roughly 19psi, this turbo makes huge gains in HP over the stock turbo.

The ALTA Billet 56 makes 30-40more Wheel HP, and 20-40 ft-lbs of torque more with almost no change to turbo response!

dyno_turbo_billet56vsstg3

 

Below is a comparison between the same Stage 4 2010 MCS and a totally stock 2010 MCS.  For just over $5000, you can turn you MCS into a 250WHP monster!  The best part about the Stage 4 package is that there is no loss in turbo response anywhere in the RPM band!

The Stage 4 MCS w/ALTA Billet 56 makes 40-80 more Wheel HP, and 80-60 ft-lbs of torque more with no change to turbo response!dyno_turbo_billet56vsstckmcs

 

Below is a 2009 JCW that started life as a Stage 3 setup (ALTA turboback, FMIC and boost tube) indicated by the green line, and then got an ALTA Billet 56 turbo installed, indicated by the red line.  You can see that there is very little change to turbo lag with this larger turbo and with 20-40 more Wheel HP, and 20-30 ft-lbs of torque, who wouldn’t want that!

Castro-jcw-billet-562

 

Below is a comparison between the same Stage 4 2009 JCW and a totally stock 2009 JCW.  For just over $5000, you can add 50-60 Wheel HP and 100ft-lbs of torque to your JCW.

dyno_turbo_billet56vsstckjcw

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Posted by on May 11, 2011 Dyno Test & Tune, First Look, MINI Only Tagged with: , , , ,
Mar 222011
 

I know, its been a while since i posted, but there was tons to compile and just not enough time in the day to complete this. Anyway here you go! I will repsond to some of the customer posts in just a few!

The Build and the Results

Installing the EFR, or should i say building a turbo kit surrounding this turbo wasn’t too hard, it just took some time and planning. I spent alot of time placing the turbo in an area that balanced clearing everything, while still providing a decent intake path and downpipe path. At the time i didn’t have the larger EFR8374 or something representing the size of it. On BW’s website there were no dimensions that showed the overall size of the bigger turbos, so i resulted to figuring out the scale of the pics in relationship to the part i had. Hoping that the larger turbos would still fit with my initial design, i finished up the upppipe and downpipe and started the install. Below is a pic showing it all mounted up.

As many of you know I had had somewhat of a wasted dyno session/weekend dealing with the medium pressure actuator for the EFR. Essentially what it comes down to is our Subarus run high enough exhaust backpressure that some autowastegating occurs. This is when the exhaust pressure is pushing open the wastegate door not the wastegate actuator. While BW says the Medium canister cracks at various pressures, in my testing I found these don’t pertain to actual boost pressures found. Meaning, BW says the Medium canister with 10mm of preload (plus the 2mm added at the factory) will crack open at 14psi of pressure. I found to actually crack open around 12psi and on the car ran about 11psi of boost. Even though I found contradicting info there is no need to go over my wasted efforts in trying to make this Medium Canister work.

So while the Medium Canisters the OE wastgates for these turbos, for our car, you need the high pressure one which is rated 17psi to 32psi. I have now been able to do a bunch more testing on these and I found 32 is not hard to hit! Yes, the simple solution is the BW high pressure wastegate canister. A more complicated answer is using a push/pull setup like this PERRIN prototype we built a few years back.

Amongst all my troubles with the High Pressure Wastegate Actuator, Full-Race sent me an EFR9180 to test out. This thing is freaking huge! I only had it for a couple of days and didn’t get to dyno it as they needed it back, only to ship me an EFR8374! But anyway I will eventually toss this on to see how the spool characteristics are. I know it will make huge power with the right boost, but when will it reach 20psi, that is the question. And yes it did fit! Luckily i made a second uppipe and left it installed on our 2011 STI so i could just drop this into place. Sure enough there was tons of room!

More details will follow on our prototype kit and its design over the next few months, but there are a couple of really cool tricks and things that i think will make customers really like the install of this, IF we make kits surrounding the EFR.

Before I made time to dyno my car with the new actuator, I did some road testing and while this isn’t an exact test, it does show how much more responsive the EFR is compared to the Garrett GTX. IF you look at this 2 second window comparing the GTX3076R w/.82 to the EFR7670 w/83, both reached the same boost level at the same time, but the EFR was floored about .5seconds later and about 200-300RPM later. This is a great example of the light weight CHRA coming into play.

In this diagram the Green line is a run on the GTX, and the red line is the one done on the EFR. You can see the sharp vertical line that represents throttle position. You can see how the EFR was floored later.

I did some other road comparisons and I was getting excited to see how this performed on the dyno. On the road, with the new high pressure actuator installed, I was noticing that the EFR was much snappier feeling. Cruising at 3000, I would floor it and it really felt alive as the boost started building. This is different compared to the GT or GTX3076 turbo, which turbos have much less response off throttle, and also at those lower RPM full throttle areas where the turbo is building boost. But when they come on boost, they hit pretty hard which makes them feel fast.

If a turbo feels fast that doesn’t mean its really that fast right??

That is one of those things that is hard to describe to customers when talking about turbos. I hear customers say they were in their friends GT35 powered car and it felt so fast. It was because of that huge lag then huge hit of power. This makes cars feel faster than they really are. The reason why I mention that is the EFR actually doesn’t have that huge hit power on the road like the GT turbos, especially the GT35.

Its like saying a Z06 Corvette feels slow compared to Rotated turbo kit STI. I have driven them back to back and the Vette with the flat TQ and linear HP curve actually feels slower, until you look at the speedo! This is the same with the EFR. On full throttle 2-4th gear runs, it doesn’t have that huge hit of power, but when you look at the speedo you realize it’s time to hit the brakes all of a sudden.

So, that is how I “Feel” about the EFR7670 with high pressure canister so far, not knowing how the EFR spools on the dyno. Until this point I had only dynoed the EFR7670 w/.83 with the medium canister and found it was slower spooling than the GTX3076R w/.82 housing by about 400RPM.

Hot Headers and Cold Headers

Below is a graph showing hot and cold runs. This is an important thing to understand because hot headers versus cold headers, makes a huge difference when the turbo spools up. The EFR7670 is the red and yellow lines from one set of runs at 25psi, and the green and blue are a set from the GTX3076. I consider the cold runs to be typical tuning runs where a run is made, a few things may be adjusted, and 30 seconds to 1 minute later another run is done. During this time, the header cools off as well as the turbine housing. A hot run I consider when a second run is done 10seconds or so after a run. During this time the header is still plenty hot as well as the turbine housing. The reason why it spools the turbo faster is that less of the exhaust energy/heat gets sucked out of cold headers which slows down exhaust velocity. When they are already hot, that energy/heat stays in the tubing and the exhaust velocity stays the same. The header on this car is not wrapped but wrapping would help this out between runs. This is also the same un wrapped header as used on the GT/GTX test so it a valid test as far as that goes.

If we use the 20psi mark, you can see that the EFR7670 with cool header crosses that point at just past 4000. But when hot, the change is pretty significant and decreases the spool point just past 3750. That is a 250RPM increase. The GT or GTX when cold was hitting 20psi at 3750,and when hot it would only decrease this RPM about 125 RPM. Either way all runs shown from here on out are done with the GTX or GT turbos with a cool header as well as the EFR with a cool header. All these runs
Before we start with the dynos let talk about the car, the dyno and all that stuff. I am sure many have see our GTX vs GT testing we did and while that info is still the same I know, not all of you, know about the car or dyno. So here we go.

The Car and The Setup

My 08 STI was used for these tests and its setup like a typical PERRIN GT rotated turbo kit car would be.

Parts installed: PERRIN Headers, PERRIN EFR Turbo kit, PERRIN FMIC, PERRIN Catback, and our PWI-2 Methanol Injection kit, PERRIN EBCS Pro, Deatchwerks 850cc injectors and Walbro 255lph pump. The engine is built with Cosworth Rods, Pistons and bearings, and ARP Studs. Things to take special notes on are: Stock heads, Stock Cams, OEM head gaskets, OEM TGV housings in place and functioning and stock fuel rails with PERRIN Stumble fix installed.

We use 92 ocatane fuel here in Oregon, but like any big power car running on pump gas, we run 50/50 methanol. The kit is setup to flow around 800cc’s per minute. But can go up to 1200cc’s.

Tuning duties are controlled by a Cosworth ECPro standalone ECU. An Innovate Wide Band, and EGT is integrated into the ECU as well as into the dash so i can visually watch AFR along with logging it.

The Dyno

Setup: Dyno we are using is our awesome Dynapack Dyno. Car is setup to run in 4th gear, starting at 2000 RPM and ending at 6900RPM. We use a settle time of 4 seconds, which means, the dyno holds the RPMS at 2000RPM for 4 seconds before the run starts. During these 4 seconds, we have the car at 100% throttle for about 2-3 seconds. The fans we use are not super crazy fans that flow 100MPH wind, but each fan flows exactly 28MPH (measured with our anemometer) and both are aimed at (not on) the intercooler). This doesn’t provide perfect airflow to the intercooler compared to driving on the street, but it does provide very accurate and repeatable results and if anything lower HP that you may see on the road. Since the dyno has a pretty heavy load, it does provide pretty much the ultimate RPM for which a turbo will spool. So in these tests you will see ZERO benefit from the Titanium Aluminide Turbine wheel. Also all dyno readings are in Wheel HP not flywheel. Stock STI’s make about 230-240WHP on our dyno as a reference.

All runs were done with the ECU reading about 30C intake temps, and this was very consistent. The dyno temp measured 60-65F. The dyno runs were done with about the same amount of time between them as well as coolant temps were always at 90C. The idea is we did it consistently to eliminate as many variables as possible. These same exact things were done with the GTX and GT tests a few weeks back and of course we did it on the EFR to ensure that the results were the same.

Tuning

Regarding the tuning. Like the other GT/GTX tests, I tried not to do any tuning beyond AFR. I of course tuned for boost to be able to match the same 1.2 bar, 1.5bar, 1.7bar and 1.9bar runs I did with the GTX test. For sure the AFR needed tuning between these turbos and in fact I found that I needed to add fuel compared to previous runs. But I started with the same ignition timing as used on the other tests. The idea is to ensure that no unfair tuning was done to increase HP or TQ beyond a normal level. Keep in mind the whole idea here is that these are tests for PERRIN to determine if the EFR turbo is something we are interested in making kits for. There is no reason for us to fudge results, or make one turbo look better than the other.

Engine Demand

On last thing to hit on is, engine demand. Using engine airflow calculators, or the Borg Warner Matchbot program, you can see what your engine requires for air flow for a given boost level and redline. The next thing to look at is if a turbo fits these demands and if it does it efficiently. If you compare this against some of the popular turbo upgrades you will see that in most cases customers are running off the compressor map but getting great power. So its not always 100% important that your engine airflow needs fit within the boundary of the turbos compressor map. Far too often I get calls from customers that look way to deep into this and try to match their power goals to perfectly on the compressor map.

EFR7670 vs GT3076R

This is the turbo that BW said it compared to the most, but should make more power. After the first few pulls I noticed that I was getting a bit more engine noise that previously. I ended up pulling timing around the 5500-6000 range to keep some of the noise down. In the end this didn’t change power at all. First let’s compare the GT3076R w/.82 housing. In this test you can see the EFR is slower spooling on the dyno. Keep in mind these are cool runs and hot runs were faster spooling as well as heavy load on the road showed better performance, but none the less its consistent.

The green line shows the GT3076r w/.82 housing making more TQ at 4000 because it was making more boost there., but as soon as the EFR and the GT cross the same boost path the more efficient compressor wheel starts to kick in. Even at 1.7 bar of boost the EFR was showing a pretty solid 20WHP gain over the GT. In this case it’s easy to see that the slightly laggier nature of the EFR was worth the trade off in HP. The “Area Under the Curve” the EFR has, outweighs the GT easily. I feel this is the best boost (1.7bar/25psi) to test all these turbos at because this is a very common boost run on Subaru’s. Of course you see more, but when it comes down to boost being used on the street, 25psi or less is pretty common.

Now on to the comparison of the 1.9 bar runs. Even at 1.7bar, the GT3076R is running out of in relationship to the compressor map, but at 1.9 it really starts to. I remember in previous dyno runs with the GT, I had to pull timing out to ensure it was ok. With the EFR, it was way happier. As you can see, its making 20-30 more WHP at the same boost. There is only one thing with the GT3076 run, it’s that it was on the hotter side of things and it was spooling faster than the other. For some reason when I did the 1.9bar GT runs, I spent the first few runs dialing in boost and this purple line ended up being on the hotter side of things. Either way you get the idea on HP gained, and from the other results you will get and idea on the spool.

I did do the other 1.2 bar and 1.5 bar runs but no need to show you the same basic gains of about 20WHP.

EFR7670 vs. GTX3076R

As I had shown before the GTX turbos spool the same as the GT turbos. So its not a question if GTX is going to spool faster than the EFR, it’s a question of how much power will the GTX3076R w/.82 make. As I had show the GTX3076 made about 20WHP over the GT3076 and you can see here that it’s still not quite enough to overcome the EFR7670 HP. Looking at the purple line showing 1.5 bar of boost, you can see a bump in power at 4000, but that is where the EFR was running a bit more boost than it was supposed to. Besides that you can see they make about the same power until redline. Why is that??

Below are the 1.7bar runs and it shows about the same thing. The GTX and EFR make very similar power until 6000 RPM where the EFR starts to pull away. The blue line in the below graphs shows also that the area under the curve on the EFR most likely outweighs the 250 RPM slower spooling. That and the fact on the street the EFR is more responsive between shifts but more on that later.

Now if you compare the EFR7670 compressor map to the GTX3076R compressor map you will see how the GTX is more efficient higher up on the pressure scale, but not by much. In the grand scheme of things a few points in efficiency here or there doesn’t really matter. This could be why the GTX3076 and the EFR7670 both made similar power at this boost level. At this level both are starting to run out of air and become less efficient. During the EFR7670 tuning I ended up getting some engine noise that I felt needed some timing removed. No I never hear knock but I pulled .5 to 1 degree at 6000 as it just wasn’t perfectly happy. Again trying to keep thing consistent I was not experiencing this on the GTX tests. I had a target for engine noise on these runs and it was being exceeded. This is a one of the logs, and you can see how I use the individual cylinder noise as a guide to what is going on.

This is one of the runs that you can see I got some spiking in engine noise. It crossed the threshold for knock (that I set) and it pulled timing. But anyway in keeping things consistent, and while this didn’t loose power or cause audible knock, I lowered timing to keep things consistent between the GTX and EFR tests.

Some might come to the conclusion that this turbo is less efficient than the GTX which is why I got knock. Well yes and no. The compressor wheel is less efficient, but my Methanol injection masks a lot of that. But as the engine becomes more and more efficient, the combustion chamber also does. A more efficient combustion chamber typically has faster, more controlled flame burn rates. This in turn means you need less ignition timing to get the same peak cylinder pressure. Is this what was happening because of the freer flowing nature of the turbine housing and wheel?

And finally here is the 1.9 bar results still show great Wheel HP and 480WHP is nothing to complain about that is for sure. Keep in mind that If I remove my TGV’s, maybe wrap the header, there is more power to be had for sure. Is there 500WHP to be had here?? I say yes on an engine with heads and cams, and with a higher redline.

Why is the turbo not making more power than the GTX3076r? Here is the compressor map for the EFR using my engine data plotted on it. You can see that at 7000 we are off the compressor map. This also is true for the GTX3076r and GT3582R. But still this is making great power and for sure there is more on tap with the use of race fuel, higher boost, heads, cams….

EFR7670 vs. GTX3582R

So now lets compare the GTX3582R to this turbo. First up is the GTX3582R w/.63 housing. In this case the EFR blows it out of the water. It spools the same but it makes about 20more WHP everywhere. This is because the EFR has a much freer flowing exhaust housing/turbine wheel. According to Garrett’s site this combo only has 22.5lbs/min of turbine flow capability. The EFR flows 24.5 lbs/min. That change in 2 lbs-min is 20WHP! So in this case the GTX3582R w/.63 housing is no longer a match for the EFR7670 with .83 housing. You can see below the blue line makes a lot more power everywhere.

I didn’t put up the GTX3582R w/.63 and 1.9 bar as it shows the same thing. The EFR makes more power. But below you can see when we compare this to the GTX3582R with .82 housing, things start to change….

Now you can see this comparison look like the EFR7670 vs the GTX3076R, but this is the GTX3582R w/.82 vs the EFR7670 w/.83. If you think this is the more comparable turbo to the EFR7670, you would be correct. In this case, the EFR spools much faster and makes pretty much the same HP. At this 1.7 bar level, its obvious what turbo is best for you. Looking at the plot above, you can see at 1.9Bar of boost, the EFR efficiency starts to fall off at redline. Don’t jump to conclusions that this is bad because GT3076 customers are constantly running WAY off the map. Here is a GT3076 compressor map plotted at different boost levels. Now don’t forget I ran the GT3076 at all these levels and it made plenty of power.

Here is the GTX3076R with the same boost plotted and you can see how this matches pretty close to the EFR7670 where it just starts to run off the map at 1.9Bar and redline. Again we were running this off the map and it was still making lots of HP, so its not bad to run it off the map necessarily.

One more comparison is the GTX3582R w/,82 AR. You can see that the GTX compressor map is much more efficient at these boost and RPM levels compared to the EFR7670. But really the GTX3582 compares closer to the EFR8374 but we are not testing that turbo here, but soon! But this graph is more for comparison purposes and may explain why the GTX3582R made a tiny bit more power.

 

While the above graphs show the EFR7670 runs off the map at redline, and still makes great power. Check this out!

The EFR being quite a bit smaller than the GT3582R (in the compressor map department) it easily holds it own with the GTX3582. The faster spooling nature the fact it easily keeps up until 6000, I say the EFR7670 is worth a measly loss of 15WHP. Also during these tuning sessions, I had pulled some timing from the map because I was getting some increased engine noise as I was during the 1.7bar runs. I suspect that had the runs been done with race fuel, I would guess that the spread in HP would have been almost nothing. But as I said before, these tests were done to represent what most customers do with their cars.

And I bet that if I did a drag race with both the faster respooling nature of the EFR is going to make it a faster car. If you are running to 8000rpm or a lot more boost, then the GTX3582 comes into play, or the EFR8374. But in this case the EFR7670 is versus the GTX3582R w/.82 I would still pick the EFR7670 as on the road, this turbo feels significantly faster off boost and also between shifts.

On the Dyno Conclusions

The EFR7670 is a turbo that I personally feel compares more like A GT3582R, but spools faster on the dyno (like a GT or GTX3582R w/.63Ar). Comparing the EFR7670 to a GTX3076, its slightly laggier, but that lag is a trade off for more power. Since the GTX3076R and EFR7670 have very similar compressor maps, the HP gained is do to the higher flowing turbine housing/wheel. Since the dyno is very controlled, and a high loaded run, in all these tests the super light Titanium Aluminide turbine wheel doesn’t come into play at all. What this does show is the turbine wheel and compressor wheel design is a notch up over the Garrett GTX stuff. From what I have seen Borg Warner has designed a turbo that does what they say it should. It makes more power and spools faster than the GT3582R.

On the Road Conclusions

My conclusions are this. The dyno conclusions do not match what I “feel” on the road. On the road, I feel like this is much more lively than the GT or GTX3076R. Its interesting as in some road tests the EFR7670 shows the same spool up RPM as the GTX3076 w.82ar, but it feels so much snappier between shifts light load low RPM shifts. Meaning the normal day to day 2000-4000RPM shifting is about 50% better than it was before. In some logs I notice that the GTX would show say 2-3psi of boost at these really low RPM’s, where the EFR is showing about 5psi. Its only a couple PSI but that makes huge difference in how it feels. You can see this on the dyno graphs where the EFR is making more TQ at 2000-2500.

Under full throttle high RPM acceleration, again the car feels a bit faster. It feels like Its right back on the power. When comparing this to the GTX3582R graphs I have, it blows it out of the water. When comparing it to the GTX3076, its very close in respool time, but there is this thing that just “feels” better.

I am compiling some road going plots of the GTX3076R and EFR and I think this will show what I am feeling.

Final Conclusions

I used to think that there are lots of turbos out there, depending on the size of the turbine, its going to spool at a particular RPM, depending on the compressor wheel used, your redline and boost, its going to make a given HP. So then it was a matter of what size wheels Garrett and others used to create a given turbo and it was a balancing act of spool and HP. But Borg Warner has proven that there is some magic left in its turbos in that it actually spools faster than its comparable GTX/GT3582R turbo and makes almost the same power, if not more on the GT3582R.

PERRIN Performance will hold off on making conclusions about the entire EFR line when we are able to test an EFR7064 and the 8374. After seeing when these spool up, and the HP they make, I think we and other customers can decide if the EFR is here to stay. What I suspect is that the other EFR turbos are going perform better in one way or another to the Garrett product but will fall in between Garret part numbers in some way. That is not bad as it will make for a big balancing act of price, spool, HP, durability, features and feel.

What is next? I am going to beg and beg to get a test EFR 7064 turbo and in the mean time, I should have the test 8374 turbo from Full-Race any day and that will be bolted on and dynoed. I think this turbo will make more power, but I hate to say, I am not going to be running it high enough boost or high enough redline to really see where it kicks butt. For these tests I will be dynoing it purely to see when it builds boost. I will do the 1.7bar and 1.9 bar runs just for fun, but its not going to be making that much more power…..right???

Over the last couple of weeks I have been asked: Are we giving up on Garrett? No way! These turbos are very well proven and while they sometimes have a bad name in the quality department, I can say over the last 2 years we have had 3 warranty issues come up. Relative to how many we have sold, that % is very very low. I see that they will always have their place and customers will always want a Garrett turbo with an external wastegate.

Lots of fun stuff to come over the next few months!

Street Results/ Real world Feel Results coming soon!

 

 Posted by on March 22, 2011 Dyno Test & Tune, First Look Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Mar 012011
 

When you email tech@perrinperformance.com, or need help with an AccessPORT map, or ask for help with installing your PERRIN Radiator Shroud, you get Cone.  Chris Cone that is. Chris handles all the AccessPORT customers along with all the general tech stuff.  Chris is 100% a car, guy but never actually tuned a car on the dyno. Over the years he started to pick up on why we tune things a certain way, and started to understand some of the basics behind tuning.

Chris had just got his first 06 STI and he really wanted me to tune his car. I told him NO, but you can.

We took this occasion to do some retesting of a few parts and started with Stage 1.  I tuned it showing Chris the basics behind the software and how we tune the cars.  At this point we installed his Turboback exhaust while the car was on the dyno, and ran the Stage 1 mapping with the turbo back exhaust installed.

You can see the graph below, the yellow line represents his car in stock form, then middle hatched turquoise line is Stage 1 tuning with the turboback exhaust installed.  The upper solid turquoise line was Chris’s work.

 

Like all the STI tunes its all about boost.  More boost more power.  Chris pushed the turbo to around 18psi and let it taper down to 14 at redline and as you can see it broke past the 300WHP barrier.  Overall it was a pretty decent gain going from Stage 1 ECU tuning with the turboback exhaust installed to the custom tuned Stage2 map.  20WHP and 20 ft-lbs isn’t too bad for a first time tuner.

To recap Chris’s car has our PERRIN 3″ Single Cat Downpipe, 3″ catback exhaust, and also our Short Ram intake system installed. If your car matches his perfectly, i bet if you ask nice, he will email the special “Cone 06 STI Stage 2 92 Octane map” for free!  As long as you bought an AP from us…..

 

Feb 112011
 

The ALTA BOV Spring Upgrade is a better alternative to the more expensive complete replacement BOV’s other competitors sell.  Our competitors sell you the JCW replacement part which is an upgrade for a MCS, but not for a JCW.  We took this a step further and created this simpler, better performing spring upgrade that is an upgrade for both JCW and MCS models!

 

So Simple, Yet So Effective

The ALTA BOV Spring Uprade for your stock Blow Off Valve (BOV) is a very effective way to make your Turbocharged Mini hold more boost between shifts reducing turbo lag.  The stiffer spring still allows for normal functioning of the BOV during light throttle lifts, but keeps more pressure in the boost tubes making it feel much faster shifting.

 

Installs In About 30 Minutes!

Anyone with proper tools can install this part in under 30 minutes.  Simply remove a couple OEM parts, remove the electrionic BOV and replace spring with the ALTA spring and your done!

Tested to hold 40PSI of boost!!

This test fixture was created to be able to test the spring on a bench before it was installed on a car.  This allowed us to test as much pressure as we wanted and make sure the BOV functioned as it should.  Lets just say this BOV holds and vents more boost than you will ever see!

Key to the design of this part is ensuring the spring is not too stiff.  Because this is an electromechanical device, its was important that electronic part of the system (solenoid) still was able to open the BOV.  We settled on a spring rate that was about 50% higher than the JCW, which is tested to work perfect beyond 40psi of boost!

So Many Features

Our competitors simply resell the JCW Electronic BOV as an upgrade for your MCS.  If you disect what makes these different you will find the entire part to be the same except one item, the spring.

  • 50% stiffer seat pressure than JCW BOV spring.
  • Installation time is roughly 20 minutes.
  • Custom Made Heat treated 17-7 Stainless Steel Spring
  • Rated for over 7,000,000 cycles
  • Makes turbo more repsonsive between shifts/less turbo lag
  • Hold and vents 40psi perfectly!
  • Cheaper than the entire BOV competitors sells.

 

What is a BOV?

A BOV (blow off valve) diverts pressure out of the boost system during certain driving conditions.  On a turbocharged car, under full throttle boost is built up in the boost tube system, and as soon as you lift throttle, the throttle plate closes and the built up pressure has no where to go but backwards through the system. This is a form of compressor surge, which is damaging to your turbo, and also can hurt performance as the “backup” of pressure slows the turbo down or sometimes can stop it.

A BOV is used to vent this build up of pressure during throttle lift conditions.  The Mini Cooper S and JCW have BOVs that are controlled by the ECU which are large solenoids that when energized opens up a valve, and dumps the  built up boost.  The ALTA Spring is a stiffer spring to make the valve close faster after shifts and hold more boost in general.

 

 

 

Features are:

Makes turbo more repsonsive between shifts or less turbo lag between shifts
Cheaper than the entire BOV WMW sells.
50% stiffer seat pressure than JCW BOV spring.
Hold and vents 40psi perfectly!
Installation time is roughly 20minutes.
17-7 Stainless wire
Rated for over 7,000,000 cycles.

 Posted by on February 11, 2011 First Look, MINI Only Tagged with: , , ,
Feb 102011
 

EFR7670

Like a lot of guys out there, we have been waiting for an EFR to play with for a long time!
Someone took this picture of me about a month ago waiting. Ok not really it was from today, but it sure feels like i have been waiting forever.

I know there is no proven power yet, but very very soon. Maybe Nasioc can make a new Turbo section for things like this… Like the GTX thread i started there will be great data to surf through. Lets start with simple things like pics.

I have a bunch more coming don’t worry!

Even the badge is way nicer!

The compressor wheel is amazing looking just wait until the shroud comes off.

EFR is 3.25″ taller overall and like others have said, this is going to be a challenge to fit into the car for sure!

This is probably my favorite part of the whole turbo. The SS housing is very high quality and the internal wastegate routing is very cool. The angle of the exit is angled perfectly off the inlet. VERY cool.

Another angle showing the turbine.

One of the things i was looking forward is the BOV and how its integrated. It just like the Mini coopers we deal with that have a very similar style. The pressure port is tiny, the spring is pretty weak, but small port means less overall force acting upon it. I know guys are going to be concerned that the port is too small to dump the boost it might see, but it works fine on Minis running 24psi, as well as a bunch of other euro cars. There are stiffer springs available for them but we will have to see how these work first.

The EFR compressor housing is smaller OD than the Garrett. Also has a smaller inlet, which is great for fittment reasons and shouldn’t hinder HP at all.

HEre is a side by side of the EFR and the Garrett housings. You can see which one is much nicer. The EFR casting is smooth, not dinged up as though its been thrown across the floor a few times.

Here are the other important things to compare. I tried to take a picture showing the finish of the two wheels. I think it came out pretty good. The EFR wheel is a machined forging and you can see the feed rate of the machining is very slow making these pretty much polished!

Compare the GTX wheel and you can see how much faster they machine the part by the deeper grooves. Borg Warner really took their time making these new turbos really nice.

Its hard to see in this pictures, but the GTX wheels are much shorter compared to the EFR compressor wheels. Its very interesting up close as they shape of the fins are very very different. Its like comparing fins on a ceiling fan to fins on a jet engine.

The one part that i think really make people go crazy is the Gamma Titanium turbine wheel. Its finish is very very nice. The flat bottom of the turbine wheel makes it very strong and also more aerodynamic compared to the split Garrett type. Again the turbine wheel fin design is different.

The Garrett turbine wheel is shaped different, and also has a much thinner cross section. You can almost make it out in the pics. Brock at Borg Warner told me that you have to go up a size in the EFR turbine wheel OD, to compare against a Garrett. In this case 70mm EFR will be similar to the 60mm GTX. Which this makes more sense base on the overall volume the turbine wheel being slightly less with an EFR of the same given OD as a Garrett.

Beside that stuff here are some other cool pics from BWTS.

This cross section shows why the turbo is so much longer. The dual caged ceramic ball bearings are spread far apart for stability, notice the 4 oil seals (Garrett has 2), the oiling mechanism is designed to push oil to the front and back bearings, the coolant jacket spreads deep into the turbine wheel area, the really cool BOV return port and all the other really cool stuff. You can really tell this is over built and designed for abuse.

Here is the GT3076R. You can’t see the bearings in this but you get the idea.They don’t recommend going 20 degrees of kilter with the EFR, but with the better oil slinger and dual seals on both ends, i bet you could do close to 45 degrees.

These are the 3 main castings used on all the current models of the turbos.

tech_turbo_efrcompcovers

tech_turbo_efrcompwheelfamily

Now the fun begins trying to make this fit!

EFR Turbo Technical Brief

Here is a very in depth article about the EFR turbos and how they came to be. This article is what really got me going on these turbos. Never before has turbo company done this kind of public documentation.

Click Here to Download EFR Turbo Technical breif.pdf

 

 Posted by on February 10, 2011 First Look Tagged with: , , , , , , ,
Jan 062011
 

This is the first time I have made a post on a forum that wasn€™t business related for our company, and it should be a good one!  I am excited to be just one of the forum guys this time around.

I bought my 09 135i last year just before SEMA time mainly because I was looking for something new and different to drive than a loud,stiff, and over powered AWD car.  I wanted something that would be satisfying, non-racer boy looking and something I wouldn€™t feel like I had to mess with.  I was very intrigued by the BMW turbo motors and after taking a 135 for a quickspin I was sold.  Its quite, smooth, quirky looking and the build quality is far better than any Subaru or Mitsubishi, something you all already know!

But like many of us here, I am addicted.  Its like an HAA meeting, (Horsepower Addiction Anonymous) Hi my name is Jeff Perrin, I am addicted to horsepower€¦   I have to mess with things, I have to take them apart, I have to make them better, I need more HP!  There has never been a car I have owned that didn€™t get modified in some way or another.  While the intentions were to not modify the 135i, my urge was growing!

My first few times surfing the BWM forums all I saw was piggyback this and piggyback that.  I just couldn€™t believe that guys were buying these rather old school ecu tuning devices for their high-tech expensive cars! I have had many dealings with piggybacks in the past and there is always a limit or a problem!  There is always something sacrificed for the cheaper less expensive part.  I know that all the BMW world knows, is piggybacks, but in any other car world, piggybacks are looked upon like Osama Bin Laden.   Maybe its a bad example, but in all other car worlds, if there is an ECU flash, that is what you buy!

It seemed like the few flashes out there were either expensive, a pain to get flashed, and then getting similar results to the piggybacks.  When I found out COBB was coming out with a N54 ECU based AccessPORT, I was excited as I knew it would kick ass!  Especially if they do the normal features that come with other AccessPORT that are available.

I have always said that a proper tune can be done many ways,and to give the piggybacks credit, from what I have seen on these forums is that there are some proper tunes done.  But after comparing their HP results to what I have now seen with the AccessPORT results, they are missing out on soooo much power!   That is because of limits!  The AccessPORT maps have many key limiters unlocked that piggybacks and others ECU reflashes can€™t get around.  I think the competitors to the AccessPORT will NEVER be able to make as much power, and make as much €œsafe€power because they can€™t get around these limits.

My great connections at COBB got me into some of the beta testing on the AccessPORT for the N54 powerplant.  And after I was able to dyno the released version of the Stage 1 mapping I was absolutely floored by the power gains.  I have been stewing here just waiting to publish these numbers and finally I can put them out there to see.  Keep in mind whether you have a 135i or a335i with an N54 engine these are the same results you will see!

dyno_tune_135istg1oct92

Continue reading »

 Posted by on January 6, 2011 Dyno Test & Tune, First Look Tagged with: , , , , ,