Bazman

Anyone using this yet?

What are your thoughts?

I'm looking at replacing my single 6275 STS BB one with one of these. Has to be water cooled though.

EFR tech reckon it will spool as fast as the smaller STS yet blow an extra 150rwhp at the same 10psi. If it can do both I'll be a huge fan.

stevieturbo

Ive yet to hear a bad report about these yet. I guess their better spool and performance would be a huge bonus for a rear mount. In a lot oc cases too, handy that they also have an integral wastegate.

Blacksaleen95

iTrader: (2)

They spool super fast, very low inertia compared to other turbos on the market. You will not be disappointed. They've been running on the Indy cars for 2 years no with no issues.

Bazman

Sweet, thanks guys for that input.

The wastegate issue is an inteersting one, I have a huge wastegate but still cannot get less than 8lb boost due to the back pressure from the tiny turbine. A bigger turbo will help that a lot.

I may even go twins on the front eventually, but for now the rear mount makes monster torque - I have 300rwhp at 2600rpm, not bad for a little LS3. Too bad the new $3k trans took a crap

chuntington101

Steve, why do you think these turbos are less popular in the after market scene? They look amazing on paper but I'm not seeing as many out there as I thought there would be!

Bazman

I suspect price. They are double the cost of many others

stevieturbo

Simple really, they're relatively new on the market.

Pricewise, they are slightly more expensive than anything comparable. Certainly not a huge amount though.
Especially if you opt for internal wastegate. In that mode, they are basically the same price overall as a new turbo and external gate.

@Baz, they may be more expensive than an oil journal, but compared to the likes of a Garrett GTX...they are only a little more expensive

Mark at MAD seems to rant and rave about them, although havent seen very many people using them yet, or actual results.

Sarg

iTrader: (6)

Funny enough the picture on my avatar is an eff turbo. I I've used them a couple times and been very impressed. When you get one with the wastegate and the bov, the price is really not terrible when you count up how much you are saving. The bad part is they don't have anything bigger than a t4. As twins they would be expensive. But they are a phenomenal turbo. 375 to the wheels on a 2.3 l motor with nearly instant spool and boost recovery between shifts was fun.

stevieturbo

Not sure if they offer a T4 or not, but the 9180 is rated as a 900hp turbo...so either way it is very capable.
I think that particular one has a fairly large turbine, despite whatever housing it has ?

I'd say it will be rare to see them on V8's, where spool is less of an issue.

On smaller 4 cyl engines, I'm sure they will become more popular as time goes on.

Sarg

iTrader: (6)

900 hp on a 4 cylinder or maybe a 6, but on a 8 I think it would struggle to make that. It is basically a very similar compressor to the Borg Warner S366. If it is making 900 hp it is at a very high boost ratio.

Here is a plot on a 5.3

Way off the compressor map at a mere 15 psi.

chuntington101

Steve, would you use the internally gated option on a LS engine?

stevieturbo

I couldnt afford either lol

If I had the money, I'd use whichever was most convenient. However no matter how good they are, I'd probably distrust the internal ates ability to get the job done, and having an external gate with easy spring changes, and easy ability to blow into both ports....
It would just make it a difficult decision to stick with the internal gate.

That said, as the majority of V8 applications are relatively low boost anyway, I'm sure it would work perfectly fine

But the internal gate also adds physical size...and in a non flexible location, as the actuator can/rod must go in certain places. So an external unit can be easier to install in some respects.

Bazman

That map makes it look like it is way too small for an LS3 as a single, yet their techs say it'd make around 650rwhp at 10lb boost which is perfect for me. It certainly looks like it'd lose nothing down low to the small one I have now.

I'll have to check carefully to see if the internal wastegate will fit with the housings rotated where I want them though.

stevieturbo

yes it will make the numbers, Will it be the most efficient at those levels ? perhaps not.

But it's still a compromise. A unit that is super efficient making the peak number, might be a lot more lethargic at lower rpm's

So it's always a compromise. Choose the unit that is the most efficient and fastest spooling that will get the job done over the operating range you will be using it most of the time.

IMO a lot of the turbo's I see people using are too small for the application as far as compressor maps go. But they still work, they still make great numbers. But I also suspect it is part of the reason for a lot of failures, because at the top end you're basically overspinning the crap out of the smaller units.

But would the car feel as good or the same with bigger units making the same power ? Probably not due to slower spool times.

Sarg

iTrader: (6)

6.0 plot on the same turbo

It would be responsive as hell, but just not really the right application imho. A small $650 S475 or something along those lines would probably be much better suited and perform very well. Jump my personal perspective. I mean after all, it is at the end of the day still a 66mm turbo. There is no magic that is going to make it larger. Twins would be sick though

Unobtainium

They aren't popular because of a lot of broken promises, terrible wait times, and then poor quality housings. The company originally slated to do the hot sides couldn't meet QC and BW rejected a ton. The new turbine housings are likely the worst on the market in terms of finish. The turbine wheel is state of the art, center section is huge and beefy, and it's a great little system.
The biggest difference is the transient response. League of their own.

CornFedLS

The spool time a a lot lower than it's counterparts. I can't wait til the suppy is back!