New BW EFR Turbo Thread
Nov 1, 2012 | 05:04 AM
#2118
Evolving Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 491
Likes: 1
From: Redmond Washington
Nov 1, 2012 | 08:51 AM
#2119
You aren't after actual fuel pressure, persay, you are after differential fuel pressure across the injector. Reference the back side of the movable piston with boost pressure.
This would allow the accumulator to fill up any time there is excess fuel capacity but would maintian fuel injector differential pressure when the pump can't keep up.
The trick here would be to have a nearly constant force on the movable piston regardless of piston position within the accumulator.
This would allow the accumulator to fill up any time there is excess fuel capacity but would maintian fuel injector differential pressure when the pump can't keep up.
The trick here would be to have a nearly constant force on the movable piston regardless of piston position within the accumulator.
Nov 1, 2012 | 12:28 PM
#2120
· Road Blocks
o Stock FPR cannot handle full pressure from pumps – replace with aftermarket
o Is it possible to program ECU to keep Fuel Pump Relay 3 on at all times?
o Possible to turn fuel injectors to any IDC without engine running?
o Will Accusump provide specs needed to replace seals with appropriate ones for fuel? Will they do the seals themselves if provided a spec?
o What max fuel pressure steady state at with no injector flow requirement for a Walbro 255lph? Walbro 400lph? This is dependent on the return line.
o Is the accumulator gas side pre-pressurized? To what pressure? Can a set pressure be requested?
· Testing
o 1qt accumulator, 255lph Walbro, stock wiring
1. Verify FPR is at 42psi above atmosphere
2. Log voltage over pump
3. Log fuel line pressure
4. Turn fuel pump onto full voltage
5. Turn on fuel injectors to 30%IDC
6. Take time/pressure measurements until fuel line pressure drops below 60psi
7. Turn off fuel injectors and wait until fuel pressure gets to steady state
8. Repeat step 4 but increase IDC by 10% until IDC at 100%
o 2qt accumulator, 255lph Walbro, stock wiring
1. Same process as 1qt accumulator
o *3qt accumulator, 255lph Walbro, stock wiring*
o Can repeat testing with modifying the FPR +/- 5 psi to see how the fuel line overhead affects the drain.
Equipment needed
· Digital Oscilloscope (Can rent one from local Electro Rent)
· 2050cc/min injectors (I’m sure I might be able to temporarily borrow some from a local); can use 1050cc injectors in car now which will handle 500awhp on 92oct
Cost of test
· 1qt Accusump: $210
· 2qt Accusump: $228
· 3qt Accusump: $246
· Seals modification: $depends (can have someone do the work but seals might be $$)
· FPR and kit: $310 for AMS (otherwise have to have someone fab up mounting)
Seal specs:
· 150psi liquid pressure (same pressure on air side but if seals rated for that psi then they won’t need changing)
· Handle Gasoline and/or E85
Doing the test with a 400lph Walbro may require doing a fuel pump rewire or finding someone who already has done the rewire.
o Stock FPR cannot handle full pressure from pumps – replace with aftermarket
o Is it possible to program ECU to keep Fuel Pump Relay 3 on at all times?
o Possible to turn fuel injectors to any IDC without engine running?
o Will Accusump provide specs needed to replace seals with appropriate ones for fuel? Will they do the seals themselves if provided a spec?
o What max fuel pressure steady state at with no injector flow requirement for a Walbro 255lph? Walbro 400lph? This is dependent on the return line.
o Is the accumulator gas side pre-pressurized? To what pressure? Can a set pressure be requested?
· Testing
o 1qt accumulator, 255lph Walbro, stock wiring
1. Verify FPR is at 42psi above atmosphere
2. Log voltage over pump
3. Log fuel line pressure
4. Turn fuel pump onto full voltage
5. Turn on fuel injectors to 30%IDC
6. Take time/pressure measurements until fuel line pressure drops below 60psi
7. Turn off fuel injectors and wait until fuel pressure gets to steady state
8. Repeat step 4 but increase IDC by 10% until IDC at 100%
o 2qt accumulator, 255lph Walbro, stock wiring
1. Same process as 1qt accumulator
o *3qt accumulator, 255lph Walbro, stock wiring*
o Can repeat testing with modifying the FPR +/- 5 psi to see how the fuel line overhead affects the drain.
Equipment needed
· Digital Oscilloscope (Can rent one from local Electro Rent)
· 2050cc/min injectors (I’m sure I might be able to temporarily borrow some from a local); can use 1050cc injectors in car now which will handle 500awhp on 92oct
Cost of test
· 1qt Accusump: $210
· 2qt Accusump: $228
· 3qt Accusump: $246
· Seals modification: $depends (can have someone do the work but seals might be $$)
· FPR and kit: $310 for AMS (otherwise have to have someone fab up mounting)
Seal specs:
· 150psi liquid pressure (same pressure on air side but if seals rated for that psi then they won’t need changing)
· Handle Gasoline and/or E85
Doing the test with a 400lph Walbro may require doing a fuel pump rewire or finding someone who already has done the rewire.
Last edited by nollij; Nov 1, 2012 at 12:32 PM.
Nov 1, 2012 | 09:27 PM
#2121
Evolving Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 491
Likes: 1
From: Redmond Washington
If you did make a new thread I would probably post in there from time to time. Maybe the mods would let you copy what's already been posted here to the new thread, as startup material.
Last edited by Talonboost; Nov 1, 2012 at 09:29 PM.
Nov 2, 2012 | 11:07 AM
#2122
7163 has some impressive new results! Bw released info at sema that in 2013 they'll have aluminum chra's for the small frame turbos... And the 1.45 a/r div t4 turbine housing for the 8374 and the 9180!
Good stuff.
It was nice to talk to Geoff, Raffi, and Brock again. Exciting new things from bw that are moving the product in the right direction. From the sounds of it supplier issues are becoming less and less so the efr production will be picking up dramatically over the next few months. I'm still stoked to get a few 8374s
Good stuff.
It was nice to talk to Geoff, Raffi, and Brock again. Exciting new things from bw that are moving the product in the right direction. From the sounds of it supplier issues are becoming less and less so the efr production will be picking up dramatically over the next few months. I'm still stoked to get a few 8374s
Nov 3, 2012 | 08:28 PM
#2128
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
From: Blaine, MN
Are there any results at all that show any BW being anything other than a durable turbo?
Not that it is bad they are durable but they don't seem to make dick for power on any setups.
Maybe this is true and maybe it is not, but I haven't seen any public figures out of them vs a PTE or Garrett worth going crazy about.
Not that it is bad they are durable but they don't seem to make dick for power on any setups.
Maybe this is true and maybe it is not, but I haven't seen any public figures out of them vs a PTE or Garrett worth going crazy about.
Nov 3, 2012 | 08:51 PM
#2129
Are there any results at all that show any BW being anything other than a durable turbo?
Not that it is bad they are durable but they don't seem to make dick for power on any setups.
Maybe this is true and maybe it is not, but I haven't seen any public figures out of them vs a PTE or Garrett worth going crazy about.
Not that it is bad they are durable but they don't seem to make dick for power on any setups.
Maybe this is true and maybe it is not, but I haven't seen any public figures out of them vs a PTE or Garrett worth going crazy about.
And the bigger the turbo size that you're comparing the LARGER the gains that can be seen in transient response. So you can upsize your EFR to make more power and it'll still respond faster than a 7mm smaller GTX, HTA, or PTE turbo.
Once you drive one... you'll understand what the hype is about. Ever notice that the PTE vs EFR thread on Supraforums NEVER showed the transient response data? Never showed the turbospeed data? Never even took the sensor out of the box!
The EFR just plain ****S on the competition when it comes to transient response.
Get this... 50 data samples of my car's transient response.
@5500 RPMS in 3rd gear my car gets to
180kpa in 6ms!
240kpa in 103ms!
270kpa in 214ms!
300kpa in 305ms!
I have data for 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th gear... and I'm compiling more and more data. Just so you can figure these numbers at I'm seeing 300kpa (29.4psi) of boost in 3 tenths of a second.
Nov 4, 2012 | 08:26 AM
#2130
But do you have the same data on equivalently sized, twinscroll GTX and PTEs?
Also, how exactly was that recorded?
180kPa in 6ms means the turbo was already spinning fast enough to produce that boost. If anything, it was probably making that boost in the upper intercooler pipe and you are likely seeing the response time of the sensor and not the turbo. Scott from FP made some logs showing a similar situation where the MAP sensor sees vacuum under part throttle but the upper IC pipe had a ton of boost pressure and it lead to part throttle surge.
I'm not questioning if the response is great. I question if the data you have is really a fair projection of response. You said it yourself, unless you did a coast down from a higher RPM (like 7000RPM) to let the turbo speed minimize before the test, it really doesn't tell you much about true transient response.
Also, how exactly was that recorded?
180kPa in 6ms means the turbo was already spinning fast enough to produce that boost. If anything, it was probably making that boost in the upper intercooler pipe and you are likely seeing the response time of the sensor and not the turbo. Scott from FP made some logs showing a similar situation where the MAP sensor sees vacuum under part throttle but the upper IC pipe had a ton of boost pressure and it lead to part throttle surge.
I'm not questioning if the response is great. I question if the data you have is really a fair projection of response. You said it yourself, unless you did a coast down from a higher RPM (like 7000RPM) to let the turbo speed minimize before the test, it really doesn't tell you much about true transient response.