You can't compare wastegate functionality on 2 completely different turbos. They also don't say what size gate was used on the gt35 turbo, or how it was sprung, or what they were using to control it. If they were running a single 38mm external gate, yeah, it may not have been able to control boost. Questionable comparison is questionable.


And the GT35 they used has an ages old and out dated compressor. A better "comparison" as far as spoolup and power is concerned would have been a gtx3582 so it would have at least had the somewhat more modern 11 blade billet compressor.

 

Very fair assessment. I am sure I can dig up the info or more comparisons, but your point is well received.

However, my point is (which I mentioned in the post prior to this) for the lower power stuff, the BW EFR internal gate performs exceptionally well (say below 500-550WHP) with the smaller AR housings.

 

The difficulty, and expense, of fitting the IWG 7163 to an 8/9 is undoubtedly why we have not seen more people running them. If BW offered a T4 twin scroll EWG 7163 I would buy one, and I am sure others would too.

Hopefully, BW just expands the mixed-flow tech to more of their line. The 7670 really "should have been" the ideal turbo for the 4G63 (according to matchbot). But in reality it pales in comparison to the 8374.

 

I just want to address something you mentioned. The issue I have with Garrrett GTX turbos currently is they are still on an "outdated" (by current standards) turbine wheel design on the GTX turbos. From what I have seen, the only real benefit is the billet compressor wheels are much more efficient and able to support more airflow (and make more WHP) for the same boost level, but spoolup is very similar to regular GT ballbearing turbos of the same variety. Something I found somewhat intriguing

However, I cannot say I have personally had first hand experience with any GTX turbos, but coming from the GT series, I went straight to the EFR series turbos citing (the outdated turbine wheels) as my reasoning.

Bolted for truth. I think the only option right now is to wait for the 7163 EFR from the indy cars to start showing up to purchase to get the EWG option. However, BW does not sell the compressor housing separate so you will have to run the non CRV housing and just run an external BOV. Simple enough to accomplish!

EDIT: Or just run a full race manifold and 7163 setup. I have seen people spend more on lesser setups..........

 

I somewhat disagree. I very much like price point of the EFR IWG turbos. T4TS EWG would require purchasing two EWGs that would add at least another $500 to the total price if not $700. You might argue that an EWG design could preclude the need to purchase a thinner radiator, but since my radiator is now 10 years old, I don't mind replacing it.

I think the reasons for the low 7163 adoption rate have been the relative easy of obtaining high power stock frame turbos, the difficulty in obtaining a 7163 (I got one of the very first ones back in August of 2014), and the uncertainty in their performance. I think the EFR failure rate and the apparent lackluster performance of the 7670 also put a damper on the enthusiasm for the EFR turbos in the Evo community.

 

So the irony behind this was the failures were not wide spread and was mostly centralized to the early production 62/6758 turbos. It ended up being a manufacturer material supplier issue and they have since changed manufacturers and have had close to 0 unprompted turbo failures (read: overspeed for instance). The B1 frame turbos have been out long enough to easily dig up performance information and it seems the 7163 is readily available to the general public. It's going to be really cool when the Indy cars "time out" their 7163s and a few pop up on the market.

......but as usual, the real builds happen behind the scenes

 

I think it just comes down to price. Most people willing to drop $5K+ on a turbo kit, probably want to make more than 400whp on pump gas.

 

THIS

Having built a 7460 E9 and having seen how great this works for the way we use these cars I sometims wonder if my efr 7163 development is worth it... well only one way to know..

 

I know of a failed 7670, two 8374s, and a 9180.

 

In the grand scheme of things, that is in the realm of noise. In addition, out of curiosity, how did those fail??

From what I saw, for the initial run of EFRs, the B1 frame had the most cases of failure particularly the 62/6758 and this was strictly due to a material supplier defect.

 

All turbine wheel failure. Some were within the last two years.

 

The one (and only IMHO) downside of the TiAL wheel is it is somewhat brittle at room temp. Now, this is not to say they are weak by any means, just something I have had first hand experience with. They just need to be handled with extra sense of orientation and items in close proximity to the turbine wheel. Nothing a little extra care won't fix during handling.

Read: When swapping to a TS housing on one my EFRs, the turbine housing shifted during removal and chipped or shattered 50-60% of the turbine blades.............this turned into a $1500 dollar paperweight shortly thereafter. That was hands down, the most joyous day of my life...........

 

Spool should be quicker with the 7064 over the 7163 because of the smaller compressor (inducer mainly) and larger exhaust wheel.
The MLR guys are loving the 7064 over the 7163 turbo.

 

There is ZERO 7064 dynos on Evo, only Mark Shead citing his experience on YB Cosworth, and drawing parallels.
Mark has shown on turbo flow chart how 7064 fits better the Evo 2.0. But they are so close, that is just a guidance, and real testing will show which actually fits best or what are the compromises for each.

I saw the 7064 dyno Mark was referring to, and I also saw 7163 TS T4 dynos on 2.0 motors: both reach 15psi at 3000rpm (Cossie YB 2.0 on 7064 and Motor X on EF‰7163, both TS).
Its hard to draw conclusions, without any data that can be directly correlated.

Incidentally the 7163 TS reached 15.5psi at 3000rpm on FA20 Subaru boxer, and on VW/Audi 2.0.
Both are DI motors with high compression, aiding spool.

There is an Evo 6 in Australia with 7064 TS, used for track mostly, and similarly it spooled ~3000rpm to 15psi.

Power output wise, I would speculate 7163 would be ~20-30whp higher potential over 7064.
We are not pushing on pump gas to bitter end, so it ends up being a game of area under the curve, which has best spool/midrange, and feel snappiest.

 

Well it was not my day today. Had some fuel issues and a Diverter valve. issue.
It seems my brand new aeromotive 340 e85 pump is almost dead causing a lean issue
Then my diverter valve decided to turn its self into a bov by blowing it's self off the car.
Car did manage to do 450/420 at 24psi with no timing and running stupid lean before we let off. Going back Friday after I get the issues fixed.