Turblown cast ewg 9280 1.05 FD Rx7 Dyno


Half bridge, pump gas with methanol at 18 psi. Full 3.5 exhaust. Our full cast ewg 9280 turbo kit. This dyno is BHP, not RWHP. Built and tuned in Ireland by Shadow Rotary.

 

Weird looking curve. Did they let out at the top end? I thought the 9280 curve would hold better in the upper rpms.

 

Likely the manifold design choking out, but yeah, this looks like doctored a bit...

 

In my experience its usually the port work. I have a back to back dyno showing what the difference in a large change in port work does to the powerband( zero other changes). I will have to dig it up.

 

Strange dyno using flywheel equations from a chassis dyno, what's that-530 rwhp? At nearly 20 psi? It would be truth telling to see what the previous model EFR 9180 made on this same dyno and same ports, etc. Because the 9180 probably comes close to that at the same 19 psi. Turned up it's said the the 9280(110 lbs per mn) is an 830rwhp (rotary) turbo.
Maybe not, or definitely not if this shop did everything correctly with the set up. I'm hoping they didn't.

That half bridge looks like it takes away from how soon the EFR should see full boost, and the dyno sure sounded like it too. Big power drop at the end also as was said. I expected more power at that boost level since there was a 9180 dyno sheet posted up reading 570 rwhp @ just 3 psi more.

 

Most dynos in the UK and surrounding region report their HP figures this way. I haven't seen any other dynos from this shop, so I cannot make any comments on the rest. I am street tuning a 9280 cast kit maybe this week, and have a few more too do. I've also sold quite a few of these turbo kits, so soon or later there will be more dyno data.

 

"its usually the port work"

you can tell lots about the ports by locating peak torque. peak torque is the rpm point of MAX CYLINDER FILL. aggressive porting moves this point higher on the rpm band. on this particular run peak torque is at 6290. i would have thought a half bridge would have moved P T to a higher RPM. my highly engineered raceports are around 6450 without the lower rpm penalty of a bridgeport. nevertheless 6290 isn't a bad number.

what does stand out is it appears that full boost, in this case a hair above 18, doesn't arrive till just after 6000 rpm? many factors could effect this, such as the wastegate control so perhaps this just isn't maximized.

i may have missed it but i don't see if this is corrected. i did see humidity temp and pressure so maybe it is... and maybe not. not very professional to not disclose... also it is relevant (16 hp if corrected, who knows what if not) to the tune as to which type of correction is used.

then there is the lack of data to at least 8500-9000. i attribute this to some other factor not relating to the turbo.

just to be very clear on one central point... if you are wanting a 9280 you are looking for 800 SAE rrwhp... given it is close to impossible to hook up 600 in the real world (given a 2960 curb weight) you are looking to replace the entire drivetrain and set some serious records. nothing wrong w that as long as you understand the challenge.

i will take the 9180 as a more rational irrational option.

 

Waiting on the 20 psi dyno charts( made 581rwhp). Below is 13 psi( 493rwhp). This dyno reads a lot lower than a dynojet too.

 

obviously influenced by the semi PP and ProJay intake

really hate when they list speed rather than engine rpm though

 

What's crazy is the car that put up those numbers is running through a catalytic converter and by the sound of the exhaust in the dyno video, his gates are routed into that restricted exhaust system and not the atmosphere.

That's quite a bit of power being left on the table, especially at 20psi.

Hopefully we will see some #'s from my car with that turbo in the near future on IRP's dyno.

 

Thats usual 1:1 4th gear and if its 4.10 rear it looks like full 13psi boost at 4,000rpm and the pull is to 8,400rpm.

Sounds like an "interesting" set-up from others descriprions- unless that cat is in the exhaust tip like a rally car I dont see how it can survive long with a semi-p.port.

 

not sure I understand your assessment about it surviving? It’s making almost 500 whp on only 13 psi boost, which as previously posted is directly related to same. For me that seems to suggest otherwise and my expectation is it’s complimented by a good emap as well, but am open to hear and consider your explanation.

edit: my bad, you’re referring to the cat surviving I suppose. I misinterpreted as the engine. No, that would depend on the cat converter. An HJS motorsport cat can handle that. I’ve run them successfully for competition use where a cat is required. Good to 1050*C., 100 cpi, passes OBD2 emissions. Might need a pair parallel plumbed for higher boost though. Largest one is 3.5” in/out rated for 500 hp. 3” rated for 400 hp in the pic below. Premix might be the eventual downfall, but I didn't have any issue on an increased output OMP + 1/2 oz/gal for a Renesis.

https://www.hjs-motorsport.de/produc...catalysts.html



kind of making a few assumptions on this, but based on what I see and will expect from the 20 psi pull, it seems like the 9274 might be preferred instead? Especially if the variable A/R housing pans out.
.

 

Emap i saw on the video was 13.5. Thats a true 1-1, which I've seen posts on here that say it is next to impossible.

It proves how efficient the 9280 really is and the same with Turblown's manifold.

 

You can easily have 1:1, even less sometimes. Just takes a very efficient setup( and usually very laggy... )

As always most people regurgitate things they have read on the internet.

 

Yeah, I was thinking the cat wont last too long with Semi P. Port dumping air and unburnt fuel into the exhaust.

Seems like a weird liability/restriction on a 700hp+ set-up.

Like when Scoot tried to make their P. Port 4 rotor thing street spec with cat and all.

 

Not a rotary but just for example, I had an old GT4082 on a four litre straight six which made 18psi by 3500rpm and had 16psi pre-turbine.