I dont know who you are but my gosh, you are good. That's the closest i have ever been to understanding a compressor map!! Thank you very much!

I had both turbos on my car recently. What I didn’t like about Garret was 1. Center section is way to tight making pita to access the fittings, had to preassemble all lines with out hot side before installing. 2. Compressor clamp system to the cartridge it terrible design as the bolts that hold it interfere with AN fittings. 3. Garret came with shaft play were Borg had and still doesn’t have any play what so ever. 4. Garret w/o intercooler pipes on running engine started to spit out oil out of the compressor outlet, Borg under same condition did not (reason why it ran w/o pipes is due to me driving to fabricator) "Ones pipes where on there was no more oil" 5. Biggest negative Garret was much more lazy turbo in response and boost creation on 2.5 liter engine, I find the EFR 8474 walks all over it in midrange, I have all logs which I sent to Turbodirect as well as full-race.

Really awesome info as always. I keep learning more about compressor maps. A topic I was always scared of. You really put things into perspective. When you think about what you get cost for cost, G Series vs EFR, it's really crazy. Unless there are reliability issues, the EFR seems the obvious choice. Given your info from past videos, I'd bet the EFR is more reliable if anything. Sure, Garrett with big WG and BOV is fun, but not actually a better system. I keep sharing your vids with my friends. The ones who actually want to learn the in depth info. Thanks for providing this resource!

Thanks for the explanation again the borg Warner seems to be the better all round turbo especially with the efficient water cooler jackets!!

i can sit hear all day and watch this guy knows his stuff

Thank you for the detailed explanation. 🙏

I absolutely love the content! Somebody needed to tell and show how it is, and you are that man. I would love to see your impression of the newer Xona Rotor stuff. You seem to have a keen eye for quality and Xona looks like the best solution in that regard. I'll be watching. Kind regards from Alaska!

Before anyone gets confused. He means its a 2.5” inlet and 3” outlet on the garrett. Measure ID aposed to OD.

Good to see someone knows what they are talking about! Smart man! Interested now in your turbos!

There's a couple things missing... 1)Smaller diameter turbos can and will spin at higher shafts speeds 2)It's clear that the g35 turbine cannot keep up with the compresor. The G40-900 might be the better turbo over the G35-1050 despite it's lower rating.

this is is the vid i needed. i have been racking my brain over these to turbos for 2 weeks. lets watch the vid!

The G35-1050 also comes in a divided T4 with a 1.06 A/R and a T3 with either a 0.83 or 1.01 A/R. These housings have a V-band outlet and are free floating.

Great content as always Chris!

Hey Chris and team, hope to see some new videos soon! I see all your Facebook posts on the new in house turbos. Would love videos on those as well as more technical videos. Cheers!

Thank you this was very informative! How would efr 9274 compare to 1050? To me efr clearly comes out on top but would be good to have your thoughts :)

Borg Warner needs to make the next version more compact whic will fit way more tight engine bays Most at that power level will have vent to atmosphere bov like the Tubosmart Race port. Also the boost solenoid doesn’t need to be mounted on the compressor housing.

The borg warner having a full back disc actually has more to do with aerodynamic efficiency than anything else. A scalloped design loses efficiency due to the leakage between the blades and center housing. A full back disc can also help with reducing high cycle fatigue as it adds stiffness to the blade root at the inducer. However, the draw back of full back discs are poorer transient response and poorer low cycle fatigue life. The fact that borg is using TiAl or whatever may have pushed the optimization in the direction of full back disc while the marM garrett uses may prefer a scalloped design.

Well the compressor efficiency shown is the pT efficiency aka the ratio of how much of the turbo shaft energy goes into raising the air pressure rather than heating the air. Comparing compressor efficiencies doesn't tell you the full picture (which is what you are trying to explain to the viewers) because we may have one compressor with 78% efficiency but requires a rate of example 1kW to achieve a required flowrate@some pressure but another one with 75% efficiency might only require 0.8kW to achieve the same parameters. So in the first case 220W of energy will go into heating the air while on the latter case 200W will go into heating the air. Therefore the 75% turbocharger is better even though the compressor efficiency is worse. Therefore you need to calculate the shaft power in order to find out which one is better. With the Borg Warner calculator you can do this easily (assuming you have some real data - best is to install the turbo on the specific engine and datalog the parameters..which is a bit counterproductive since you can get the actual engine output that way; ideally you already have one known turbo and you want to move to another one, then you can use the existing data to do the calculation to see where you will land).

Bro do please a video compare between EFR 9274 and Garrett G40 1150 🙏🙏🙏

Another concern is apples-to-apples on the efficiency. How about comparing them both at the maximum efficiency of the Borg-Warner, aka 75 percent? That takes the Garrett from 30 pounds of airflow at 0.4 bar of boost to about 89 pounds of airflow at around 2.7 bar of boost at 75 percent efficiency. Borg-Warner: it is all the way up at 0.9bar of boost before it gets to the 75 percent region, and at 41 pounds of airflow, up to only 62 pounds of airflow at 1.8 bar of boost. For 70 pounds of airflow, the Garrett is at 78 percent efficiency from 1.5 bar to 2.1 bar of boost. For 70 pounds of airflow the Borg Warner is at a maximum of 72 percent efficiency from 2 bar to 2.8 bar. The Garrett thus makes more airflow with less boost and higher efficiency at those points. At 1.5 bar of boost, on the Garrett, you can go from inefficient 30 pounds of airflow to about 95 pounds of airflow. Borg-Warner: also-inefficient 30 to 87 pounds of airflow You just ain't gonna get 3.2 bar out of the Garrett, period. The Garrett chart looks narrower because it is a more laterally-compressed scale, also. Garrett's own boost advisor does not even advise use of the G35-1050 for 1000hp unless it is over 2 liters. (sea level 4-valve, 7000 RPM) Could it be that Garretts are sufficiently efficient, adiabatically, that they don't need the same airflow to get the same horsepower? However, the Ti-Al lightweight turbine wheel on the Borg-Warner HAS to mean it spools up faster than the Garrett, does it not? Also, the Borg-Warner seems to be built-to-last-forever unit that has a large number of features built in, AND it costs less (to manufacture) due to Borg-Warner's gigantic economics of scale, being a worldwide OEM supplier The Borg-Warner seems to focus on less glitz and flash, and more on solid engineering. I mean, Ti-Al is available for everyone. Why doesn't Garrett use it? I think if they want to survive, Garrett is going to have to up their game to catch up to Borg-Warner on the materials front. The compressor maps don't tell the whole story, and there is no way a lighter Ti-Al turbine wheel can not be an advantage in spooling time for the Borg-Warner.

Basically i learned borg warner made a turbo that does it all. Built in bov and iwg uses less speed to produce somewhat similar hp numbers

i did buy a Garrett turbo about to fit it - but might have to rotate it ? - it is only small - GT 28/60 ej207 subaru.

Considering this 8474 turbo with a divided T3 inlet and .75 a/r for my 2.0 built FA20F WRX (I'm a mile above sea level). Would you do this combo for a street car? I don't want to be lugging around and be disappointed in the streetability, but I want to easily hit 700hp or more. Thanks, in advance!

hi, I love the content and support you all provide to those with questions. I have an EFR8474 i just got and wondering if it can make 850WHP on a 2.5L DAZA 5CYL, the competing turbo for this car at that power range is a XONA 8264S, so wondering if this will not only outspool, but out power it! looking forward to hearing back :)

Great video

Thank you for another great video. Couple of Question. 1. Are you referring to whp or crank hp when you are talking about power made? 2. Also, this power claims would be pump petrol? 3. Do you know the turbine shaft thickness on both chargers? 4. How is proven reliability on Borg lightweight turbine/materials? Garrett is known to be very robust and can operate far outside the limits without snapping. Regards.

Hi Chris i just oppened my early Efr 7163 bought 10 years ago and just found my turbine sharp tips missing looks like high egt or to much lunch control/anti lag....could i still use the turbo? i didn't notice anything in running the car. Any advice? Thank you!

Awesome video... I stil stand by my bw🤌🏼

I have a question regarding turbocharger speed. The non splitter blade compressorwheels seems to need higher rpm than a splitter blade compressor wheel to deliver the same amount of airflow. The turbinewheel therefor naturally also has higher rpm. Does this not reduce back pressure compared to a turbinewheel rotating at a lower rpm? If so, one can use a slightly smaller and lighter turbinewheel for better spool up intensity, right? Is this the main advantage for the non splitter blade turbochargers?

Great video! Though it's not a G35 I find it interesting that a few people I see are making over 1100whp with a G42-1200 despite being rated for only 1200 at the crank. On the same dyno people with EFRs are making almost exactly what Borg seems to advertise on their maps. Could it be that Garrett is under rating or playing around with their compressor maps or is it people pushing the G42s past the maps. I noticed that G40 and bigger do not Mar-M like their smaller counterparts, would this allow allow them to push the turbines more?

I had both of this brands and is funny how I've seen psr turbos making same power but on v8 Ford engine,s the psr ,s are monster and less money for sure but don't get me wrong garrets are still the best because there street and track proven .

Yes! Watching now

Rotation speed is pretty meaningless unless you understand the turbine map and the U/C matching. However the only company that properly map turbines so you can do this is Holset.

Do you think the EFR 8474 would be a good choice for a 4 cylinder time attack (road racing time trials) car? For something like the Honda S2000's F22C 2.2L engine or a K24 2.4L engine?

Which brands is the most reliable

Great video.

Can you get a efr8474 with a compressor housing that doesn't have the bov and the boost control solenoid on it too simplify it and make it cheaper to buy?

love your videos .... very informative.... I would also go efr at this point... I am looking to build a kit for the b58 bmw .... wondering what kind of response would we get from the efr 8474 and what rpm will we reach peak boost on the bmw straight 6 .... also looking at this being a street car with good response

How would the response/boost be on a CA18det between a grx3582 gen 2 with t3 0.63 and the eft 8474 with t3 0.82 exh housing?

What does the borg gain exactly by having bigger cooling passages? As long as their is sufficient oil flow in the bearing system to maintain bearing stability and cool the bearing system sufficiently the coolant system doesn't add much value. It is really there to reduce damage during hot shutdown where thermal soak back occurs. If anything excessive cooling of the turbocharger during operation will pull heat energy from the exhaust gases and reduce efficiency.

Hi. Efr 9174 t4 split pulse1.05 on a sinco manifold vs gt35r on stock barra log manifold, both 4 inch dump pipes into 3 inch exhaust. Would 9174 spool up similar on 4 litre barra? My gt35r gets 16psi full boost at 2600rpm with 45mm turbosmart ext gate with 19psi of springs in it on my barra.

The compressor map on the garret doesnt stop at 130.000. It stops were the garrett reccomends in terms of max rpm. And there it cuts the map. You can overspin the turbo to make the peak 100lbs at higher boost but with lower efficiensy. Thanks god garretts can take overspin ;)

What are your thoughts on the GBC line of turbos that Garrett is working on?

what size is the actual hole on the 8474 wastegate? thanks

EFR???? vs GTX3582r/GTX3584rs vs precision.. all .8 rear...on a 1jz? 500rwkw number target

Been watching all your vids and fr taking notes you have a instagram ur the best bro

When or if you get hand on the new Garrett GBC turbos please do a video on them .... Preferably the 22-350

In summary Garett compressor maps are suspect?

I can tell you love some bw turbo I would love some more knowledge on why there betters than precision Garrett etc

Would like to get your feedback on the difference in a G35-1050 and the GTX3584rs. The dimensional specs look so very similar, is it really just improved aero/design in the G series?

Did BW bring out a t4 .81-.83ar for the efr8474 yet?

First good videos! All this is well and good, but we have done extensive real world testing and literally hundreds of hrs of dyno testing and we can never get the power out of the Borg Warner EFR turbos as we can the G series, I know they look good on paper. And when it comes to how fast they come on boost, the G series even beats the Xona, not by a lot but very measurable. And we have done back to back on 2 different applications, 1 STI, using all 3 comparable turbos and 1 Zl1 with just the Garrett and BW. We really did try to use the BW for a wile but they just don't perform like the G series and the xona and in the end we have to sell what really works the best for the customer. As a side note Even if we could get as good a result from the EFR its ridiculous size and inefficient packaging makes it so large and award to fit in most applications its just not worth trying to make them fit, the Garret is so well designed and compact it makes fabricating them in tight spaces so easy and that in turn make it easy to get good efficient air intake, down pipe and manifold designs that you usual have to comprise al lot when using the EFRs. Last thing, cost should not be a factor in something this important, do your penny pinching some place else on the build. But these are just my thoughts.

Can you fit a tial exhaust housing on the efr? That would save a lot of space!

I have Owen gt35, garrett gt35,efr 8374,for evo8 hks2.3 272cams, but I like efr,but efr saiz to big 😂

Please tell me the diameter of the cold part efr 8474????

Precision? billet CHRA? comparison

compare a xona rotor 9569s with something from and EFR and G-SERIES! the xona rotor turbos are very good.

Τελικά Χρήστο Borgwarner or Garrett

Thoughts on the new g40 and g45 turbos from Garrett?

All theoretical hypothesis don't always reflect actual conditions go put them on the dyno please especially on e85

in the uk the 2 turbos are not at or near the same price ,the garrett is £500-£1000 cheaper even if it,s an inferior design,,,the BW is around £3k ,admittedly a garrett with the extra pipework for a EWG may be similarly priced,,,i assume the ratings of these units is with race fuel ,,meth ,, or E85 which may extend power outputs past the 100ib limit

You sell bw so of course your gonna downplay garrett. Every person i know running efr turbos get rid of them cause they domt perform as well as other companies turbos for the same spec turbos.

EFR8474 is not 1000hp at all try EFR9284 or 9280....