Patrol 4x4 - Nissan Patrol Forum banner

Borg Warner EFR6758 turbo information

300K views 2K replies 77 participants last post by  Jjjag 
#1 ·
Ok, first up I am not the brains behind this turbo selection, so I won’t pretend to be. But having made the decision to fit one to the TD42Ti in my GQ, there was a lot to figure out for me. So as I go along I thought it would be good to document some of the details.

Eventually there will be a dyno tune, and the power and torque figures will be known. However, this is not going to be a “numbers” exercise, so those of you expecting to see big numbers will be disappointed. First and foremost, my GQ is a tourer, so torque production at low revs is number one priority. I also have an 11mm pump (mechanical) which has not done much work, and a Safari Tough clutch which is the same. So getting a 12mm pump and a clutch to handle the torque is not going to happen until they wear out.

My engine is a TD42Ti crate motor from Nissan, fitted last year. Cross Country top mount intercooler, modified intake manifold, Turboglide high mount exhaust manifold. Manifolds have been port matched, and the exhaust manifold ceramic coated. I have a Radius Fabrications 4” intake and LS1 airbox. I also have water injection, but that will be left switched off initially.

First thing for me to figure out was how it would bolt up to my manifold, and how it would match up to the water and oil lines and intake that I had fitted to my existing turbo, a Garrett GT2860RS. The EFR6758 needs M14 x 1.5 water fittings, and a -4AN oil supply fitting. These fittings are the same as the Garrett, as is the oil drain. My Turboglide manifold has a T25 flange which also matches the Borg Warner. The inlet on the compressor housing is smaller than the Garrett, so I needed a new silicon hose to join the 4” intake to the 2.5” housing. Incidentally, the Garrett is not actually bigger internally as this would suggest, as the internal and external dimensions are quite different, where the Borg Warner is not.

The EFR6758 is a bit larger than the 2860 as the photo shows. No big deal with the inlet, as most of us have a pipe or hose of some sort that can easily be shortened as needed. However, the turbine housing is now closer to the firewall by about 25mm, so that means less room for a dump pipe. On my high mount manifold, after I moved the clutch line out of the way, I have about 100mm to make a 3” dump pipe. Oldmav tells me that he has managed one with 80mm, with a bit of skill needed of course. Mine should be ok (I hope!). See how I go.





As someone who could be considered “enthusiastic” rather than “knowledgeable”, to my untrained eye the differences in the turbine housing between the two turbos shows what looks to me to be a big advantage to the Borg Warner. I will let you be the judge.





One thing I did not get right was the V band flange and clamp needed. The BW is different to others, so a generic V band flange and clamp will not fit. The photo shows one difference between the two, being the taper. The BW flange is on the left. They are also slightly different in diameter. Clamp MAY be different, not sure on that. I had to modify mine to clear the housing. GCG Turbos list the same clamp for Garrett and BW though. I think there will be specific clamp available, but as I already had one I fixed it with the die grinder.





I have done a test fit, which is all good so far. Seems like it is where it needs to sit. Photo is a bit deceiving, as there is enough clearance to the aircon lines. So now I am waiting on parts. Dump pipe is the next job, and I also need a different mount for the boost canister. Borg Warner makes a “Super short” wastegate bracket kit, which Oldmav has assured me I need, in order to get the angle on the wastegate actuator right for our application. It is also needed to help with guard clearance if you have a low mount manifold. This part is not available, so I have to wait for it.

 
See less See more
7
#4 ·
Yeh I am also committed down this path with the turbo on its way from the states. Mines going onto a TD42ti still with the TCV and currently std pump.

I ordered the efr6758 v-band and short can in one hit. Total cost for all three came in at $2088AUD. Could have saved $100 if I hadnt used Paypal.

Ill be lagging your install by a month or two.

Cheers
 
#25 ·
Mixed flow turbines are a bit more efficient.
It is said that they can produce equivalent Spool rates as conventional type turbines, with very low drive pressures. I have seen figures of 1:2 published in white papers.
I would always look what was going in and out of turbo department. Mainly larger stuff, but alot if the modern engines in trucks, earthmoving etc, are now mixed flow.
The entry angles varied a bit, as did turbine design itself, but all the same principle. Feeding the turbine from a angle, not directly radially.
Garrett also have a version they were doing in TA45 size, but I did see mentioned in the master dealer update sometime ago that a t3 version was in development.
Is it going to work for us, well I would think so, and would certainly try it myself. It is another project I have put on the back burner for the time being.
Just a personal thing for me, but I prefer a non water cooled chra, and a floating bush bearing for ease of rebuild. I haven't looked into the service life of the BW bearing setup, but Garrett BB chra are 100K km, suggested service life from memory. As I said, that is just a personal thing though.
 
#26 ·
Ah cool, so the bw has a water cooled chra and (assuming) stainless bb set up.
100k for me is about 4-5 years, so wouldn't be to bad if rebuild time was that long apart.
Would the water cooler chra assist in efficiency by keeping it cooler?
What would be the reason do you think that the inlet mouth is only 2.5 and not 3" like most other turbs.



I'm happy to be part of the test crew.
 
#36 ·
Fair call. I may have been a little over zealous with my comment.

What are your thoughts on say the placement of the slots in a garrett? And in your experience have you seen any advantages/disadvantages of say drillings over slots or vice versa?

Do you still run a bov yourself? And have you played with its placement much?
 
#44 ·
Dump pipe was todays job. I have just tacked the flange in place with my mig. Given the stainless flange is being welded to a mild steel pipe, a tig will do a better job, so I will leave that for the shop to do.

I have started with a 1D bend and then cut it back to get the clearance I need to the firewall. The flange normally goes over the pipe, but I have cut the pipe back into the curve, which means I have increased the diameter of it. This means the pipe now gets welded onto the face of the flange instead of the inside. I have also cut it deliberately on an angle to help with clearance, and to help match up with the exhaust pipe. This lines up quite well.

A bit of cutting, grinding, and bending was needed to get it to match up, but in the end I finished with this.







 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top