Begi Alpha Omega Bow to Me Peasant
#323
I'm ignoring spool because 1.6
And I'm actually being forgiving on power because 1.6
But are we really to expect no more than 200 from an ITB/Cam car with supposedly a "super optimized re-designed" begi setup?
I mean, underdog and brain made 250 and 230 at just a couple more psi with crappy ebay setups and chinachargers.
Their setups cost 1/4 of this, and that's ignoring the cams and itb's, which likely put this setup into the 7-8 grand total if not more vs their 1500-2000 setups
I'm genuinely curious if I'm missing something here, cause I would be truly sad if I spent that much money on 200hp
And I'm actually being forgiving on power because 1.6
But are we really to expect no more than 200 from an ITB/Cam car with supposedly a "super optimized re-designed" begi setup?
I mean, underdog and brain made 250 and 230 at just a couple more psi with crappy ebay setups and chinachargers.
Their setups cost 1/4 of this, and that's ignoring the cams and itb's, which likely put this setup into the 7-8 grand total if not more vs their 1500-2000 setups
I'm genuinely curious if I'm missing something here, cause I would be truly sad if I spent that much money on 200hp
#324
mkturbo.com
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 15,177
Total Cats: 1,681
I'm ignoring spool because 1.6
And I'm actually being forgiving on power because 1.6
But are we really to expect no more than 200 from an ITB/Cam car with supposedly a "super optimized re-designed" begi setup?
I mean, underdog and brain made 250 and 230 at just a couple more psi with crappy ebay setups and chinachargers
And I'm actually being forgiving on power because 1.6
But are we really to expect no more than 200 from an ITB/Cam car with supposedly a "super optimized re-designed" begi setup?
I mean, underdog and brain made 250 and 230 at just a couple more psi with crappy ebay setups and chinachargers
I think if you crank up the boost power will go up a good bit. I am highly doubtful that the IRTB's/cams are doing much to help at such a low amount of boost. We also don't know what gear pulls are in and what the spark table looks like.
I do think spending any money on irtb's and cams on a 1.6 is a complete waste of money.
#325
Moderator
iTrader: (12)
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tampa, Florida
Posts: 20,651
Total Cats: 3,011
My old setup made 200whp at 9.5psi without a ball bearing turbo (journal), without genuine Garrett (communist China), without fancy manifold (FM log), without good injectors (RX7 460s), without good ECU (MS1), without fancy cams (stock), without ITBs (stock), without good downpipe (~70 degree bend 6in from turbo), without a good tune (base timing map), but with stock block 1.8 and china 2870.
Moral of story: don't waste money on fancypants parts that don't actually make power. Spend your money on a 1.8.
Moral of story: don't waste money on fancypants parts that don't actually make power. Spend your money on a 1.8.
#326
mkturbo.com
iTrader: (24)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Charleston SC
Posts: 15,177
Total Cats: 1,681
My old setup made 200whp at 9.5psi without a ball bearing turbo (journal), without genuine Garrett (communist China), without fancy manifold (FM log), without good injectors (RX7 460s), without good ECU (MS1), without fancy cams (stock), without ITBs (stock), without good downpipe (~70 degree bend 6in from turbo), without a good tune (base timing map), but with stock block 1.8 and china 2870.
Moral of story: don't waste money on fancypants parts that don't actually make power. Spend your money on a 1.8.
Moral of story: don't waste money on fancypants parts that don't actually make power. Spend your money on a 1.8.
#327
Retired Mech Design Engr
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Seneca, SC
Posts: 5,009
Total Cats: 856
<p> </p><p>And it's even worse. OP claims 200HP at CRANK, not at WHEELS.</p><p>From post 316:</p><p>"So this setup gives me 200HP @ the crank.<br />60HP/70Nm more than without the turbo kit."</p><p> </p>
#330
Time table is from basemap. And perhaps the dyno at your place will show different numbers than the one at mine place does. Overall I'm happy with the result. Boost is now at around 0,85bar (guess 220hp @ crank). Could keep up with a CLS AMG 63 this week, I was noselenght infront of him (~0-80mph). The guy pulled over and couldn't believe it was a 1.6. Yes, turbo spools less than a 1.8, at 4000 I have full boost. ITB's gives me a fast response at throttle.
#331
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
stop guessing crank, just report what's measured at the ******* wheel, where you took the ******* measurement.
200rwhp miata is not that fast at all. the cls63 was probably on cruise control.
i should honestly just ban you right now for that bull **** lie.
200rwhp miata is not that fast at all. the cls63 was probably on cruise control.
i should honestly just ban you right now for that bull **** lie.
#333
MB CLS 63 has ~3.8kg/ton weight.
My car has ~4.5kg/ton weight.
MB took off with wheel spin, no cruise controll, no launch controll. He was going for it. Car made a lot off revs. What else could I say. It's all about power/weight ratio and a good start ;-). Guy pulled over asking me what was under the hood, he wasn't expected this. Maybe I did suprice him
My car has ~4.5kg/ton weight.
MB took off with wheel spin, no cruise controll, no launch controll. He was going for it. Car made a lot off revs. What else could I say. It's all about power/weight ratio and a good start ;-). Guy pulled over asking me what was under the hood, he wasn't expected this. Maybe I did suprice him
#340
<p></p><p>This is ******* hard to do in a miata.</p><p>@patsmx5 owns both. Maybe he will chime in.</p>
Benz traps 83-84mph in the 1/8 mile. Miata traps 88-89 mph in the 1/8 with 8* of ignition advance. The miata is faster, but I'm running all of it. I think my setup might trap high 90's mph in the 1/8 when it's tuned well.