No, the part that makes them make way more power at minimal boost pressure is that the compressor and turbine are GT3071 size.

 

I never cared about your feelings.

 

OH U MAD

 

 

 

 

The compressor exd/ind size of the efr6258 is 62mm/49.6mm, the turbine wheel on the EFR is 58mm, according to Borg Warner.

In contrast the 3071 comp wheel exd/ind is 71mm/53.1mm and the turbine wheel is 60mm, considerably larger than the EFR so your argument is inaccurate.

The 2871 is a better comparison to the efr6258 with a slightly larger compressor but smaller turbine compared to the EFR. Looking through the dyno section it seems to take close to 20psi on a 2871 to get past 300whp, hard to compare the two unless comparing identical motors and manifolds but I don't believe the EFR is going to break 300whp at 12psi. This is also backed up by the fact that when he ran his 6258 soviet was at higher boost, again not a direct comparison due to different intake manifolds but the at those power levels I seriously doubt the square top will make the same power at 50% less boost, soviets 18 (iirc) vs 12 for 99mx5.

The extended tip technology and Tial machined wheel combined with efficiency at higher pressure ratios is what allows the efr's to make the power they do. Of course that means running higher boost pressure to make the power and get into the efficiency zone of the compressor map.

Jim

 

How old are you again?

 

What the hell are you talking about? I never said either of those two statements...why are you getting so butthurt?
P.S I actually drove an 04 Vette today, it was awesome

 

I am going to be honest. I am a newb that spent a lot of $$ on 1.6 turbo setup. I regret it after looking at 1.8 dyno's.

Of course any turbo miata is fun but, all else equal, a 1.8 turbo will always feel and drive better compared to the 1.6; there is no replacement for displacement and power is addictive. The administrators know this and really want to help everyone in the right direction, especially Brain.

Now, if anyone must insist on keeping their 1.6, Brain mentioned somewhere in this forum that 1.6 cams from and auto car will help with the low end. But still, don't cheap out like Brain did, if you are already spending a lot of time and money anyways.

Do it once and do it right!

 

You stupid little ****. You wouldn't know a good thing if you dumped thousands of dollars on it and still was left with something only sub-par in comparison!

What makes you say I cheaped out on my build? I've done everything but build/replace the motor. -1

 

Comparing the wheel diameter sizes between two different manufacturers is pointless and trivial. Stop comparing EFRs to garrett, because they dont compare, since the EFR6258 has proven to spool like a 2560 but make power more like a 3071. So unless you just want to say they are both turbos, then yeah, that's a good comparison: they are both turbos.

I've seen two 1.8L miatas, in person, hit 300rwhp on a dynojet at 14psi, on a 2560. So seeing a EFR do somethign very similar is not surprising.

Also, 99mx5 hit his peak HP number at closer to 13.7psi, not 12psi, if you look at his datalog from the dyno.

Also Also, I've personally tuned a 1.6L to hit 300hp with less than 20psi on a 2871.

All it takes is a IM, that's the whole point of them. At the same boost level, all the 2560 could make at 14psi was 271rwhp.

If you look at soviet's 17psi 318rwhp pull, you can see his torque drops off significantly at 5.5K. Had a squaretop or alike IM been fitted, I'd except his torque at 7K to be closer to 250rwtq, maybe more, over the 215rwtq he plotted. That would have put his peak HP at 17psi closer to 333rwhp.

This effect has been proven time and time again on the miata (here's a plot of the BEGi/FM IM during intial testing):



a 10% power gain at the same boost level.


IIRC, someone from miata.net maybe fit the first EFR6258 that I can remember seeing back in 2011 and hit ~275rwhp at 12psi with the stock 94 motor, stock IM, a log manifold, a horrible DP, and running the LINK ECU. His previous turbo he replaced, the Schwitzer S100 only made about ~225rwhp at the same boost.


12psi is 33% less boost than 18psi, since 18 * .5 = 9. 18psi might be 50% more boost than 12psi, since 12 + 6 = 18, but to say it's 50% less boost is purposely deceiving. Plus 99mx5 actually plotted, as mentioned before, closer to 13.7psi according to his datalog of the dyno run. So he actually ran ~24% less boost.

Anyways, these are trivial arguements. Both were done on different dynos with different components/engines/timing maps. Both are in the ballpark of each other. I do have a feeling Ari's numbers might be slightly buffed from the dyno to mimic dynojet numbers, but that's okay with me; so long as he goes back to the same dyno to do more pulls once he fits the EBC, he'll have a good comparison.

But this is all outside the point and doesn't matter. We are all smart enough to know when to question numbers that don't make sense, and you have proven that you don't. It's as simple as that.

tl;dr
So to summarize: the 1.6L is a shitty motor for boost in comparison to a 1.8L.

Unless you own a 1.8L turbo miata and 10 other vehicles, then the 1.6L is great motor and spending $400-600 is not worth the extra investment and it's better to just slap parts on the 1.6L and be stuck with it and enjoy always being second fiddle.

 

 

This thread makes me sad for being teh dumbbbbb and going 1.6T. And I don't even have all of my parts yet

 

So after reading this thread I'm convinced 1.6>1.8

Thanks guys

 

Something like that

 

I mean you wont die because you turboed your 1.6L, but you might contract AIDs and have to live the rest of your life with treatment.

 

You're still alive so the treatment is effective.

 

science has come a long ways since me and freddie were going strong.

 

Is a 1.8 swap the cure for aids? I think you might be onto something here Brain