Buy Concealer404's 2554 kit so he can replace it with a BORG WARNER S366

lol @ this awful thread. Half of you arguing that every single 6258 setup will blow up a stock engine, the other half of you arguing that it doesn't make any more power than a 2560R does. Cognitive dissonance at its finest.

I want to argue about something.

Good. Post up when you have solid before/after data.

Can do, but first I need my manifold & downpipe :sad2:

I don't mind burning an hour of dyno time for science to see what 200/200 or whatever looks like on a 6258 with a low boost can and EBC, but its going to take me some months before I get to that point.

FM's disappointing EFR6258 vs 2560 test results.
FM or Begi Exh. Manifold & Borg Warner EFR 6258... - MX-5 Miata Forum

HOWEVER, reading it more critically, they did NOT do a test at 200 kPa which is where a lot of folks run a 2560. They show a test at lower boost. I suppose it's possible the 6258 will make a bunch more power at 200 kPa. Their test shows the EFR matches the 2560's boost rise on the dyno. If so that would make it a clear winner.

EFR vs GTX testing on Subies:
Borg Warner EFR7670 Turbo Exposed and Tuned Part 2 » PERRIN Performance Official Blog

I skimmed through it, and at first glance there seems to be conflicting info.
He says "sometimes turbos feel fast but aren't". The dyno shows EFR spools slower. However he says on the street it's snappier (and shows a datalog). Like Sav describes. Then he also says "the EFR feels faster on the street and it is", contradicting the "feels faster but not" statement.

Funny thing is he's got a Dynapack and doesn't use it to show boost vs. time, which would test "snappier".

You don't want to know what i'd put back on the car if someone did happen to offer me a sane amount of money for the 2554 setup.

Oh yes we do

No you don't haha. Might not be a turbo.

Or i'd buy that gtx2860 with some pimp Artech parts.