Well aware. You actually set the settle time, hold time, and rate of RPM rise in RPM/sec. I think the problem is that the rate of acceleration is constant, which is not how a turbo motor accelerates.

That aside, Heikki's car was loaded the exact same way with both turbos. You create a folder for each car in the Dynapack software. When you put the same car back on the dyno, you just open the old folder and load the old settings, otherwise skipping the initial setup.

Thats right. Its been a while. But as it stands, you can use those things to load the car up somewhat like the road would with a bit of math.

I thought your comparison was of a 2560R and an EFR6758?

Nobody's accusing you of impropriety. We're just curious why your customer made 90 less horsepower with the same turbo on a similar motor at the same boost level as other people have.

Off the top of my head, swimming108 and 99mx5 both toasted stock motors with 6258's. These guys are the reason I decided to build a motor before I install my EFR. Soviet has some pretty solid data as well, not sure he's blown anything up ...yet. (other than turbos :giggle:)

That I cannot say.

Believe it or not, we have complete faith in you. What Andrew said above is exactly what we are trying to figure out. Something is missing, we are all just gobsmacked as to what happened.

Error on my part -- my notes show that Heikki's turbo is a 6758. I can't explain the difference between Heikki's and Soviet's results. I can only present the data that I do have, and that's the GT2560r vs EFR6758 on the same motor, same dyno. I was expecting the EFR to wax the GT.

Are you sure he had a GT2560? The spool up from the 2560 looks like a 2560 but after that it looks like a 2860 or a 3071. I'm not just hung up on the poor efr showing, its also the exceptional (record setting?) 2560 showing on a dyno that's infamous for reading stupid low.

I'm struggling a little with the 2560R numbers too. 335whp from a 2560R through a VICS intake and log exhaust manifolds is hard to stomach. I've seen 335whp from a 2560R before, but it was on a dyno that reads 8% high, and it came from an FM Stroker breathing through a BEGi S4 manifold.

^this. That's way, way out of the park on a 2560. And it's not like it's a new turbo that nobody has tested before.

We do trust you. Something just seems wonky and we want to find the reason why your results are sooooo far different than the hypothesis.

Didn't Jeremy from FM do a comparison on a test rig and the efr didn't toast the 2560 (with a 6258 not a 6758). Granted he did use the same tune for them. He used lower boost but the efr didn't crush the 2560 or anything.

I want a magical turbo but I'm still kind of skeptical. But it doesn't matter for me since I have safety parts to update before i worry about it. I also think that one day TSE will release dynos with their finished products and those should be reputable and nice. ALso they have older data with 2871 and others to compare to.

We ran Heikki's car on 2 separate occasions with the 2560r. The first time Heikki was on the dyno, he made 230 at only 8 psi. He then came back and made 330 at ~19 psi. The third time he came back with the EFR.

It's the number the dyno gave 3 or 4 times, consistently. His 2560r made more power than I've ever seen from a 2560r, by 30 hp (10%). He's also got the only completely built engine that I've ever tested with that turbo; everyone else with a built engine has a bigger turbo. Keep in mind he has a p&p head, SUBs, external gate, and a good exhaust.

I could only get 278 out of my BEGi S4 with 2560r and otherwise stock motor. We see ~250 out of BEGi S3s and FMIIs.

This dyno hits 200kpa @ 3700 rpm.
I hit 200kpa @ 3000 rpm.

700 rpm is a pretty significant difference.

I did an overlay with my 400whp on pump gas 27psi dyno.
This was on VICS IM, stock throttle body, stock 99 head, 9:1 compression 84mm pistons.

http://gaiazov.com/photo/mt.net/EFR6...-GT2560R.png??

Is it just me or are those close enough that it might just have been that heikki wasn't running a fae fae aggressive timing map up top with the 6758? That's one thing that isn't taken into account, I assume the EFR can run more timing up top because it's greater efficiency?

Either way, >300whp in a Lotus 7 is fucking nuts.

He would have to be pulling timing like crazy to maintain 20psi to redline yet drop off that hard past 5

Maybe you have to with a 2560 because it starts blowing hot air up there, whereas the 6758 is still going strong? I realize I've got no practical experience, I'm just throwing shit out there.

I am pretty sure the guys at DIY who tuned heikki's car know how to tune it properly. You have to also remember that Heikki is also running the locost7 in hill climbs and out on track, it takes a hell of a lot more abuse then Fae's car has ever seen.

On Soviet's 400hp dyno he is also running 27psi. Ben has said they only went up to about 20psi. That difference could easily be the extra power and torque holding flat.

Right, I'm not trying to say the DIY guys didn't tune it well, just that they tuned it properly conservative (because real race car) for the 2560 and ran the same timing map for the 6758, which didn't need to be as conservative.


Anyway A++ thread drift, I don't even remember what the thread was originally about.

Or just running same timing from 4000 till redline.
Even then, VVT retard at high rpm should help the top end dramatically.

See hhammerly's dyno from yesterday for more data.


What I can't wrap my head around is going from record breaking 2560 to really low 6758 numbers.

Link? I just checked his build thread and did not see it in there, I also checked the dyno section and did not notice it.

People keep saying it is low 6758 numbers, but does anyone actually have a plot of 20psi with a 6758 on a miata? I think I have only seen lower boost dyno's or allofit dyno's of the 6758 on a miata.

I made 330whp on wastegate (like 15-16psi?) on my last dyno running ALLOFIT timing map and E85

What dyno was that on? Remember the DIYAT one reads like 16% lower than a dynojet (supposedly), so that wouldnt even crack 290 on their dyno.

Also need to account for e85 vs 93 octane gas difference.

People keep thinking that 6758 is a big boy turbo - it isn't. It's a pretty small turbo that just HAPPENS to be able to flow ~53lb/min.
It has compressor and turbine wheel dimensions a little bit smaller than GT3071R but spools like a GT2560R.

Plus >dat transient which doesn't show up on dynos.

I always dynoed on calibrated dynojets with SAE correction.

Yeah its like more than 10* of timing difference.

I think soviet's overlay of the 6758 at 27psi shows what the efr series is designed to achieve. Spool like a 2560 or small t25 with a lot of extra room up top. You don't put the efr on to run the same psi. You put it on so you can maintain the driving characteristics of your small turbo and crank up the boost for more top end. That 2560 is maxed out in Ben's dyno. The efr is not even close.

I have also heard that the new 7163 is acl second gen design and should perform even better than the original b1 frame turbos. Mine should be up and running before the end of this year. I will max it out on gas and e85 (now that its available down here). My motor looks a lot like soviet's except it had vvt and has 83.5mm 8.6:1 instead of 84mm 9:1 pistons.

fapping with both hands.

Hello,

I am lurking away here now, Thanks shuiend for inviting me to the party.

Yes, the single most expensive part ever in my car appeared to have failed to improve the motor.
This 2560, which was for sale https://www.miataturbo.net/miata-par...ops-etc-69843/
Did make great results, both driving and in dyno. Links have been posted in this thread previously. Motor was just built, as thoroughly as I was able, some info here as well. And it ran great. Old log manifold included. Couple of 5-speeds can vouch for that. they last 54 minutes of running at speed.

Of course, the logical thing is to get more, and going from 110% loaded turbo to bigger one would make sense.

I was in contact with Borg and Warner after dyno and last Dragon Hillclimb and I was left with several issues to work on or check.
1. Wastegate actuator, getting high boost actuator from B&W. I am running with electronic boost control from MS3X.

2. Exhaust manifold. Same on both setups. Yeah yeah yeah, why it worked to the limit on old setup and now doesn't with new turbo makes me think this is not the reason.

3. Trying with higher boost. 6758 is said to respond well on 20+psi boost compared to Garrett, which should be kept below 20. Sizing, efficiency and exhaust flow may have something to do with this.

In addition I should do through check on the motor, for Garrett, everything was new, fresh and put together well. For Borg And Warner there is about 90 minutes of runtime (one and a half transmissions), and no obvious signs of issues.

The reason I asked not to tout about results in March when we did the test was that I wanted to know what is going on myself before blaming turbo, but I haven't found motivation to dig into it. Maybe this discussion gets me motivated.

hrk
Discuss.

Do you have a plot that includes manifold pressure?

Right I keep forgetting that the EFRs have the waste gate blowing open issue. Going to a dual port IWGA and using a 4 port EBC should fix all of that and still allow you to run a really low spring in the IWGA to have better part throttle characteristics.

I'd be nice if someone made an adjustable dual port that would fit the B1 frame.

I have a log somewhere but its flat to redline, I don't gain or lose manifold pressure, its flat. Just more timing to redline.

Turbosmart does, but you have to add the nipple for the 2nd port yourself. They just ship it with a set screw there. OR do you do what I did and get some actuator from south east power systems, make a 1/4-28 threaded extension and drill the holes out on the bracket a bit to get a 7psi dual port wastegate. It cost way too much money for what it was, but it was the only dual port option at the time and that was the direction I wanted to go with. It also doenst have enough stroke to fully stroke the EFR waste gate, which is why my car tapered to 10psi at peak power then tapered back off when I ran straight wastegate.

nvm

Here's the link:

https://www.miataturbo.net/showthread.php?t=77361

I know we dont really have other 20psi dyno charts, but you think Soviet's stock head car is going to pick up 150whp by just adding 8psi over this?

4 port is on the too do list still. I'm waiting to do it for the next time I dyno the car.

dude I made almost identical TQ and HP on same turbo (he is using 6258, and so was I, 2 years ago)

his:
http://i1084.photobucket.com/albums/...9.jpg~original

Seems about right. He's rockin' pump gas too. So ~8psi + e85 = 18.75hp per psi?

past 20psi its like 5 hp per psi and 10 hp per 1* timing.

the key difference is that the 6758 can flow enough air to support >450whp where as a GT2560 does not, no matter how much timing you run.

I think this is the real thing. If you want more then 300hp at the wheels then and willing to run allofit then the EFR is a good choice. Otherwise the 2560 is still a pretty good choice.

I think the real comparison we need to have is my 2871 vs a 6758. Hopefully one day I will actually get my car back together, head down to DIY and run allofit.

I dont care what the dyno says. The 6758 is a better choice because its like a v8 swap, rather than adding a turbo.

I think we can all agree that turbo size and wheel design doesn't matter, because 20psi = 20psi no matter what turbo you run :party:

:laugh:

I just threw my mouse across my cube.

/thread

well, obviously that's the case. The difference between the 2560 and EFR could be attributed to a little more humidity or a little lower ambient temperature on the two different dyno days.


The noobs have been right all along! :party:

Is it possible the e cool wasn't working on the EFR run?

T-shirt idea:

20psi :ne: 20psi

impossibruuuu

otherwise they'd have to use inferior cooling, like an air/air intecooler

Paint the e cool injector(s) black for even more........wait, wrong thread.

spit my coffee everywhere. :facepalm:

Sure, my point/questions though:

1) Why aren't the 6258 cars romping on this particular 2560 car?

2) Why isn't the record breaking 2560 car mopping the floor with the 6258 cars now that is has a magical 6758?



Or did thenuge24 answer it? :rofl:

Then there's this, just to fuck everything up even more.

I don't even know what's real anymore.

https://www.miataturbo.net/diy-turbo...9/#post1141624

Is that an axial flow compressor?

Maybe what he thought was a GT2560 was actually a GT2860?

Or it could be the larger 2560, I believe I have one in my garage.

Well, this car is back to try to make m0ar power out of the EFR. We'll see. I am hopeful for the car's owner because I want nothing but success for him.

This just in: FM doesn't know how to read a compressor map. Whoa this 2560 makes just as much power as this other, better turbo when it's outside of it's efficiency range. WHOA

Well the EFR car came back with a new external gate (internal gate was sealed) and a 4" exhaust. It didn't make any more power than last time and still makes less power than the 2560 did.

The car's owner is going to go back through the motor and look for anything that can explain it.

Can we see the new chart?

He didn't change anything other upgrading from a 2560?

LOL @ upgrading to 4" exhaust without first measuring backpressures.