Notices
DIY Turbo Discussion greddy on a 1.8? homebrew kit?

Garrett vs EFR at DIYAutotune discussion

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 10:54 AM
  #81  
soviet's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,493
Total Cats: 269
From: VA
Default

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

Last edited by soviet; Jun 18, 2014 at 11:07 AM.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 10:56 AM
  #82  
Leafy's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 9,491
Total Cats: 105
From: NH
Default

Originally Posted by soviet
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.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 11:03 AM
  #83  
shuiend's Avatar
mkturbo.com
iTrader: (24)
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 15,235
Total Cats: 1,700
From: Charleston SC
Default

Originally Posted by Leafy
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.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 11:07 AM
  #84  
soviet's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,493
Total Cats: 269
From: VA
Default

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.

Originally Posted by Leafy
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.
I always dynoed on calibrated dynojets with SAE correction.

Originally Posted by shuiend
Also need to account for e85 vs 93 octane gas difference.
Yeah its like more than 10* of timing difference.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 11:18 AM
  #85  
Ryan_G's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,568
Total Cats: 217
From: Tampa, Florida
Default

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.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 11:25 AM
  #86  
soviet's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,493
Total Cats: 269
From: VA
Default

Originally Posted by Ryan_G
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.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 11:27 AM
  #87  
hrk's Avatar
hrk
Junior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 335
Total Cats: 3
From: Atlanta GA
Default

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.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 11:40 AM
  #88  
Ben's Avatar
Ben
Thread Starter
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (33)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,659
Total Cats: 134
From: atlanta-ish
Default

Originally Posted by soviet
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.
Do you have a plot that includes manifold pressure?
__________________
Chief of Floor Sweeping, DIYAutoTune.com & AMP EFI
Crew Chief, Car Owner & Least Valuable Driver, HongNorrthRacing

91 Turbo | 10AE Turbo | 01 Track Rat | #323 Mazda Champcar

Originally Posted by concealer404
Buy an MSPNP Pro, you'll feel better.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 11:43 AM
  #89  
Leafy's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 9,491
Total Cats: 105
From: NH
Default

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.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 12:03 PM
  #90  
EO2K's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (37)
 
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,477
Total Cats: 1,924
From: Very NorCal
Default

I'd be nice if someone made an adjustable dual port that would fit the B1 frame.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 12:06 PM
  #91  
soviet's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,493
Total Cats: 269
From: VA
Default

Originally Posted by Ben
Do you have a plot that includes manifold pressure?
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.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 12:06 PM
  #92  
Leafy's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 9,491
Total Cats: 105
From: NH
Default

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.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 12:18 PM
  #93  
18psi's Avatar
VladiTuned
iTrader: (76)
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 35,821
Total Cats: 3,482
Default

nvm
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 12:19 PM
  #94  
concealer404's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,917
Total Cats: 2,206
Default

Originally Posted by shuiend
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.
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?
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 12:22 PM
  #95  
Leafy's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 9,491
Total Cats: 105
From: NH
Default

Originally Posted by 18psi
nvm
4 port is on the too do list still. I'm waiting to do it for the next time I dyno the car.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 12:27 PM
  #96  
soviet's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,493
Total Cats: 269
From: VA
Default

Originally Posted by concealer404
Here's the link:

MS2 advanced user near central indiana - Miata Turbo Forum - Turbo Kitten is watching you test compression.

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?
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

Originally Posted by soviet


1st run - blue = 299hp, 19-20 psi, my super-conservative timing
2nd run - green = 287hp, 17-18psi same timing
3rd run - red = 318hp, same boost but 3* more timing everywhere in boost
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 12:49 PM
  #97  
krissetsfire's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 883
Total Cats: 56
From: Tucson, Arizona
Default

Seems about right. He's rockin' pump gas too. So ~8psi + e85 = 18.75hp per psi?
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 01:06 PM
  #98  
soviet's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (10)
 
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,493
Total Cats: 269
From: VA
Default

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.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 01:09 PM
  #99  
shuiend's Avatar
mkturbo.com
iTrader: (24)
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 15,235
Total Cats: 1,700
From: Charleston SC
Default

Originally Posted by soviet
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.
Old Jun 18, 2014 | 01:12 PM
  #100  
Leafy's Avatar
Elite Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 9,491
Total Cats: 105
From: NH
Default

Originally Posted by shuiend
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.



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:53 PM.