NEW EFR?
#21
I see what you mean about torque drop off, but I'm not sure I'd agree that a "well working turbo" is one without any torque drop off up top. The way I look at it, if power isn't nosing over, there is still room to push it and the limit is not reached.
I did this on a very conservative CA91 pump gas tune on a 6258
Boost is not really dropping that much (it's shaky due to weak actuator) and power aint dropping, I say it will do 350 on good gas without too much effort
I did this on a very conservative CA91 pump gas tune on a 6258
Boost is not really dropping that much (it's shaky due to weak actuator) and power aint dropping, I say it will do 350 on good gas without too much effort
That is a lot better looking than the other plots I looked at....Not in the same ballpark!
The torque is low in the range, but it only drops 50flbs over 3000 rpm...Which is downright amazing compared to the others I have seen.
Why would anybody want a torque curve at lower rpm than this? You are already making almost 10psi and 200Ftlbs @ 3000 rpm? First and second gear tires on fire?
A smaller turbo will move the torque band lower making traction more problematic while punishing you on the shortest of straights.
Does this motor have the VVT head?
I understand it makes boost come on sooner, but offers no horsepower gains at higher rpms?
Does the torque curve broaden at all?
Thanks for commenting!
#22
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,100
There are factors far beyond the turbo when it comes to motor setup. A squaretop IM will carry torque past 5000rpm better than a VICS manifold, as long as the turbo can carry it. VVT cams will see a slight falloff past 6500rpm in exchange for better torque between 3500 and 5000rpm. You can't just look at a single plot and use it to assume the behavior of the turbocharger. You have to look at lots of data to get a better idea of what the turbos are capable of.
The 5951 will respond better and should still make 250-275whp on top, which is why people here are interested in it.
The 5951 will respond better and should still make 250-275whp on top, which is why people here are interested in it.
#24
Now there is a tune!
That is a lot better looking than the other plots I looked at....Not in the same ballpark!
The torque is low in the range, but it only drops 50flbs over 3000 rpm...Which is downright amazing compared to the others I have seen.
Why would anybody want a torque curve at lower rpm than this? You are already making almost 10psi and 200Ftlbs @ 3000 rpm? First and second gear tires on fire?
A smaller turbo will move the torque band lower making traction more problematic while punishing you on the shortest of straights.
Does this motor have the VVT head?
I understand it makes boost come on sooner, but offers no horsepower gains at higher rpms?
Does the torque curve broaden at all?
Thanks for commenting!
That is a lot better looking than the other plots I looked at....Not in the same ballpark!
The torque is low in the range, but it only drops 50flbs over 3000 rpm...Which is downright amazing compared to the others I have seen.
Why would anybody want a torque curve at lower rpm than this? You are already making almost 10psi and 200Ftlbs @ 3000 rpm? First and second gear tires on fire?
A smaller turbo will move the torque band lower making traction more problematic while punishing you on the shortest of straights.
Does this motor have the VVT head?
I understand it makes boost come on sooner, but offers no horsepower gains at higher rpms?
Does the torque curve broaden at all?
Thanks for commenting!
As everyone said it's all about insane fast response (though the 6258 is not lacking in that department either), and I think during normal street driving, you're not necessarily wringing out every gear, so that when you're in 4th/5th/6th at say 2500rpm (think of your typical 45mph city street), more torque down there is always welcomed. Especially when you're running proper 3.6 final drive
*edit: its basically the same reason people throw twin screw's on v8's: no one needs 500wtq at 2500, it mostly results in tire spin in the lower gears, but chugging along effortlessly at 2500 without even revving the engine to propel the car like a locomotive definitely feels amazing.
Last edited by 18psi; 02-16-2017 at 11:48 AM.
#28
Yeah, what I had in mind was a rods-only rebuild, but then why not get the 6258... I will be in the market when the whole TSE kit is ready. I have been through 5 other cars since it was initially announced, but I still have my ratty 01 SE that would be perfect for a track-ish build.
#31
If you are making +- 6 pounds at 2000 rpm a smaller EFR will probably make 10-15 there.....I can only imagine how much boost it would make with a bit of anti lag!
With 10+PSI on tap the temptation will be to roll on at at low rpms...Which will induce LLSPI ( Low Speed Pre Ignition) with stock pistons.
Those stock rods will fold in days.
Timing wont fix it as LSPI happens before the ignition event. The only fix it is to go pig rich at WOT under 2500ish rpm....Not a long term solution
Hard to say 100% before it gets here, but rods and pistons are pretty much going to be essential.
#33
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,100
With 10+PSI on tap the temptation will be to roll on at at low rpms...Which will induce LLSPI ( Low Speed Pre Ignition) with stock pistons.
Those stock rods will fold in days.
Timing wont fix it as LSPI happens before the ignition event. The only fix it is to go pig rich at WOT under 2500ish rpm....Not a long term solution
Those stock rods will fold in days.
Timing wont fix it as LSPI happens before the ignition event. The only fix it is to go pig rich at WOT under 2500ish rpm....Not a long term solution
Hard to say 100% before it gets here, but rods and pistons are pretty much going to be essential.
#34
Sorry for all the questions, I have never heard of this before at all. Itcs these tidbits of info that I don't know that I don't know that keep me reading these threads. Will have to do some googling later on it.
#35
Former Vendor
iTrader: (31)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 15,442
Total Cats: 2,100
Is it a non issue because of the lower compression and port injection? Or because neither turbo will make more than low single digit boost down that low? How about if there was a supercharger or something capable of making 8-10psi at those TPMs? 15? 20? Or is that just a matter of tuning like higher RPM where you just need to get timing and mixture right?
#36
This, 100 percent. Only people who tune these cars desire this, and fail to acknowledge a characteristic called diminishing return. "My goal is to have all my torque before 2500 RPM and accept a massive amount of torque loss over the last 2500 RPM of my power-band, because torque wins races and I am way too literal!"... Give me a ******* break ha. But seriously, a 6258 (on any 1.8 Miata engine, I.M. aside, cam aside) spools plenty fast enough, and damn close to optimum. Torque 1000 RPMs sooner than a 6258 will not gain you anything.
#37
SADFab Destructive Testing Engineer
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Beaverton, USA
Posts: 18,642
Total Cats: 1,866
It may not gain you anything. But a lot of people want torque right off the bat.
Look at any new turbo car. Torque asap, and choke up top. Just cuz you have some idea of what "everyone wants" doesn't mean you are right.
Look at any new turbo car. Torque asap, and choke up top. Just cuz you have some idea of what "everyone wants" doesn't mean you are right.
#38
This, 100 percent. Only people who tune these cars desire this, and fail to acknowledge a characteristic called diminishing return. "My goal is to have all my torque before 2500 RPM and accept a massive amount of torque loss over the last 2500 RPM of my power-band, because torque wins races and I am way too literal!"... Give me a ******* break ha. But seriously, a 6258 (on any 1.8 Miata engine, I.M. aside, cam aside) spools plenty fast enough, and damn close to optimum. Torque 1000 RPMs sooner than a 6258 will not gain you anything.
#40
SADFab Destructive Testing Engineer
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Beaverton, USA
Posts: 18,642
Total Cats: 1,866
Of course its preference. I'm just saying there are obviously people that want it. Where NBoost seems to believe everybody is exactly like him and only wants max power.