BEGi S3 vs FM2 - Page 7 - Miata Turbo Forum - Boost cars, acquire cats.

Welcome to Miataturbo.net   Members
 


Prefabbed Turbo Kits A place to discuss prefabricated turbo kits on the market
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

View Poll Results: Would you get the BEGi S3 or FM2 system
BEGi S3 29 31.87%
FM2 62 68.13%
Voters: 91. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-04-2012, 03:15 AM   #121
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 2,640
Total Cats: 25
Default

Im not bullshitting anything, I think it will work, my experience says it will, the maths and chemistry says it will, experience tuning n/a and seeing gains says it will (despite the turbo being COMPLETELY tapped on all n/a setups). And all im saying is I think it will work and Im going to try it before the turbo gets upgraded.

No bullshit just what I think, which as far as I can work out is what you are doing also, posting what you THINK.

Dann
nitrodann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 03:48 AM   #122
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posts: 889
Total Cats: 55
Default

I don't doubt there will be some kind of increase. the point is that there is a very large restriction killing the efficiency. If you read my posts i explain why you won't get to 350. not that there won't be any gains.
krissetsfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 09:45 AM   #123
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,896
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

I wonder why people don't put single .63 A/R 2560s on their v8s???
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 11:04 AM   #124
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,086
Total Cats: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Braineack View Post
I wonder why people don't put single .63 A/R 2560s on their v8s???
It's almost like you can't understand that the amount of input air will stay constant, it doesn't matter that the turbo is supposedly tapped out at that point. That said, the more posts like this one that are in the thread before nitro posts the dyno sheets, the more backtracking and hilarious it'll be for me to watch.
albumleaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 01:44 PM   #125
Supporting Vendor
iTrader: (31)
 
Savington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 14,370
Total Cats: 1,332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrodann View Post
The car doesnt need extra airflow into the engine because E85 has an oxygen molecule in its chemical makeup just ready to help burn the fuel (which is stoich ratio is in the 9's not 14.7). So the fuel itself adds some oxygen, to stay at stoich the tuner adds more fuel than on gas, and total sum energy output is increased.
Kids, read this post until you understand why E85 can produce more power despite no increase in compressor flow.
Savington is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 05:31 PM   #126
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,896
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by albumleaf View Post
It's almost like you can't understand that the amount of input air will stay constant, it doesn't matter that the turbo is supposedly tapped out at that point.
if the input of air stays the same, then the turbo will stay tapped out, because we've already found the point in which that mass air flow of the compressor reaches the end of efficient compression, and that was right in the 310rwhp range on a dynojet.

You'll see a big bump in mid range on e85 for sure.

Then as the turbine housing/wheel has to deal with greater amount of volume of exhaust gasses, from the lower stoichmetric value of the e85 fuel, it might even tap out even sooner as it cant efficiently pass enough gasses through the small housing. When you surpass the 15 lb/min gas turbine flow peak efficiency of a .64 A/R 2560R turbine housing, you'll start increasing back pressure, lowering peak output.

So, I'd expect a big bump in low/mid range power compared to Paul's Monster...but maybe even loss of peak HP as the turbine and compressor became overwhelmed sooner, and you weren't able to use the RPMs to increase the peak HP; since the torque might drop off much faster and much sooner.

But even if it doesn't I wouldn't expect any huge increase in peak HP number in what Paul achieved without going to a bigger turbine or turbine housing.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 05:38 PM   #127
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,896
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Savington View Post
Kids, read this post until you understand why E85 can produce more power despite no increase in compressor flow.
I was never doubting the net energy increase due to the lower stoich point.

I'm doubting that even with the increased energy output, if you still use too small a turbo for the power goals, it cant produce anymore power than it can produce before the turbine is overwhelmed increasing backpressure or before the compressor just dumps hot air without any extra mass volume.


It's also why my gas stove can boil water so fast, it has insane amount of BTUs.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:11 PM   #128
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,086
Total Cats: 30
Default

I'll take Mass Balance for $500
albumleaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:15 PM   #129
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 36,197
Total Cats: 2,584
Default

/\ The above 2 of Scotts posts are exactly what I've been trying to tell Dann in the past page. You word it better, thank you. I (and many others) have done this on td04 equipped subarus (in which the turbo is way too small for the engine, and its extremely easy to tap it out). The result was a ton of midrange torque increase, but peak power output would never go much higher than a few horses over pump gas figures. Once a larger snail was bolted up it would skyrocket, as expected. I know, not same engine and not same setup, but I think it definitely still applies. All we're talking about is turbo efficiency, and engine VE and how it relates to type of fuel used (or how much energy it has). If anything a 1.6 miata is a terribly flowing engine and I wouldn't expect it to outflow a subaru ej25 by a long shot.

Maybe we're still mis-understanding Dann, but I'm eagerly waiting for results. Hope they are no-nonsense tests that once and for all prove or disprove what we're arguing about.
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:18 PM   #130
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 2,640
Total Cats: 25
Default

Braineak, you have completely missed it. It has nothing to do with stoich, I simply referenced it to make a point. Also your belief that E85 may produce more gas for the same HP further shows your misunderstanding about how engines produce torque and how that translates to HP.

Furthermore, it's not important if the compressor side pumps the same mass of air at a greater temperature while the turbine side flows an extra 10% exhaust past its optimum efficiency, as log as the temperature doesn't make the engine knock limited, which on E85 I don't think it will be.

Dann
nitrodann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:20 PM   #131
Murderator
iTrader: (76)
 
18psi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 36,197
Total Cats: 2,584
Default

What about overspinning the turbo due to pushing both sides off the charts?
18psi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:32 PM   #132
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 2,640
Total Cats: 25
Default

No idea what happens in that case. The car will have 3D EBC and perhaps we will find a point that it works best at. Perhaps max compressor flow in mass will occur at 17psi and allowing the wastegate to open rather than overspeeding the compressor and allow the exhaust side to flow through the wastegate will make a difference F'd if I know. But we are going to find out.

Dann
nitrodann is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:37 PM   #133
Boost Czar
iTrader: (61)
 
Braineack's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 72,896
Total Cats: 1,792
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrodann View Post
Braineak, you have completely missed it. It has nothing to do with stoich, I simply referenced it to make a point. Also your belief that E85 may produce more gas for the same HP further shows your misunderstanding about how engines produce torque and how that translates to HP.
I understand how a motor produces torque and how that translates to HP, but you seem to misunderstand how a turbo uses exhaust volume flow to spin a turbine, to spin a compressor, to compress air and increase the density ratio in the charge and how that translates into HP.

Are you suggesting that with an increase in backpressure there is not a reduction in TQ? Because I'd argue that instead of all the energy being used to push the piston down, it not how to expend some to push the exhaust out to overcome the excess pressure.

Also, if there's significantly more fuel being injected per volume of air during each compression, the byproduct also increases; this will spin the turbo sooner and faster, but a turbine has limits... there's published flow numbers for the 2560 turbine housing. If you surpass this point, the turbo's output drops off significantly regardless of magic fairy fuel or not.

Quote:
Furthermore, it's not important if the compressor side pumps the same mass of air at a greater temperature while the turbine side flows an extra 10% exhaust past its optimum efficiency, as log as the temperature doesn't make the engine knock limited, which on E85 I don't think it will be.
I find it very important.

Also keep in mind I'm just an art student...so I hope that makes it feel worse when we can't disprove me.
Braineack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:43 PM   #134
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,086
Total Cats: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 18psi View Post
What about overspinning the turbo due to pushing both sides off the charts?
Jesus Christ.

For the sake of simplifying things, say you have 10kg/min input air and fuel. Assume max power gasoline @ 12.5afr, E85 7.0afr

E85: 8.73kg air, 1.26kg fuel
Gasoline: 9.25kg air, 0.75 kg fuel

1.26 kg E85 * 33.1 MJ/kg = 41.70 MJ
0.75 kg gasoline * 47.2 MJ/kg = 34.9 MJ

Here's the amazing part that you keep looking over. MASS IS CONSERVED. 10kg in, 10kg out.

If you move the numbers closer to stoich, the power output/kg advantage moves down to 3% or so for E85 which isn't quite as encouraging, but the fact of the matter is that E85 will make more power without changing the mass flow rate.
albumleaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:44 PM   #135
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,436
Total Cats: 58
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nitrodann View Post
Braineak, you have completely missed it. It has nothing to do with stoich, I simply referenced it to make a point. Also your belief that E85 may produce more gas for the same HP further shows your misunderstanding about how engines produce torque and how that translates to HP.
I don't think this is what he's saying. I think he's saying this:

2C8H18 +25O2= 16CO2 +18H20

8.33C2H6O + 24.99O2 = 24.99H2O + 18.66CO2

24.99H2O + 18.66CO2 > 18H2O + 16CO2

For the same airflow in, complete, ideal combustion of ethanol will produce significantly more exhaust.
Enginerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:48 PM   #136
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,086
Total Cats: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cymx5 View Post
I don't think this is what he's saying. I think he's saying this:

2C8H18 +25O2= 16CO2 +18H20

8.33C2H6O + 24.99O2 = 24.99H2O + 18.66CO2

24.99H2O + 18.66CO2 > 18H2O + 16CO2

For the same airflow in, complete, ideal combustion of ethanol will produce significantly more exhaust.
This is pretty stupid because your masses don't add up.

2C8H18=228g
8.33C2H6O=383.18g

Whoa look at that, the percentage difference in your stoichiometry is similar to the amount in which you were off in mass.
albumleaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:54 PM   #137
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,436
Total Cats: 58
Default

OMFG

That's the point, moron.

Enginerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:55 PM   #138
I'm Miserable!
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Okinawa Japan
Posts: 329
Total Cats: -7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by albumleaf View Post
This is pretty stupid because your masses don't add up.

2C8H18=228g
8.33C2H6O=383.18g

Whoa look at that, the percentage difference in your stoichiometry is similar to the amount in which you were off in mass.
HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!
this just made this thread.
dk wolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:56 PM   #139
Senior Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,086
Total Cats: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cymx5 View Post
OMFG

That's the point, moron.

Holy ****, are you really that ******* dumb? If your MASS INPUTS AREN'T EQUAL THERE'S NO POINT IN COMPARING THE TWO. One apple has less caloric value than two bananas well who the **** cares?

I should show this thread to my old thermo professors, I always wondered what I could do to make them cry. Miataturbo: teaching high school chemistry one post at a time.
albumleaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2012, 06:59 PM   #140
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Newcastle, Australia
Posts: 2,640
Total Cats: 25
Default

Will its mass flow drop off or its efficiency. If it's just its efficiency, then as long as the heat produced doesn't lead to knock limiting then it's inconsequential.

If this happens on the exhaust side the turbine may become a restriction and limit exhaust flow and then we are going to stop making power. However if the turbo is producing x Lb/minute of flow at 17psi but can also produce x Lb/minute at 19psi due to inefficiency surely boost control set at 17psi will result in the wastegate opening and increasing flow through the rear housing?

A reminder of what we are doing here.

Current set is a built 1.6L with a log manifold and a downpipe that is 2", and exits the turbo at a 60* angle, it's not a bend, it's straight 2" that's Ben slash cut.
It then goes into a 2.5" exhaust with a cat,a hot dog and a chambered muffler. turbosmart T boost bleed valve.

On this setup it has made 297whp.

This is being replaced with a tubular long radius 1.5" steam pipe manifold with a low angle collector and at least 3" downpipe and exhaust feeding into a single hotdogs and exiting under the car.
It's getting 3D EBC and I happen to know a bloke who writes firmware for the ECU who's happy to help with whatever I need in this regard.

Dann
nitrodann is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Buying another club edition NC for 300+ whp, what clutch? pwnall1337 Prefabbed Turbo Kits 16 02-11-2015 01:05 PM
WTB: 1.8 FM2 or BEGI old style downpipe Rocwandrer WTB 0 07-13-2012 12:13 AM
HELP: Settings/tip needed for FM2 CARB 99 Turbo kit Link Piggyback and install dohcturbosi Prefabbed Turbo Kits 25 06-04-2012 06:38 PM
Car will not rev past 4000 RPM! Need Help admtn2 DIY Turbo Discussion 23 12-03-2009 05:11 PM
FS: customized BEGI/FM turbo system kung fu jesus Miata parts for sale/trade 22 09-27-2006 11:57 PM


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:58 PM.