borka

iTrader: (1)

TSE kit is top notch for the Miata. solid parts, best on the market efr turbo, and great spool.

I believe its a few hundred more expensive than FM, but its worth the extra expense.

I have a really nice 2560 setup, but still dream of a TSE efr. lol.

also, not a big fan of FM Vmaxx, they came free with my miata, and i did not like them, dampers are too soft and mushy. sold them and swapped in my BC racing BR coilovers from my last miata, and much happier now.

Bs_nb1

I may still go with the 2560 and an Fm kit because it will initially meet all my power needs. An EFR seems like a very nice option but it is more expensive at the end of the day. What kind of power is your car making and on what gas? As for the Vmaxx I'm not that into them either.

borka

iTrader: (1)

You just made a huge list of mods that you are doing to the car, like $10,000+ in planned mods, and a few hundred dollars for top of the line turbo kit is too much?
Thats fine, if you want to live in 2005 with a 2560 and old school fm cast manifold, they will work just fine.

i made 264hp 253tq at 17 PSI. 93 gas. and that is pretty much maxing out the 2560 turbo. dyno link below
https://www.miataturbo.net/dynos-tim...p-253tq-95003/

ridethecliche

iTrader: (2)

I wouldn't compare this to TSE or FM because it's the new kid on the block and not track proven...yet.

But I would look at the Kraken setup as well. The manifold appears to be far better than FM's log design and it's a pretty solid pricepoint. It should help spool relative to FM though I'm sure TSE will beat it.
The big advantage is that it will work with an EFR. So you can run a 6258 with it with the money you save relative to the other kits and pick up the upgraded hardware as well.

Wingman703

MSM users gaining 4-5WHP when swapping to a normal cam. It was my understanding that the MSM cam was designed for emissions reasons, not power when FI is involved, and that the MSM cam only shows gains when in NA setups.

Bs_nb1

the build is not going to cost me anywhere near 10k as I already have a lot of parts on the car and the only thing that will be putting lots of money into is the motor . The TSE kit is very nice and if it’s in my budget I will most likely buy it but I would like to save money anywhere I can as I am not a millionaire.

ridethecliche

iTrader: (2)

(Hence my suggestion for kraken)

emilio700

iTrader: (3)

Interesting. This is something I have never heard of. Any solid dyno reports, SAE corrected, wilth no other modifications?

This is enough of a thread drift to deserve its own thread though.

sixshooter

iTrader: (12)

I am reasonably certain the MSM cam has a longer duration, but don't feel like searching out the sources. Perhaps those you are citing as examples were seeing differences based upon overlap or maybe even other variables not controlled for in testing. This doesn't compute.

Looked it up. The MSM intake cam is 251 degrees and the NB1 is 248 and has significantly more lift than the NB1 intake cam (.349 vs .326).
Somebody's taken the time to do it right already.

Wingman703

I stumbled upon a back to back test on an MSM once, but didn't save the source and now can't locate it. Convenient, I know.
However, here is a test from FM using an MSM cam and '99 cam back to back, showing 2-3WHP gain and faster spool with the '99 cam on an unaltered tune.
https://forum.miata.net/vb/showthread.php?t=423014

If you guys feel this is substantial evidence I'll dig up the MSM test and start a new thread.

sixshooter

iTrader: (12)

That's odd. I would think that you would want to alter the tune to make sure that you were generating an optimal result for each of the two test subjects. You know, measure the best each one can give you. Otherwise you are inadvertently favoring whichever one the tune is more close to optimal for.

Wingman703

I think the thought is to eliminate variables. More things changed=more chance for an error in testing and leading to a false/inaccurate result.

sixshooter

iTrader: (12)

But if the valves are opening for longer, allowing the motor to ingest more air, then it would run lean if you were not also adding additional fuel. Therefore it would not be optimized.

Bs_nb1

i would also assume that the tune would be changed. Showing no increase while not changing the tune to optimize the parts you put in your car seems pointless.

nitrodann

Absolutely no question that this is right. Our 250whp turbo kit is worth about 5 seconds a minute on aussies tracks as compared to the same cars with stock power.

Most tracks are 80% full throttle or more. Going from 100 to 250whp is a big deal.

dann

Chilicharger665

iTrader: (2)

I am basing my suggestion on my experience with the Vmaxx's. They were on my car for years and I did not like them at all on track. That $1000 I spent on them with the FM sway bars would been much better used by saving up longer for XIDA's.

nbfather

I have the FM setup (came with the car) with a new GTX 2860 (came with a 3071r)....Get the Trackspeed EFR setup....Best money you will spend in the performance side of things.
If you think you can do this right for anywhere near 10K? I want to try some of what you are smoking....
You probably could, but you will end up buying everything twice....then how much have you saved? Just sayin dude.

I have the Xidas....Best performance value to be had at any price on the suspension side of things....Period
Your car will be vastly under sprung with those springs and you can't just go to heavier springs with that crappy shock as the shock can not control the added rates.
Heavier bars wont help either.

Do it right once, or buy it twice....Your choice

ooja3k

iTrader: (1)

I'd go TSE all the way.

I got 241 TQ and 285 HP on CA91 at 10psi with the TSE kit. tons of head room still available.

ridethecliche

iTrader: (2)

I don't understand the back lash here. The FM setup is proven track reliable, is available off the shelf without extended waiting time, and meets this posters goals. Sure, the TSE with the efr looks to be superior, but if thems the goals why the push back?

Does spool even matter that much on track since you're never going to be that low in the revs anyway?

I thought that the EFRs started to shine when going bigger than the 2560 since the bigger garrett turbos most consider give up a lot compared to the EFRs and the better new ones cost the same or more.

emilio700

iTrader: (3)

Spool/response always matters on road courses. It could be that it's more an issue for advanced drivers who tend to apply throttle earlier to balance the car on entry and mid turn. Being able to modulate torque early in a turn without needing to fight a timing factor allows for higher min corner speeds.
Higher min corners speeds are generally what separate data traces from intermediate to advanced level drivers. Same terminal speeds, same exits speeds but the better driver enters fast and slows down less. Precise torque control is a key factor. So a turbo that responds more slowly is intrinsically at a disadvantage to a faster responding turbo.

Watch my video in Bullet at Buttonwillow posted here and elsewhere. Note how low I let the revs get. Note how I add maintenance throttle early in most turns. To get that level of response with a traditional Garrett would mean making less power. The world has changed. Take advantage of those changes or don't. That's a personal choice but no arguing that old stuff works as well as the new stuff.