Dyno, new Bell Engineering turbo..
Can't speak for the other owners of the 2 or 3 other cars that are part of this proto, but I was given a choice of either.
Even Corky referenced the 'wimpy *** journal bearing chinachargers' in another post.
I only know of one other owner and he and I chose Chinese.
Money was/is a factor in my case. BEGI feels like if a customer is given a choice, and finances are a factor, the chinachargers have been a decent alternative.
Even Corky referenced the 'wimpy *** journal bearing chinachargers' in another post.
I only know of one other owner and he and I chose Chinese.
Money was/is a factor in my case. BEGI feels like if a customer is given a choice, and finances are a factor, the chinachargers have been a decent alternative.
Do you know how they're handling the increased fuel pressure? Did they change out the fpr in the tank somehow? I can't imagine them converting the car to a returnless setup.
I am impressed with the ability to reflash the stock ecu, that's a great option for those that just want to tune it once and leave it alone.
Reply
0
0
Elite Member
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,642
Total Cats: 36
From: Colorado
My utterly haphazard guess is that:
1) Its actually a relatively large turbo for the application. As in maybe a freer flowing hot side than most Churbos we see. Maybe a bit more efficient on the compressor side too. Maybe not.
2) The resulting slow spool is actually helpful from a fueling standpoint, as you don't have as much need around/before 4K. Hence the ability to run a sort of good AFR on the stockers.
3) The slow-spooling-kinda-low-restriction turbo does not make as much boost pressure for a given airflow, so there's that much less pressure for the fuel rail pressure to overcome. Combine that with a higher base rail pressure and you get about as much from the stockers as you ever will.
Or maybe its just a bit optimistic on that dyno. I really have no idea. But the approach of using a freer flowing turbo to keep fueling requirements down at the expense of some low end response has been done a lot outside Miatas.
1) Its actually a relatively large turbo for the application. As in maybe a freer flowing hot side than most Churbos we see. Maybe a bit more efficient on the compressor side too. Maybe not.
2) The resulting slow spool is actually helpful from a fueling standpoint, as you don't have as much need around/before 4K. Hence the ability to run a sort of good AFR on the stockers.
3) The slow-spooling-kinda-low-restriction turbo does not make as much boost pressure for a given airflow, so there's that much less pressure for the fuel rail pressure to overcome. Combine that with a higher base rail pressure and you get about as much from the stockers as you ever will.
Or maybe its just a bit optimistic on that dyno. I really have no idea. But the approach of using a freer flowing turbo to keep fueling requirements down at the expense of some low end response has been done a lot outside Miatas.
Reply
0
0
I made 220+ whp on stock injectors and band-aids (BEGi arrfpr, NA though)
It even survived ~1000 track miles before melting piston #4.
...
It even survived ~1000 track miles before melting piston #4.
...
Last edited by Efini~FC3S; Jul 29, 2014 at 02:56 PM. Reason: Added infoz
Reply
1
1
there's a few issues with your logic. here is my take:
My utterly haphazard guess is that:
1) Its actually a relatively large turbo for the application. As in maybe a freer flowing hot side than most Churbos we see. Maybe a bit more efficient on the compressor side too. Maybe not.size =/= efficiency. that comes from design, and you can pretty much rule out any "efficient" design from chinachargers since they just stamp them based on what other tubo's LOOK like. There is next to no actual engineering.
2) The resulting slow spool is actually helpful from a fueling standpoint, as you don't have as much need around/before 4K. Hence the ability to run a sort of good AFR on the stockers.
fuel needed in the midrange in no way affects fuel needed up top, injectors will max out up top no matter how much pressure is needed down low.
3) The slow-spooling-kinda-low-restriction turbo does not make as much boost pressure for a given airflow, so there's that much less pressure for the fuel rail pressure to overcome. Combine that with a higher base rail pressure and you get about as much from the stockers as you ever will.
this one kinda sorta may be true. except to make more power you need more flow, and for a certain amount of airflow you need a certain amount of fuel, and stock injetors are just not gonna do 230whp on any proper, non-MOON dyno.
Or maybe its just a bit optimistic on that dyno. I really have no idea. But the approach of using a freer flowing turbo to keep fueling requirements down at the expense of some low end response has been done a lot outside Miatas.ding ding ding. that's what I'm leaning towards, unless this particular miata somehow magically came with oversized injectors lol
1) Its actually a relatively large turbo for the application. As in maybe a freer flowing hot side than most Churbos we see. Maybe a bit more efficient on the compressor side too. Maybe not.size =/= efficiency. that comes from design, and you can pretty much rule out any "efficient" design from chinachargers since they just stamp them based on what other tubo's LOOK like. There is next to no actual engineering.
2) The resulting slow spool is actually helpful from a fueling standpoint, as you don't have as much need around/before 4K. Hence the ability to run a sort of good AFR on the stockers.
fuel needed in the midrange in no way affects fuel needed up top, injectors will max out up top no matter how much pressure is needed down low.
3) The slow-spooling-kinda-low-restriction turbo does not make as much boost pressure for a given airflow, so there's that much less pressure for the fuel rail pressure to overcome. Combine that with a higher base rail pressure and you get about as much from the stockers as you ever will.
this one kinda sorta may be true. except to make more power you need more flow, and for a certain amount of airflow you need a certain amount of fuel, and stock injetors are just not gonna do 230whp on any proper, non-MOON dyno.
Or maybe its just a bit optimistic on that dyno. I really have no idea. But the approach of using a freer flowing turbo to keep fueling requirements down at the expense of some low end response has been done a lot outside Miatas.ding ding ding. that's what I'm leaning towards, unless this particular miata somehow magically came with oversized injectors lol
Reply
0
0
Elite Member
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,642
Total Cats: 36
From: Colorado
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
If it's anything like old ECUs (maybe... because BP?) it's just a matter of figuring out the "key" to the hex code stored in the ECU, installing a chip socket (make no mistake, BeGi's "reflashes" will NOT be California usable unless you plan on swapping ECUs every time you want to go in for emissions testing. We found out that what they're doing is NOT reversible quite some time ago.), burning a new chip with modified hex code, and rolling.
It's quite archaic, but if done properly, works just fine.
It's quite archaic, but if done properly, works just fine.
Reply
0
0
If it's anything like old ECUs (maybe... because BP?) it's just a matter of figuring out the "key" to the hex code stored in the ECU, installing a chip socket (make no mistake, BeGi's "reflashes" will NOT be California usable unless you plan on swapping ECUs every time you want to go in for emissions testing. We found out that what they're doing is NOT reversible quite some time ago.), burning a new chip with modified hex code, and rolling.
It's quite archaic, but if done properly, works just fine.
It's quite archaic, but if done properly, works just fine.
Reply
0
0
Possibly. Once the ECU is socketed, anyone can stick a chip in there, reburn said chip, do what they want.
I suppose i should offer the caveat that the "reflash" they were doing on the MSMs is a socketed ECU with a chip.
I don't know for sure if that's what's happening here, but based on past information, a BeGi "reflash" has been a socketed ECU with a chip.
A la Crome, NepTune, etc etc etc.
I'm literally just a translator and "ostrich" cable away from being able to do the same thing on the MX6. (I'm already socketed and running an ECU that's supporting/calls for 440cc injectors instead of 330cc stock injectors.)
Hell, i can't imagine it would be hard to just run one of these damn cars on a Honda ECU to start with. I know we've done it on the MX6s, and it used to be somewhat common in the Toyota world.
Reply
1
1
yep, it sounds like that's what they're doing. why wouldn't it be CA legal though? if the ecu retains all of its normal functions, and only fuel/timing is affected in boost, what would stop it from passing a OBD rediness scanner and sniffer?
Reply
0
0
Dunno. I don't live in CA.
I just remember it being a big deal to those who lived in California when this came around. Hellion or whatever his name is had some stuff on it.
Ended up coming out because BeGi had said that the reflash was reversible originally, and while you could flash back to stock maps, they ended up saying they would be incapable of returning the ECU itself back to stock.
Reply
0
0
CA legal, like actually CA legal. Or Tech shed CA legal where it passes all the normal tests?
Reply
0
0
You know what I mean.
Nothing outside of OEM is CA legal. Literally, nothing. Like most places here will refuse service to you EVEN if you have a CARB number for your intake. Just cause they don't want to take chances.
Nothing outside of OEM is CA legal. Literally, nothing. Like most places here will refuse service to you EVEN if you have a CARB number for your intake. Just cause they don't want to take chances.
Reply
0
0
Reply
0
0
