When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Thanks for sharing mate, I know the miata doesn't do s**t under 3000RPM but after that I want it to pull. I am really considering the 2554 now although it won't have as much top end, but I think it wil feed my need for speed for a long time.
Regards
Who cares about the very top end, you just said you rarely hit 5k rpm.
With the 2554 you will be in the power 3.5-6k rpm, where you probably spend 95% of the time anyway.
I had a 2860 and the car was a dog up to 4.5k rpm. now with the 2560 the car feels faster from 2.5k and really wakes up at 3.5k
I can only image that if i had a 2554, the car would come alive at 3k.
Well, you're too late trying to convince me with that,
Greg's videos made me buy a Miata 1½ years ago :P
Greg's video and the power he made is not typical. Don't think that you will match it or come close. I would say 95% of the 2554 dyno's I have seen on 1.6 or 1.8 engines don't beat 225whp.
You can match it. You can come close. And you will also achieve his end result, sooner or later.
most cars, even on stock rods, can hold up to a few dyno pulls well past the "threshold" that we've all kinda agreed upon. the real question is how long they last.
I've achieved 300 and even 350whp out of a completely unopened BP.
Both grenaded, but the 300 one actually held up for a year of street abuse before it went.
The 350 a couple months.
Greg's video and the power he made is not typical. Don't think that you will match it or come close. I would say 95% of the 2554 dyno's I have seen on 1.6 or 1.8 engines don't beat 225whp.
Thanks for pointing out, but I was aware.
Of course, he has ethanol which helps him get a nice bump in power.
You can match it. You can come close. And you will also achieve his end result, sooner or later.
most cars, even on stock rods, can hold up to a few dyno pulls well past the "threshold" that we've all kinda agreed upon. the real question is how long they last.
I've achieved 300 and even 350whp out of a completely unopened BP.
Both grenaded, but the 300 one actually held up for a year of street abuse before it went.
The 350 a couple months.
But he then added more timing.
I think he did a back to back and only gained 5 hp? And 300 rpm quicker spool. Definitely not worth the asking price.
I thought he added more boost and a little more timing. The billet wheel has a more refined profile which is why he could get a little more power where the stock wheel couldn't move any more air.
- a tiny bit faster spool (50-100RPM)
- a bit of low/mid torque
- a beefy amount of top-end torque (235lb/ft vs 210lb/ft @6250RPM) which flattens the torque curve nicely in de higher RPMS.
No drawbacks, only little improvements.
Last edited by Gerbocharged; 10-22-2016 at 07:38 AM.
A while ago Garrett has updated their website, product catalogue, and compressor/turbine maps. Since then I have been crunching some more numbers just to get a real equal comparison between some common turbos.
These turbo's being the GT2554R ( 836023-5001S ), GT2560R ( 836023-5004S ) and the GT2860RS ( 836026-5014S ).
I am probably going with a GT2554R on my 1.6L but just for the sake of it here it is:
(DISCLAIMER)
(These calculations are based on a 1.6L on gasoline, please correct me if something is way off)
(Both the GT2554R and the GT2560R are maxed out pressure-wise. So with more RPM, E85 or less intake restriction these turbo's could make a little bit more power.) (I limited the GT2860R to a max of 240 WTQ in these calculations so this *COULD* be done on a stock block.)
(The efficiency listed in these tables is based off off Garrett most recent compressor maps.)
Picture: GT2554R vs GT2560R vs GT2860RS on a 1.6L.
The GT2554R beats all to ~4000RPM and can keep up with the other two till 4500RPM after which the compressor starts to choke/the compressor wheel just can't grab any more air at these high boost pressures.
The GT2560R gets a nice flat torque curve from 4000 to 6500 RPM. At 5500RPM the engine starts to lose it's volumetric efficiency (engine is restricting flow, upgrade; throttle body, intake manifold, head work/port etc.). This turbo is pretty well matched to a 1.6L and it should be able to keep steady boost until redline. If you take a look at the compressor efficiency you can see it is most efficient in the top end. Tapering boost up top to keep the torque curve from nose diving is not possible because it cannot push any more air at higher pressures.
The GT2860RS is a complete different story. It is really efficient, but also has a lot of power still on the table. It should be possible to taper the boost up top to keep it at around 240 WTQ or go even higher boost (picture below). Ideal for a track car where you would be spending most of the time above 4500RPM.
Picture: GT2860RS maxed out on a stock 1.6L (which will blow apart if not built) the compressor wheel will not flow any more air at higher pressures on a stock engine. (With a built (ported head and lessen restriction.) engine you could get more out of this turbo.)
I think most of you already knew all of this and I'm telling old news, I am sorry for that. At least for me I have a clear vision on how these turbo's perform on a 1.6L now.
Regards
Last edited by Gerbocharged; 11-24-2016 at 05:30 PM.
the 2860RS is not going to look like this in real life on a 1.6L. From what I've experienced it will still spool similar to the Gt2560, albeit a touch slower, (which actually looks about right) but it will ramp up significantly past 4K due to the cam profile and there will be a much greater drop off in tq -- that IM/Head flows like the clap.
the 2860RS is not going to look like this in real life on a 1.6L. From what I've experienced it will still spool similar to the Gt2560, albeit a touch slower, (which actually looks about right) but it will ramp up significantly past 4K due to the cam profile and there will be a much greater drop off in tq -- that IM/Head flows like the clap.
Looks almost the same to me until 6500RPM. I may be a bit optimistic about the mid range but yeah looks close enough.
It looks awfully close, although I have to give it to you at the top end. after 250WHP my calculations may be a bit optimistic, because I did not take into account that with more horsepower in the top end the miata engine chockes like crazy.
closer that I was thinking (i didn't compare after I found the dyno) yeah otherwise, like i said the 2560 looks pretty damn close to what you typically see. But that 2860 powerband on a 1.6L just plain sucks -- slow to spool, then ramps up way too late, then the motor chokes up unless you work it over.
closer that I was thinking (i didn't compare after I found the dyno) yeah otherwise, like i said the 2560 looks pretty damn close to what you typically see. But that 2860 powerband on a 1.6L just plain sucks -- slow to spool, then ramps up way too late, then the motor chokes up unless you work it over.
The powerband of the 1.6L with a 2860RS does indeed suck. Very peaky.
As I said before the GT2554R and the GT2560R both give a nice powerband. With a slight variaton, one for low end and one for top end.
I'm happy with the results, I guess this makes for a nice (equal) comparison of the smaller Garrett turbos.
10-21-2016 | 02:46 PM
0
At least for me I have a clear vision on how these turbo's perform on a 1.6L now.
