Homebrew KIT - 270rwhp/214tq
#1
Homebrew KIT - 270rwhp/214tq
Here is my 90 turbo miata... which has been in various states of progression over the past 8 years. When I first started (2000) I couldn’t afford a KIT, or didn’t like what was available. I’ve done things right, done a lot wrong – but here is my experience
270.7 rwhp / 214.8 tq 15psi
Stock 1.6
BEGI cast manifold ( circa 2000 )
Ford SVO Mustang T3
3” DP/ Exhaust
RC 550’s, Vishnu Rail, Vortec FPR, Walboro pump
TEC II ECU, Blitz SBC, Tial 38mm Wastgate, HKS pro BOV
Custom IC.
Should have done from Day 1:
Started with a 1.8L miata
Bought a dual feed rail
Stand alone ECU
Tuned on the Dyno!
Since the stock 1.6L threw a rod, I’m in the process of building a complete bottom end and will be targeting much higher power levels.
270.7 rwhp / 214.8 tq 15psi
Stock 1.6
BEGI cast manifold ( circa 2000 )
Ford SVO Mustang T3
3” DP/ Exhaust
RC 550’s, Vishnu Rail, Vortec FPR, Walboro pump
TEC II ECU, Blitz SBC, Tial 38mm Wastgate, HKS pro BOV
Custom IC.
Should have done from Day 1:
Started with a 1.8L miata
Bought a dual feed rail
Stand alone ECU
Tuned on the Dyno!
Since the stock 1.6L threw a rod, I’m in the process of building a complete bottom end and will be targeting much higher power levels.
Last edited by iluvspd; 08-21-2008 at 07:39 PM.
#6
posted Dyno run...
Still needed some love in the tuning dept... but it threw a rod a few months later LOL
Spool, less then stellar. I was given the turbo free 8 years ago. The exhaust housing has an internal crack radially that probally didnt help. Also, flanged leaked on the turbo inlet. So ... it can only get better.
I'm giving the chinacharger a shot first before I rebuild this unit. stay tuned....
Still needed some love in the tuning dept... but it threw a rod a few months later LOL
Spool, less then stellar. I was given the turbo free 8 years ago. The exhaust housing has an internal crack radially that probally didnt help. Also, flanged leaked on the turbo inlet. So ... it can only get better.
I'm giving the chinacharger a shot first before I rebuild this unit. stay tuned....
#7
Senior Member
iTrader: (14)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Tinley Park, IL
Posts: 1,482
Total Cats: 0
Thats kinda risky. I had one but not for very long.
My Garrett seems to take a lot more abuse.More money but I think a good name brand is the way to go.
My Mitsubishi was pretty good too,till I blew my motor and starved it of oil. I wouldn't get a no-name turbo.
My Garrett seems to take a lot more abuse.More money but I think a good name brand is the way to go.
My Mitsubishi was pretty good too,till I blew my motor and starved it of oil. I wouldn't get a no-name turbo.
#11
I believe the tec2 wiring faulted out, leaning out that cylinder. Detonation = extreme cylinder pressure = compromised rod.
IMO, the stock rods are good for over 250 IF it never detonates OR it is never stretched due to over revving. In the past 8 years I have been through 3 1.6L, and all rod failures were cylinder #4 and had signs of extreme detonation ( broken ring lands, cracked rings ). This past motor was pushing 270 for the last 3 years, until the ECU wiring fault.
That being said, with the price of good aftermarket rods/piston combos in the $700 range its almost a wash to build a bottom end instead of running a junkyard special - which is what the last one was
for those on a time budget, I really think the combination of dual feed rail / and reverse coolant routing can help a motor survive past the 250+ mark.
IMO, the stock rods are good for over 250 IF it never detonates OR it is never stretched due to over revving. In the past 8 years I have been through 3 1.6L, and all rod failures were cylinder #4 and had signs of extreme detonation ( broken ring lands, cracked rings ). This past motor was pushing 270 for the last 3 years, until the ECU wiring fault.
That being said, with the price of good aftermarket rods/piston combos in the $700 range its almost a wash to build a bottom end instead of running a junkyard special - which is what the last one was
for those on a time budget, I really think the combination of dual feed rail / and reverse coolant routing can help a motor survive past the 250+ mark.
#13
The dyno plot from the 8-21 post should be ignored. Manifold to turbo inlet was leaking, Exhaust turbine housing also had an internal radial crack at the casting parting line.
The latest post ( 10-8 ) was a chinacharger, supposedly a T3/T4 TO4E 50 trim.
Upon further verification, it turned out to be this:
Compressor A/R .50
Inducer 47.5
Exducer 76.2
which works out to a .39 trim ???
Turbine A/R .63
Inducer 55.88
Exducer 65.5
which works out to a .73 trim ???
I may have the Turbine #'s mislabeled depending on how you interpret the Garret turbo tech site.... but mathematically it was a .73
I have no idea were this falls in the line of true Garretts - but I will run it until winter, and decide to upgrade based on future dyno results. This weekend we will dyno again, so Ill start a new thread with full details.
The latest post ( 10-8 ) was a chinacharger, supposedly a T3/T4 TO4E 50 trim.
Upon further verification, it turned out to be this:
Compressor A/R .50
Inducer 47.5
Exducer 76.2
which works out to a .39 trim ???
Turbine A/R .63
Inducer 55.88
Exducer 65.5
which works out to a .73 trim ???
I may have the Turbine #'s mislabeled depending on how you interpret the Garret turbo tech site.... but mathematically it was a .73
I have no idea were this falls in the line of true Garretts - but I will run it until winter, and decide to upgrade based on future dyno results. This weekend we will dyno again, so Ill start a new thread with full details.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Frank_and_Beans
Supercharger Discussion
13
09-12-2016 08:17 PM