Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

Pure Tuning Borg Warner S259 Dyno Results!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 07:20 AM
  #1  
Keith-PURE Tuning's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Vendor
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 78
Likes: 1
From: Toledo
Pure Tuning Borg Warner S259 Dyno Results!

Borg Warner S259 Dyno Results.

Test were performed on our Mustang Dynamometer MD-1100-AWD-SE.

Car: 2003 Evo 8
Engine: 2.0L
Fuel: 93 octane / 118 octane
Turbo: Borg Warner S259 / Open T3 .55ar Stainless Turbine Housing
Intake Manifold: Magnus (Street)
Cams: HKS 272
Max Boost: 23psi on 93oct / 37psi on 118oct
Atmospheric Temp: 76Deg
Relative Humidity: 5.7%



We will be testing the Kelford Cams and the New Magnus Intake Manifold on this car and will post the results when finished.

Last edited by Keith-PURE Tuning; Oct 27, 2008 at 06:15 AM.
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 07:30 AM
  #2  
MR Turco's Avatar
EvoM Staff Alumni
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 3,233
Likes: 3
From: Massachusetts
so on 93 it only made 350? seems like low #s and boost. It is a monster with the 118 but seems useless for the street.
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 07:37 AM
  #3  
sabastian458's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 0
From: Upstate, SC
350 tq- 438 hp. low tq.


seems ok, you get about the same hp but more tq out of a 30r tho.

Last edited by sabastian458; Oct 14, 2008 at 07:39 AM.
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 08:28 AM
  #4  
ForcedPerformance's Avatar
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
From: TEXAS
.55 A/R turbine housing? Is that a typo?
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 08:39 AM
  #5  
Keith-PURE Tuning's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Vendor
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 78
Likes: 1
From: Toledo
Originally Posted by ForcedPerformance
.55 A/R turbine housing? Is that a typo?
Nope.
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 08:54 AM
  #6  
jouniu's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: Finland
Originally Posted by Keith-PURE Tuning
Nope.
What is the idea of this setup? .55 A/R sounds like a joke. This can't perform well.
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 08:58 AM
  #7  
mrdevo's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 722
Likes: 0
From: Ct
So this reads similarly to a dynojet? Would the car have made more power up top at slightly less boost, it seems that after 7400 the turbos run similar? Heat generated?
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 09:12 AM
  #8  
Keith-PURE Tuning's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Vendor
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 78
Likes: 1
From: Toledo
Originally Posted by sabastian458
350 tq- 438 hp. low tq.


seems ok, you get about the same hp but more tq out of a 30r tho.
No the tq is spot on for the the cars setup and a Mustang Dyno. Tq isn't going to vary much from two similar framed turbos. The cars setup will vary the tq more. This will be shown when we use different cams and intake manifold a little later in the month.
Different dynos will read different though giving a misconception, so you have to compare and use the proper reference.


Thought I would post some pictures of the engine bay.



Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 09:19 AM
  #9  
Dragracer187's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 562
Likes: 0
From: The Dragstrip
nice setup, where are the 2 hoses coming from the valve cover going to? catchcan? any pics of that?
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 09:30 AM
  #10  
Keith-PURE Tuning's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Vendor
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 78
Likes: 1
From: Toledo
Originally Posted by mrdevo
So this reads similarly to a dynojet? Would the car have made more power up top at slightly less boost, it seems that after 7400 the turbos run similar? Heat generated?
No Dynojet 248's / 224's read 8-10% higher whp than Mustang Dynos. We have tested this on on the 2WD configuration but not the AWD but I'm sure this won't vary by much.

I would have to look at some of the logs to see if the heat went up drastically enough to cause a loss of power but I highly doubt it did. Again the cars supporting parts including motor design will determine the power layout more than the turbo. I am not a big fan of the cams or the intake manifold that were chosen for the car so we wil be looking to get rid of the engines weaknesses asap. Just thought we would toss up the initial graph for initial viewing.
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 09:41 AM
  #11  
Keith-PURE Tuning's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Vendor
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 78
Likes: 1
From: Toledo
Originally Posted by jouniu
What is the idea of this setup? .55 A/R sounds like a joke. This can't perform well.
Doesn't perform well? The dyno graph is up for viewing. Not sure what else you need?

We were going to use a .70 A/R but with this turbo and manifold there was no way to make the downpipe clear the A/C so .55 won by default.
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 09:46 AM
  #12  
Keith-PURE Tuning's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Vendor
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 78
Likes: 1
From: Toledo
Originally Posted by Dragracer187
nice setup, where are the 2 hoses coming from the valve cover going to? catchcan? any pics of that?
Catch Can is on my to do list but I haven't gotten to that yet.
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 09:53 AM
  #13  
MR Turco's Avatar
EvoM Staff Alumni
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 3,233
Likes: 3
From: Massachusetts
I guess for street i dont see the point of this setup. You make the same power with less lag on a IX turbo.

Last edited by MR Turco; Oct 14, 2008 at 09:56 AM.
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 09:53 AM
  #14  
sabastian458's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (25)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,607
Likes: 0
From: Upstate, SC
well, I kinda spoke a lil too soon for my personal experiance. DDL shows I am at 431whp and 401 tq. Another friends car made 420's on pump on a 2.0 last year on a 30r

On the other hand, I didnt think to acount for the .55 housing. I have never heard of 1 that small. I and my friend ran the .82 housing, which might have contributed to the difference in results


Car looks sick tho.
Reply
Old Oct 14, 2008 | 10:11 AM
  #15  
Steve93Talon's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
From: Phila, PA
Seems to spool late for the .55 housing. Curious why you didn't use the .70 T3 housing? I'd love to see a BW S200 series with the divided T3 housing on a divided manifold, should outspool the other housings with more top end.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:06 AM.