Turbo Technics S280

[Hypergram]

You wont see any difference. Would have to run less boost and you could make more timing as you will run out of fuel pretty fast.

Ok thanks!

 

[grip grip]

I'm wanting to add content to this thread since I'm running the S280, but I don't want to get caught up in any drama. Here's a 3rd gear pull from what my tuner wants to be the final revision. The timing looks extremely conservative to me and if that's the case there's lots of power left in it. The car isn't making any torque honestly, which is allowing me to accellerate on street tires without excessive spin I suppose. Not something I requested - but received. This is a 93 octane tune in 70F temps. I might ask for a full tilt tune so I can take it to the 1/8 mile for the hell of it. What do you guys think?

https://datazap.me/u/awheelus/s280-turbo-rev-d-5-1-20-datalogs?log=1&data=5-8

 

[MagnetiseST]

I'm wanting to add content to this thread since I'm running the S280, but I don't want to get caught up in any drama. Here's a 3rd gear pull from what my tuner wants to be the final revision. The timing looks extremely conservative to me and if that's the case there's lots of power left in it. The car isn't making any torque honestly, which is allowing me to accellerate on street tires without excessive spin I suppose. Not something I requested - but received. This is a 93 octane tune in 70F temps. I might ask for a full tilt tune so I can take it to the 1/8 mile for the hell of it. What do you guys think?

https://datazap.me/u/awheelus/s280-turbo-rev-d-5-1-20-datalogs?log=0&data=5-8

Who is your tuner? Nvm it’s Adam, I really think he and Mitch at CPE know this turbo very very well. Adam just installed one on his own Fiesta ST. I doubt he’s purposely limiting your timing.

There is a difference between “conservative” timing and not having enough fuel to have more timing without subtracting boost.


Also I’m on the 3rd revision of my meth tune. I’m enjoying it to say the least haha. I’ll post a log Tomorrow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[grip grip]

Who is your tuner?

There is a difference between “conservative” timing and not having enough fuel to have more timing without subtracting boost.


Also I’m on the 3rd revision of my meth tune. I’m enjoying it to say the least haha. I’ll post a log Tomorrow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not looking to go there, but timing on 93 doesn't affect Air/Fuel as far as I know. This isn't meth or ethanol tuning. Just saying, not trying to be a prick.

 

[JDG]

Not looking to go there, but timing on 93 doesn't affect Air/Fuel. This isn't meth or ethanol tuning.

Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MagnetiseST]

Lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was thinking the same lol.

Timing is essential on any fuel.

What makes you think the timing is low? Because you aren’t seeing +6.00 in your corrections?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[grip grip]

What I'm saying is additional fuel delivery isn't necessary when additional timing is added to a boosted motor to the decrement of Air/Fuel when running 93 from what I've read and lived. You can't post on here without drama.

 

[MagnetiseST]

What I'm saying is additional fuel delivery isn't necessary when additional timing is added to a boosted motor to the decrement of Air/Fuel when running 93 from what I've read and lived. You can't post on here without drama.

Where is the drama lol. I was asking a question that gets asked all the time on the FB groups.

If you are running out of fuel, and you add timing, it will cause knock. It may not be for the sake of the AFR, it might be for knock. Have you asked why the timing is low?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[grip grip]

Where is the drama lol. I was asking a question that gets asked all the time on the FB groups.

If you are running out of fuel, and you add timing, it will cause knock. It may not be for the sake of the AFR, it might be for knock. Have you asked why the timing is low?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No offense and Interesting observation, but I never said I was running out of fuel. Air/fuel is fine on my car so it has nothing to do with your assumption. Did you review my datalog?. I can't post a f'ing lugnut for sale on here without someone commenting on it before even seeing it. Once again, I feel the timing on my car which isn't running lean is very conservative as I'm seeing way too little torque vs HP. Obviously low RPM torque isn't going to tax the fuel system like high rpm HP. What's great about my other forums is that they'll read and review data before responding. I wish this forum was the same. Thaks for the pearls of wisdom
Magnetise ST and JDG.

 

[MagnetiseST]

View attachment 30189

No offense and Interesting observation, but I never said I was running out of fuel. Air/fuel is fine on my car so it has nothing to do with your assumption. Did you review my datalog?. I can't post a f'ing lugnut for sale on here without someone commenting on it before even seeing it. Once again, I feel the timing on my car which isn't running lean is very conservative as I'm seeing way too little torque vs HP. Obviously low RPM torque isn't going to tax the fuel system like high rpm HP. What's great about my other forums is that they'll read and review data before responding. I wish this forum was the same. Thaks for the pearls of wisdom
Magnetise ST and JDG.

I'm literally comparing our datalogs in excel side by side. So give me a few, I got out of bed for this lol. Are your logs in 3rd or 4th gear? I asked what I asked based on your Datazapp graph (which isn't very good for your datalog90 since you do multiple pulls in it, 91 is much much cleaner)

But what I'm seeing is that you already have higher base timing than I do up top, you have lower charge air temps, and lower afrs than I do. Of course it doesn't mean much if yours are in 4th gear, all of mine are in 3rd. What exactly are you looking for with the additional timing? More "instant" torque, or just more overall power?

edit: here is a small comparison, yours are the left two columns, mine are the right two:



You definitely have less base timing under 4600rpm or so, but it then spikes up to the 5.0*+ range and stays there peaking out at 10.06*. Mine never go above 8.3*, you have more timing than I do top end for sure, but lower down you have less. Your boost comes on earlier than mine though, a good 5psi ahead of me at 2900 rpm.

 

[grip grip]

I'm literally comparing our datalogs in excel side by side. So give me a few, I got out of bed for this lol. Are your logs in 3rd or 4th gear? I asked what I asked based on your Datazapp graph (which isn't very good for your datalog90 since you do multiple pulls in it, 91 is much much cleaner)

But what I'm seeing is that you already have higher base timing than I do, you have lower charge air temps, and lower afrs than I do. Of course it doesn't mean much if yours are in 4th gear, all of mine are in 3rd. What exactly are you looking for with the additional timing? More "instant" torque, or just more overall power?

MagnetiseST, thanks for your thoughtful and insightful response. The datalog is a 3rd gear pull. Do you feel it's odd that a turbo is advertised at 315whp and 315wtq on 93, but the tuner selling the turbo only gives me the power levels you just reviewed and its not running lean? Why is the torque down 50wtq? How's that gonna work at the track? Why is the timing or WGDC not increeased to match the advertised specs???

Below is what my tuner has listed as the specs for the S280. My GT2860RS was pulling the exact same torque and HP numbers. I bought the S280 for the torque, which was a complete waste of money so far.

Full boost (27-28psi) @ 3700RPM !!!!
*315whp / 316wtq using 93 octane @ 28psi is a dyno proven result with the S280

Here's the disparity I'm talking about, 312whp and only 262wtq. Where's my 50wtq?

 

[Ford ST]

I apologize if this is off topic or drama.

I read just about everything that I can about this car and I have never seen anybody make that much horsepower on any turbo on 93 octane with the stock fuel system.
Also I don't like it when anybody advertises how much power you can make. It should be about the power increase because every dyno is going to give you different results.





Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

[MagnetiseST]

3rd gear pull. Do you feel it's odd that a turbo is advertised at 315whp and 315wtq on 93, but the tuner selling the turbo only gives me the power levels you just reviewed and its not running lean? Why is the torque down 40wtq? How's that gonna work at the track? Why is the timing or WGDC not increeased to match the advertised specs???

Below is what my tuner has listed as the specs for the S280. My GT2860RS was pulling the exact same torque and HP numbers. I bought the S280 for the torque, which was a complete waste of money so far.

Full boost (27-28psi) @ 3700RPM !!!!
*315whp / 316wtq using 93 octane @ 28psi is a dyno proven result with the S280

I have to say that I was slightly disappointed by the power that my car made on 93 with the S280. I was expecting 300whp, but it seems thats a magical number to hit and everything has to be set up just right.

I hadn't seen 28psi until I started tuning with methanol, I only had enough fuel to safely run 26psi peak and hold 23 to redline.

However I was EXTREMELY happy with the way the car drove and how easily it walks away from most things that it lost to before, so I wasn't going to complain. I'm only making 286ftlb of torque, but I kind of didn't want to make enough to blow the tires off every time I floored the car, so again I wasn't unhappy and now I love it.

In the end it comes down to how willing you are to fix the car if it breaks. I think that 300-320 on 93 figure is with a very aggressive tune, I do not think its been done safely, and I don't think any of us here have done it. I'm definitely limited by my ambient temperature here in Florida.

 

[MagnetiseST]

I apologize if this is off topic or drama.

I read just about everything that I can about this car and I have never seen anybody make that much horsepower on any turbo on 93 octane with the stock fuel system.
Also I don't like it when anybody advertises how much power you can make. It should be about the power increase because every dyno is going to give you different results.





Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

Yep I agree. Every dyno, including v-dynos, will give different results based on how they were set up. Being that I made 216whp on E30 with a stock downpipe and then added the S280. I lost 15fltb of torque, but gained 50~70whp (depending on temperature), was worth it to me.

 

[grip grip]

I apologize if this is off topic or drama.

I read just about everything that I can about this car and I have never seen anybody make that much horsepower on any turbo on 93 octane with the stock fuel system.
Also I don't like it when anybody advertises how much power you can make. It should be about the power increase because every dyno is going to give you different results.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

Imagine if you ponied up $1,600 for a S280 after already having spent the same on a GT2860RS that ultimately had the same numbers, literally. How'd that feel? There's literally no mechanical excuse for my S280 having the same WTQ as a disco potato IMHO.

 

[Ford ST]

Imagine if you ponied up $1,600 for a S280 after already having spent the same on a GT2860RS that ultimately had the same numbers, literally. How'd that feel? There's literally no mechanical excuse for my S280 having the same WTQ as a disco potato IMHO.

Not the best. All the work involved would piss me off more than the money to be honest though.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

[MattM]

Imagine if you ponied up $1,600 for a S280 after already having spent the same on a GT2860RS that ultimately had the same numbers, literally. How'd that feel? There's literally no mechanical excuse for my S280 having the same WTQ as a disco potato IMHO.

Hey guys,,been lurking a while as I’m
Thinking of picking one of these up, but figured I’d chime in cause now I have questions.

Doesn’t the GT2860RS spool slower than the s280? Also, I assume you have an upgraded exhaust manifold as well? I read and didn’t see anything about one, but it’s early and I could have missed it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JDG]

Imagine if you ponied up $1,600 for a S280 after already having spent the same on a GT2860RS that ultimately had the same numbers, literally. How'd that feel? There's literally no mechanical excuse for my S280 having the same WTQ as a disco potato IMHO.

Are you running aux fuel?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[wetwea33]

Imagine if you ponied up $1,600 for a S280 after already having spent the same on a GT2860RS that ultimately had the same numbers, literally. How'd that feel? There's literally no mechanical excuse for my S280 having the same WTQ as a disco potato IMHO.

I don't know why you expected much of a difference in peak numbers without more fueling. The power curve will be alot different but peak numbers won't be any different as your gonna be super limited by octane and fuel volume. Both those turbos are capable of more then 300whp and tq but are gonna be capped at a similar level.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[MagnetiseST]

Here's the disparity I'm talking about, 312whp and only 262wtq. Where's my 50wtq?

Well a few things:

-I wouldn’t use the accessport gauges as a 100% accurate source of what your car is doing in terms of Estimates HP or Estimated Torque. It’s guessing, the car isn’t a self-Dyno

-Torque tends to be what breaks things in cars. The more you have, sooner, the more things will break.

-262wtq seems low.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk