Saturday is approaching pretty fast. Almost as fast as the car with another 40-50 hp, but not quite :eyetwitch

The last part of the Flux-Capacitor upgrade arrived this afternoon. BTW, the garage radio is already tuned to my favorite ghey Smooth Jazz station. :eyetwitch

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/flux-capacitor-replica.jpg

i want that!
OD

Wtf????

I have been working on my own tune for several months now. After giving up more than once, only to start again, I have finally done something I am happy with. Check out the max g/s # at the bottom.

-Yambo

Seconds (sec) Equiv. Ratio (AFR) Engine Load (%) Long Term FT1 (%) Mass Airflow (g/s) MAF Voltage (V) RPM (RPM) Short Term FT1 (%) Vehicle Speed (mph)
0 14.85 27.05 -0.16 8.16 1.3 1163 -2.5 4.97
0.15 14.85 26.66 -0.16 8.19 1.3 1163 -2.5 4.97
0.31 14.85 26.66 -0.16 8.16 1.3 1164 -2.5 3.73
0.45 14.85 27.05 -0.16 8.22 1.31 1158 -1.72 3.73
0.6 14.85 27.05 -0.16 8.22 1.42 1160 -1.72 3.73
0.77 14.85 27.83 -0.16 12.19 2.04 1190 -1.72 3.73
0.93 14.7 63.5 -0.16 27.88 1.99 1354 -2.5 3.73
1.1 13.23 66.25 -0.16 25.32 1.9 1612 -9.52 3.73
1.26 11.91 50.96 -0.16 23.81 1.95 1918 -19.66 3.73
1.43 13.23 49.78 -0.16 24.82 1.91 1831 -20.44 4.35
1.6 14.99 53.7 -0.16 23.94 1.93 1676 -17.32 4.35
1.74 18.38 56.06 -0.16 24.44 1.95 1630 -7.96 4.97
1.91 17.64 57.62 -0.16 25.07 1.95 1634 -4.06 5.59
2.08 16.02 57.62 -0.16 25.07 1.96 1667 -3.28 6.21
2.22 15.43 58.02 -0.16 25.19 1.95 1634 -1.72 6.84
2.39 15.58 59.19 -0.16 24.88 2.03 1576 0.62 8.08
2.53 15.43 58.02 -0.16 27.32 2.04 1773 2.18 8.08
2.68 15.29 54.88 -0.16 26.94 2 1953 2.96 9.32
2.83 15.88 51.74 -0.16 26.19 1.98 1942 6.86 9.32
2.99 16.32 47.04 -0.16 25.88 1.72 2185 10.76 9.94
3.14 16.17 35.28 -0.16 18.18 1.58 2205 -0.16 10.56
3.31 17.05 29.01 -0.16 14.93 1.49 2091 -0.16 10.56
3.46 19.55 25.87 -0.16 13.07 1.44 1994 -0.16 10.56
3.62 20.29 24.7 -0.16 11.76 1.41 1834 -0.16 9.94
3.78 20.29 26.26 -0.16 11.07 1.49 1566 -0.16 9.94
3.96 20.29 34.89 -0.16 18.56 2.11 1429 -0.16 9.94
4.12 20.29 67.82 -0.16 28.82 2.04 1442 -0.16 9.94
4.27 20.29 71.74 -0.16 27.13 2.01 1453 -0.16 10.56
4.46 20.29 69.78 -0.16 26.44 2.01 1473 -0.16 11.18
4.63 15.73 68.6 -0.16 26.13 1.98 1461 1.4 11.18
4.75 13.67 64.29 -0.16 26.13 1.99 1579 -1.72 11.81
4.92 12.64 63.11 -0.16 26.13 2.01 1580 -7.96 12.43
5.09 14.11 60.76 -0.16 26.82 1.92 1686 -5.62 13.05
5.21 15.29 55.27 -0.16 24.25 1.97 1735 -3.28 13.05
5.38 16.17 54.49 -0.16 25.57 2.13 1800 1.4 13.67
5.55 16.32 58.41 -0.16 29.81 2.24 1858 6.08 14.29
5.67 15.14 64.68 -0.16 35.17 2.3 1935 4.52 14.91
5.84 14.7 68.99 -0.16 36.39 2.39 1997 5.3 15.53
6.01 14.7 73.3 -0.16 41.62 2.42 2090 6.86 16.16
6.13 14.7 73.3 -0.16 41.62 2.43 2212 7.64 16.78
6.29 14.55 71.74 -0.16 42.12 2.46 2260 7.64 17.4
6.47 14.99 70.17 -0.16 44.75 2.56 2402 10.76 18.64
6.63 15.29 74.87 -0.16 55.23 2.95 2519 14.66 19.26
6.8 15.14 114.86 -0.16 83.1 3.01 2650 -0.16 19.88
6.94 13.52 118.78 -0.16 87.71 3.04 2793 -0.16 21.75
7.11 12.49 119.17 -0.16 93.49 3.13 2958 -0.16 22.99
7.28 12.49 123.09 -0.16 102.34 3.21 3152 -0.16 24.23
7.44 12.49 127.79 -0.16 115.69 3.3 3377 -0.16 26.1
7.62 12.05 134.06 -0.16 125.37 3.37 3540 -0.16 27.96
7.78 11.61 135.63 -0.16 137.27 3.45 3769 -0.16 29.2
7.93 11.91 141.51 -0.16 147.33 3.51 3956 -0.16 30.45
8.1 11.17 145.82 -0.16 161.19 3.58 4169 -0.16 31.69
8.22 11.17 149.74 -0.16 171.21 3.65 4347 -0.16 33.55
8.39 11.17 152.1 -0.16 180.81 3.73 4512 -0.16 34.8
8.56 11.17 156.8 -0.16 195.27 3.81 4726 -0.16 36.04
8.72 11.17 161.5 -0.16 211.1 3.87 4935 -0.16 37.9
8.9 11.17 163.86 -0.16 223.54 3.93 5171 -0.16 39.77
9.06 11.17 166.21 -0.16 235.56 3.99 5384 -0.16 41.63
9.23 11.17 168.95 -0.16 249.44 4.05 5617 -0.16 43.5
9.4 11.17 171.7 -0.16 262.89 4.11 5854 -0.16 44.74
9.54 11.17 174.44 -0.16 277.53 4.14 6049 -0.16 46.6
9.69 11.17 176.4 -0.16 292.74 4.2 6252 -0.16 47.85
9.83 11.17 177.97 -0.16 301.76 4.24 6446 -0.16 49.09
10 11.17 177.97 -0.16 309.65 4.3 6612 -0.16 50.95
10.17 11.17 179.14 -0.16 323.4 4.34 6836 -0.16 52.2
10.29 11.17 180.71 -0.16 335.67 4.4 7032 -0.16 53.44
10.44 11.17 181.5 -0.16 340.93 4.44 7180 -0.16 55.3
10.61 11.17 183.06 -0.16 356.91 4.47 7380 -0.16 55.92
10.75 11.17 183.85 -0.16 366.93 4.54 7566 -0.16 57.79
10.9 11.17 185.42 -0.16 375.69 4.57 7725 -0.16 59.03
11.04 11.17 185.81 -0.16 389.6 4.6 7910 -0.16 60.27
11.19 11.17 186.2 -0.16 394.86 3.83 8093 -0.16 62.14
11.32 11.17 83.1 -0.16 110.02 1.88 8299 -0.16 62.14
11.51 11.47 9.41 -0.16 17.3 1.49 7893 -0.16 62.14
11.71 11.61 5.88 -0.16 11.76 1.46 7351 -0.16 62.14
11.88 11.17 7.06 -0.16 13.01 4.2 6835 -0.16 62.14
12.04 11.17 163.46 -0.16 252.67 4.13 6125 -0.16 63.38
12.19 12.05 171.3 -0.16 285.42 4.14 6285 -0.16 64.62
12.36 11.17 174.83 -0.16 281.48 4.18 6152 -0.16 65.24
12.5 11.17 177.58 -0.16 291.05 4.22 6268 -0.16 66.49
12.67 11.17 177.97 -0.16 300.63 4.25 6411 -0.16 67.73
12.81 11.17 177.97 -0.16 304.58 4.27 6545 -0.16 68.97
13 11.17 179.54 -0.16 314.15 4.29 6617 -0.16 69.59
13.15 11.17 179.93 -0.16 318.72 4.33 6768 -0.16 70.84
13.31 11.17 181.89 -0.16 324.57 4.36 6819 -0.16 72.08
13.48 11.17 182.67 -0.16 333.91 4.38 6927 -0.16 73.32
13.65 11.17 183.46 -0.16 340.34 4.4 7041 -0.16 73.94
13.77 11.17 183.85 -0.16 345.64 4.43 7144 -0.16 75.19
13.94 11.17 184.63 -0.16 349.4 4.47 7209 -0.16 76.43
14.1 11.17 185.81 -0.16 358.16 4.49 7340 -0.16 77.05
14.28 11.17 186.98 -0.16 365.67 4.51 7422 -0.16 78.29
14.43 11.17 187.38 -0.16 371.31 4.53 7567 -0.16 79.54
14.59 11.17 187.77 -0.16 377.57 4.56 7670 -0.16 80.78
14.77 11.17 187.77 -0.16 383.2 4.56 7740 -0.16 81.4
14.93 11.17 186.59 -0.16 388.85 4.6 7878 -0.16 82.64
15.1 11.17 188.55 -0.16 398.35 4.61 8001 -0.16 83.88
15.26 11.17 187.77 -0.16 397.72 4.63 8074 -0.16 85.13
15.43 11.17 186.98 -0.16 402.73 3.48 8205 -0.16 86.37

Daaaammmmnnnnnn Nice!!!!
So what are your plans now that you've got a nice tune,,, Dyno...

I think I'll dyno it right before I rebuild, since dynos are so hard on motors.

BTW, those #s are with the original pulley ratios, a straight pipe in place of the cat, and MSD8247 ignition coils. I can get 300 miles to a tank if I baby it, and am getting at least stock highway mileage, if not better.

-Yambo

The last part of the Flux-Capacitor upgrade arrived this afternoon. BTW, the garage radio is already tuned to my favorite ghey Smooth Jazz station. :eyetwitch

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/flux-capacitor-replica.jpg

Watch the 88 mile per hour issue....
You may fry the tracks electronics if you cross the traps before leaving and don't red-light.

Watch the 88 mile per hour issue....
You may fry the tracks electronics if you cross the traps before leaving and don't red-light.

Man, you shouldnt give the Pettit secret out. Is that the Mr Fusion model or do you have to chase down the libions. It shouldnt be hard to catch that VW bus but you gotta watch out for them popping out the top with AKs.

411g/s this morning @8200 rpm

I don't get it . How can you get a number that high with the stock pulley ? What psi are you seeing at that point ?

BTW, those #s are with the original pulley ratios, a straight pipe in place of the cat, and MSD8247 ignition coils. I can get 300 miles to a tank if I baby it, and am getting at least stock highway mileage, if not better.

-Yambo
well done.
incredible flow for std pulleys. have you upgraded the cooling or are running water injection? if so is it pre or post compressor?

I don't get it . How can you get a number that high with the stock pulley ? What psi are you seeing at that point ?

It is not so much the boost(8-9 psi) as it is the tuning. Do you think that pettit is giving customers aggressive tunes? If they are, they wouldn't make it public for different reasons. If you equate 400g/s to 400 crank hp(which is reasonable, since some people say multiply g/s by 1.23), then that comes out to @ a 66% gain over stock. Many cars have achieved that %gain in the past with FI @ the same level of boost, or lower.

well done.
incredible flow for std pulleys. have you upgraded the cooling or are running water injection? if so is it pre or post compressor?

No water injection; I need to install mine before it warms up again. I think the tune is safe for now due to ambient temps being so low.

how is it that OD only sees 300g/s ish with the stock pulley ? If it is the same pulley as yours no amount of tuning is going to net you 100g/s .....

how is it that OD only sees 300g/s ish with the stock pulley ? If it is the same pulley as yours no amount of tuning is going to net you 100g/s .....

I am not going to argue with you. But just so you have something else to think about, I consistently saw 330g/s with my tune from pettit on stock pulleys. Search the internet, or whatever source you wish, and you will find examples of cars with @ the same amount of boost making 60% gains or more over stock.

-Yambo

BTW, my motor is tired due to 100k+ mileage and a few detonation events. Hard to believe isn't it?

If anybody cares to see it, i'll set my rev limiter to 9k just see what the max flow # is. Otherwise I'll just leave alone because besides the datalogs, the car actually feels quicker.

I consistantly see 320-330g/s as well... my highest was 338g/s
Do you have any plans with turning this into a flash for the Dude...

411g/s this morning @8200 rpm

Very nice, lots of homework/reading = great results. :eyetwitch

Bastage is on his way home after a grueling 12 hours of ghey smooth jazz garage radio background music. He is now a very satisfied Pettit Racing upgrade Super Charge owner. He is also running a header, blower and intake heat shields. We were able to attain 13 psi of boost with 11.4 A/F ratios (hence his 570 cc secondary injectors) based on the cabin gauges. He is currently logging on his drive home. With a little tuning I believe that he will be able to brake the 330 whp. :eyetwitch

marsredr100,

great job!!!!

beers :beer:

Nice Job Juan and Gleynard!!!(sorry if I got that wrong its hard to remember your name Bastage)

I consistantly see 320-330g/s as well... my highest was 338g/s
Do you have any plans with turning this into a flash for the Dude...

I don't know how that would work.

very interesting Mork----can you commit why the maf voltage dropped on the last reading? That kinda puzzles me.
so you did a 15 sec run in 3nd gear?
true that i was pulling 305 g/s on the road race track
rest of data at the time:
engine temp 190.4F ambient 80F ( last part of a 20 min track section)
RPM 7547 !!!!!!
speed 129mph (5th gear) (holy shit turn 1 was coming up fast)
a/f 11.2
timing at 20 degrees
load 158
Ltt 1.56
maf 305.16
lower intake temp of 105F
i did have a bad coil(mazsport set up at the time)

just in case anyone was wondering about the rest of the data

Tune does affect power --for sure--that sure is a nice gain---intake vdi closed? Stock ports?
no cat I know---3" exhaust?
its more than just the tune I am thinking. you are running richer than I am. what is your timing?

also why wasnt your a/f's dropping when the rpm's were decreasing? 11.17 to a little over 12 was the only drop? You dont lift throttle much shifting? Dangggg! Dude--rip her up! Nice fast shift also approx 0.15 sec to shift---nice!!
OD

bunch of us at the Mazmart gathering yesterday. Great time--sawa lot of differant stuff---height was speaking with Ric I the famous engine builder---saw a 4 rotor job with get this (STAINLESS STEEL ROTORS straight from Mazda and one of them costs as much as a 09 R3!!
they are not for sale but sure are sweet.
He laps ALL his side plates--they are NOT TRUE from the factory.
The Renasis has lose side seals for a REASON--dont try and tighten them up.
COating the exhaust port offers no benefit and would be very difficult to do.
Hasnt seen and real benefit from any rotor coatings.
Rotors themselves go bad--they dont last forever.
He really likes ceramic seals--but they are not really needed for a street/hpde car and just a low boost application.
Renasis power comes from getting tolerances right and general clean up--not much room to port anything---including exhaust.
Run heavy oil!!! 20w/50 he likes --ok with a 20/40 during cool months.
the pellet in the e shaft--not a question of if it will fail--only a question of when. watch the oil temps.
loosen the alternator belt just a tad and let her warm up good in the mornings.
HE has ran aluminum side plates!!!! Someone has some now!!! ENgine looses a LOT of weight with them.
He had several questions about our water meth systems---and gave a nod of approval.:)
cant reduce compression on the renasis--rotor face too thin
Like the EFI dude
Says Hello to Cam!
Great day--Mazmart thinking about doing this 4 x a yr.
The omly bad was they had not inventoried the 09 car so i could not get the fp.\
OD

very interesting Mork----can you commit why the maf voltage dropped on the last reading? That kinda puzzles me.
so you did a 15 sec run in 3nd gear?
true that i was pulling 305 g/s on the road race track
rest of data at the time:
engine temp 190.4F ambient 80F ( last part of a 20 min track section)
RPM 7547 !!!!!!
speed 129mph (5th gear) (holy shit turn 1 was coming up fast)
a/f 11.2
timing at 20 degrees
load 158
Ltt 1.56
maf 305.16
lower intake temp of 105F
i did have a bad coil(mazsport set up at the time)

just in case anyone was wondering about the rest of the data

Tune does affect power --for sure--that sure is a nice gain---intake vdi closed? Stock ports?
no cat I know---3" exhaust?
its more than just the tune I am thinking. you are running richer than I am. what is your timing?

also why wasnt your a/f's dropping when the rpm's were decreasing? 11.17 to a little over 12 was the only drop? You dont lift throttle much shifting? Dangggg! Dude--rip her up! Nice fast shift also approx 0.15 sec to shift---nice!!
OD

The voltage drop is a throttle lift. As for the AFRs, the drop down to 11.17 is intentional. I still have a stock exhaust, except for the straight pipe. Intake VDI is closed. Stock ports. I don't know for sure yet why I am seeing these numbers. I think that the key isn't so much the top end tuning(i'm running the same 20degress at max load you are....for now), as much as the rest of the powerband. What I will do is share with you guys as soon as I figure it out.

-Yambo

OD, what reasons did Ric give for keeping the side seal tolerances loose?? I know a few respected rotary guys make them tighter when doing rebuilds.

OD, what reasons did Ric give for keeping the side seal tolerances loose?? I know a few respected rotary guys make them tighter when doing rebuilds.

Maybe the previous line explains it:
"He laps ALL his side plates--they are NOT TRUE from the factory.
The Renasis has lose side seals for a REASON--dont try and tighten them up."

If the side plates are not true, the side seals would need to be loose.
Lapping the side plates may allow for tighter side seals.

/Just a WAG....

Mork--aint doubting ya man--please understand stat---just like you wondering ---hmmmmm? What the heck? Same a/f's and timing---same pressures---basically the same set up? but pushing a bunch more air---what the heck?
Any dyno sheets?
Maf volt drop didnt make sense--thanks.
Really looking forward to more exploration dude!

Ric DID NOT SAY OUTRIGHT that Mazda's factory tolerance standards are not what they used to be but i think we understood.
Side seals stay like they are for temp fluctuations and because of the way the exhaust port works with them. I dont know all the details ---if Ric says dont mess with them--i dont need an explanation. He put more emphasize of lapping all the plates.
OD

Hmm. Do side seal tolerances have anything to do with compression?

Mork--aint doubting ya man--please understand stat---just like you wondering ---hmmmmm? What the heck? Same a/f's and timing---same pressures---basically the same set up? but pushing a bunch more air---what the heck?
Any dyno sheets?
Maf volt drop didnt make sense--thanks.
Really looking forward to more exploration dude!

The thing is, I am running significantly more timing than you guys on the bottom end and midrange. My guess is this is increasing the overall efficiency of the motor, but I cannot prove that without a dyno, which I'm not willing to do untill its time for a rebuild.

-Yambo

I'm gonna go out for a while to try a more aggressive tune. Be back in a few.

Just stopping by.. good reading so far.

Brettus et al; just keep thinking FLOW not Pressure! The same size pully will flow different masses of air based on temp; restrictions, motor compression, etc... even at the same PSI numbers.

Just stopping by.. good reading so far.

Brettus et al; just keep thinking FLOW not Pressure! The same size pully will flow different masses of air based on temp; restrictions, motor compression, etc... even at the same PSI numbers.

sure - but not 70-100 g/s more on the same pulley ..........................
Has to be another explanation .

Just stopping by.. good reading so far.

Brettus et al; just keep thinking FLOW not Pressure! The same size pully will flow different masses of air based on temp; restrictions, motor compression, etc... even at the same PSI numbers.

I'm pretty sure morkusyambo's higher MAF readings are due to the fact he rescaled his MAF voltage to g/s table with the accessport. This is a kludge I'm told you're forced into with tuning on the AP. Its not that he magically unlocked significantly more boost or flow with simple fuel/ignition tuning -- thats just silly.

The unmodified MAF table doesn't even have voltage -> flow mappings above (IIRC) 365 g/s (approx 4.7 volts) You can change/add entries into the interpolation table for voltage/MAF pairs above 4.7V/365g by extrapolating the curve, but its anybody's guess what the real MAF values for voltages above 4.7V really are in stock diameter MAF housings. Even if you did have access to calibrated flow bench equipment to extend the voltage -> flow table, my experience with other types of sensors is that when you get close to the limits of the sensor, they become wildly inconsistant and will vary from sensor to sensor so reports of any readings above 4.7V/365g should be taken with a grain of salt.

In light of this fact, what everybody probably should be comparing instead of MAF numbers is MAF sensor voltages in stock diameter housings.

Thinking in terms of flow versus pressure is a compromise the turbo folks bad at math make because of inaccurate pressure measurement. Turbo's create variable exhaust backpressure that not only can impede power, but it re-expands in the carry-over volume from the exhaust -> intake cycle and fights boost in the manifold. This, combined with the aerodynamics of the sensor placement, seems to me whats making turbo tuners distrustful of boost measurement. The exhaust backpressure in a supercharger setup is 1) much less and 2)more predictable and boost tracks with MAF much better than on a turbo from the logs I've seen.

I'm pretty sure morkusyambo's higher MAF readings are due to the fact he rescaled his MAF voltage to g/s table with the accessport. This is a kludge I'm told you're forced into with tuning on the AP. Its not that he magically unlocked significantly more boost or flow with simple fuel/ignition tuning -- thats just silly.

The unmodified MAF table doesn't even have voltage -> flow mappings above (IIRC) 365 g/s (approx 4.7 volts) You can change/add entries into the interpolation table for voltage/MAF pairs above 4.7V/365g by extrapolating the curve, but its anybody's guess what the real MAF values for voltages above 4.7V really are in stock diameter MAF housings. Even if you did have access to calibrated flow bench equipment to extend the voltage -> flow table, my experience with other types of sensors is that when you get close to the limits of the sensor, they become wildly inconsistant and will vary from sensor to sensor so reports of any readings above 4.7V/365g should be taken with a grain of salt.

In light of this fact, what everybody probably should be comparing instead of MAF numbers is MAF sensor voltages in stock diameter housings.

Thinking in terms of flow versus pressure is a compromise the turbo folks bad at math make because of inaccurate pressure measurement. Turbo's create variable exhaust backpressure that not only can impede power, but it re-expands in the carry-over volume from the exhaust -> intake cycle and fights boost in the manifold. This, combined with the aerodynamics of the sensor placement, seems to me whats making turbo tuners distrustful of boost measurement. The exhaust backpressure in a supercharger setup is 1) much less and 2)more predictable and boost tracks with MAF much better than on a turbo from the logs I've seen.


/\what he said :lol:

I'm pretty sure morkusyambo's higher MAF readings are due to the fact he rescaled his MAF voltage to g/s table with the accessport. This is a kludge I'm told you're forced into with tuning on the AP. Its not that he magically unlocked significantly more boost or flow with simple fuel/ignition tuning -- thats just silly.

The unmodified MAF table doesn't even have voltage -> flow mappings above (IIRC) 365 g/s (approx 4.7 volts) You can change/add entries into the interpolation table for voltage/MAF pairs above 4.7V/365g by extrapolating the curve, but its anybody's guess what the real MAF values for voltages above 4.7V really are in stock diameter MAF housings. Even if you did have access to calibrated flow bench equipment to extend the voltage -> flow table, my experience with other types of sensors is that when you get close to the limits of the sensor, they become wildly inconsistant and will vary from sensor to sensor so reports of any readings above 4.7V/365g should be taken with a grain of salt.

In light of this fact, what everybody probably should be comparing instead of MAF numbers is MAF sensor voltages in stock diameter housings.

Thinking in terms of flow versus pressure is a compromise the turbo folks bad at math make because of inaccurate pressure measurement. Turbo's create variable exhaust backpressure that not only can impede power, but it re-expands in the carry-over volume from the exhaust -> intake cycle and fights boost in the manifold. This, combined with the aerodynamics of the sensor placement, seems to me whats making turbo tuners distrustful of boost measurement. The exhaust backpressure in a supercharger setup is 1) much less and 2)more predictable and boost tracks with MAF much better than on a turbo from the logs I've seen.

So if I set my MAF to see 260g/s at 4.06 volts. Then on a datalog i record 255g/s, how do I know if that # is accurate or wrong?

If we cannot trust any reading above 365g/s, like you say, then does that also mean every turbo owner who has recorded #s above that are also wrong?? I only ask because I am trying to learn and am looking for productive answers....

/\what he said :lol:

...as opposed to the opposite end of that spectrum:icon_no2:

Not sure if you took that the wrong way morkus - i'm interested to learn about all this as well so take it with a grain of salt

Not sure if you took that the wrong way morkus - i'm interested to learn about all this as well so take it with a grain of salt

No worries. Your response proves you meant no harm. Its kind of frustrating to try tuning a car for several months and every time you think you're making progress, you end up going back to square 1 again, or being confused.

That is why I go off of fuel.

ALL of these measurements are relative; even fuel is since injectors have a variance and not everyone get's theirs flow tested. But I find the fuel volume to be the most accurate for tuning.

IE - if you flow 1 lb/min of fuel and your AFR's are 10:1 then you can be pretty sure your moving 10 lb/min of air.

The problem with the AP is that is doesn't read injector durations directly... I am still trying to figure out if we can work around that.

As for the flow vs pressure thing....

Thinking in terms of flow versus pressure is a compromise the turbo folks bad at math make because of inaccurate pressure measurement. Turbo's create variable exhaust backpressure that not only can impede power, but it re-expands in the carry-over volume from the exhaust -> intake cycle and fights boost in the manifold. This, combined with the aerodynamics of the sensor placement, seems to me whats making turbo tuners distrustful of boost measurement. The exhaust backpressure in a supercharger setup is 1) much less and 2)more predictable and boost tracks with MAF much better than on a turbo from the logs I've seen.
Um, no - a) we have no port overlap b) if you can prove that 10 PSI of pressure is the same flow rate regardless of other variables - I'll give you $100.

I may not be that good at math; but I have forgotten more about air pressure than most people will ever know.

So if I set my MAF to see 260g/s at 4.06 volts. Then on a datalog i record 255g/s, how do I know if that # is accurate or wrong?

If we cannot trust any reading above 365g/s, like you say, then does that also mean every turbo owner who has recorded #s above that are also wrong?? I only ask because I am trying to learn and am looking for productive answers....

As long as your A/F ratios are all good and ignition timing is what you want it to be, it doesn't matter if that g/s number is true-to-life accurate or wrong. Its just a number you're using for tuning and if it gets the results its doing its job. After modifying that table though it unfortunately can't be used anymore for comparison with another car unless its using the same table and same MAF setup. I personally found out that it also has side-effects with idle quality and stability.

FWIW, I don't think Pettit's reflash does this manipulation of the MAF-- I think they tweaked other tables and left the MAF calibration stock.

I wouldn't trust a lot of AP turbo owners MAF values as I'm pretty sure they are all tuned by Jeff and I'm pretty sure he plays around with that table to get the results he wants and then keeps it secret (?). Its also probably the quickest and easiest way to tune.

The only way I can think of to get any reading above 365 accurately would be for someone to calibrate our sensor/MAF/ECU setup with a more accurate flow bench. Simply extrapolating out the curve from 4.7V to 5V is tempting, but not accurate enough for comparison between cars until proven with something more substantial than "it seems to hold the AFR I wanted up there" -- fuel injectors and combustion efficiency are not something to calibrate a MAF against.

As far as your tune goes, what you've done is great and I look forward to hearing more!


Um, no - a) we have no port overlap b) if you can prove that 10 PSI of pressure is the same flow rate regardless of other variables - I'll give you $100.

I may not be that good at math; but I have forgotten more about air pressure than most people will ever know.


I knew somebody would bite. :-) Such a sensitive bunch and that makes you fun to pick on...

I'm not talking about port overlap -- I'm talking about clearance volume. Do you really think all 1.3(654cc per rotor) L of volume is evacuated each turn of the rotor? How do you squeegee all that pressurized combusion gas out of the rotor bathtub? Port overlap doesn't help you there.

Ooh, I can make $100?

Lets say you have a intake manifold sitting at constant 10psi of boost measured right at the closed intake port of the engine. Now lets say the exhaust stroke happens to clear out all combustion gas (impossible) and is in perfect vacuum. The intake port opens. Air starts flowing because there is a pressure differential between the manifold (+10psi) and the combustion chamber (-14.7psi). At this point, the pressure in the combustion chamber will asymptotically approach +10psi (ignoring helmholtz effects) while the intake port is open. The longer and more area the port has, the faster this pressure rises in the chamber. The turbo compressor utilized to create this +10psi in the manifold has absolute no bearing on how much air is transferred in the intake stroke (assuming perfect intercooling). The turbine side does however -- it determines how much residual gas was carried over from the exhaust side due to the pressure it creates in the exhaust manifold.

Can I have my $100 now?

Good info (brings up the intake tuning stuff again; which I am weak on but would love to develop further) - but an incomplete analogy.

EDIT:
First you have to prove the exhaust pressure from the turbo of choice caused enough backpressure to increase the air reversion from an NA motor... I am not going to bite on that one cause there are too many snails in the world.

Assuming that the transfer of that pressure (a.k.a. Pressurization of the combustion chamber) were to take place at the EXACT same ambient temperature (impossible with two different compressor set-ups, also impossible as every millisecond the air tract is at a slight pressure and temperature variation) - then the speed of air movement would be the same (same pressure differential); on two identical engines with the same intake timing - the final PPO2 would be identical as the intake port closes and begins to compress the air fuel mixture for the power stroke. At this point - you can directly measure pressure and equate it to power... all you have to do is set up that nice sterile test.


For the rest of us; we ultimately have to look at the MASS FLOW RATE - <- flow over there see it... not the PRESSURE - because the PPO2 (the part that makes power when combined with fuel) is entirely variable based on VOLUME, TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE - (See General Gas Law - Physics 101) - but 20 moles, molecules (insert mass measurement of choice) of oxygen.... is always 20 moles, molecules (insert mass measurement of choice) of oxygen.

10 PSI of AIR <> 10 PSI of AIR unless all other variables are identical.

See www.ppo2performance.com to do the math yourself.

I knew somebody would bite. :-) Such a sensitive bunch and that makes you fun to pick on...

....


Can I have my $100 now?

I was actually defending the SC (in the SC thread of all places)... so I am going to go on a limb and say I am not particularly sensitive... I just don't like stupidity.

I am also not a huge fan of your tuning recommendation to ignore the calculated values of the MAF and just work your own scale. If you have the means (which we do) to get all of the pertinant info into a tune; then you need to by all means do it.

By messing with your Calculated Loads (via the MAF g/sec); you affect fueling, timing, OMP volumes... basically the whole motor in ways that not all of us can forsee (as the entire PCM is still not open to us)... so; I am thinking that is bad advice.


No $100 for you; sorry. But hey you made a friend! The clearance information was a nice touch.

good conversation--i too have learned something here as I didnt know folks were messing with the maf scale!!
Correct me if i am wrong but dont we have a small amount of seal leakage from chamber to chamber going on also?
Damn--just got news someone is using my cc number---i hate thieves. I have never lost it and only use it to buy car stuff. Well i shut her down tonight. Damage less than $100 which i shouldnt have to pay for.
olddragger

Yeh, it would be nice to have the MAF scaled to match HP output to the wheels or atleast come close + or - 10 or so. If that happened a dyno would be rendered usless.

yeh - thanks for the party money OD ;)

Yeh, it would be nice to have the MAF scaled to match HP output to the wheels or atleast come close + or - 10 or so. .

with a turbo car I think it is already ......... pretty much . SC car pehaps down 20 whp on maf numbers ?

So if its making anything under 380 HP its a stable tune as mentioned before about false reading anywere above 380 on MAF was it.

/\ sorry don't understand the sentence

Unless you pass 380 maf reading you dont need to rescale I guess.

Assuming that the transfer of that pressure (a.k.a. Pressurization of the combustion chamber) were to take place at the EXACT same ambient temperature (impossible with two different compressor set-ups, also impossible as every millisecond the air tract is at a slight pressure and temperature variation) - then the speed of air movement would be the same (same pressure differential); on two identical engines with the same intake timing - the final PPO2 would be identical as the intake port closes and begins to compress the air fuel mixture for the power stroke. At this point - you can directly measure pressure and equate it to power... all you have to do is set up that nice sterile test.


Okay, I'm sorry, but that sounds like intellectual obfuscation and utter B.S. I don't think anybody but yourself follows how that rationalization refutes any statements I've made in my last 2 posts. To recap: the points I've brought up are:

1) morkusyambo is not actually experiencing 411g/s of flow
2) boost *is* useful to predict flow on positive displacement superchargers.
3) turbo tuners have a more complicated job because boost does not predict flow as well because of several things unique to turbos on the renesis.
4) mucking with MAF calibration makes MAF less accurate.

I am NOT:
1) advocating a tuning method (A inaccurate MAF is fine as long as its precise)
2) trying to bash turbochargers (I own both a supercharged and turbod rotary)
3) stupid

You, however, took exception to a couple off-point theories I made about why I thought boost might not be predicting flow well in turbos. Maybe because you thought I was bashing turboes or you thought I was talking about you when I mentioned "turbo tuners bad at math"

You wanted to call me out with a $100 bet that I didn't have any basis for my off-topic statement about exhaust backpressure effecting intake flow. I showed you how exhaust backpressure can effect intake flow on a zero-overlap engine even though it had no relation to the current topic of morkusyambo's MAF reading.

You obviously think morkusyambo is actually seeing 411g/s -- how does your grand unified flow theory explain that? I'll give you $100 if you can explain how a slightly more aggressive timing/fuel tune can unlock 80-100g/s of real flow on a positive displacement supercharger. Don't you think if I thought superchargers are the best I would go along with this evidence that morkusyambo's blower is flowing way more air than many turbos are...


10 PSI of AIR <> 10 PSI of AIR unless all other variables are identical.


Do you not see the ridiculousness of this assertion? Have you ever seen the t-shirts some computer geeks wear with the text "2 + 2 = 5, for sufficiently high values of 2". http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts-apparel/unisex/sciencemath/60f5/ The above statement (and your whole argument style, for that matter) reminds of that shirt.

See www.ppo2performance.com to do the math yourself.

Ah, I see now why you got so defensive -- you have a reputation to uphold and a "flock" of little-people to educate and enlighten. Forgive my low post count newbie naieveity.

(disclaimer - i havent been following, just jumped in browsing and saw this)

2) boost *is* useful to predict flow on positive displacement superchargers.


sounds reasonable to me - IF you know other variables. 10psi at 70 degrees precompressor isnt the same flow as 10psi at 35 degrees precompressor(not being smart, i know you understand this, just saying)

they are inter-related, with the right supporting information you can use either one for most(all?) purposes. its just a matter of which one can be used more precisely and/or more conveniently. IMO mass flow is more convenient and precise as other variable are already accounted for

edit:
ehhh just read the rest/last of your post. OK i'll bite. show us the math that can explain the ridiculousness of that assertion. If you cant quantify a scientific claim, then its only a theory. so show us something tangible, logical, and repeatable that disproves what he's saying

Good Stuff, keep up the info and keep down the tempers, learning as always

edit:
ehhh just read the rest/last of your post. OK i'll bite. show us the math that can explain the ridiculousness of that assertion. If you cant quantify a scientific claim, then its only a theory. so show us something tangible, logical, and repeatable that disproves what he's saying


10 PSI of AIR <> 10 PSI of AIR unless all other variables are identical.


The ridiculousness is that it says and predicts absolutely nothing. 10 psi of air not being equal to 10 psi of air is about as useless a comment as saying 100 lbs of potatoes is not equal to 100 lbs of potatoes. Theres nothing tangible or logical to refute in that statement.

point taken. although i am pretty sure the point of the statement was meant to be implied that flow/ppo2/whatever at 10psi is not consistent unless other variables(ie temp) are also consistent

Paul got my point.

I am not attacking your SC vs Turbo assertations; nor saying that Mork is seeing an actual 411 g/s. What I AM attacking is the Pressure argument; because it is in fact an incorrect assertion. Pressure by itself means squat.

10 PSI <> 10 PSI for air because the PPO2 can differ by a very large amount. My $100 bet was in relation to pressure = power vs the flow = power.

Partial Pressure of Oxygen(PPO2) aka the molecules of oxygen available to be burned = Power; period and without equivocation when it comes to the airflow of a motor. Please read my posts a bit more carefully.

I can prove my assertion - now prove yours.



Ah, I see now why you got so defensive -- you have a reputation to uphold and a "flock" of little-people to educate and enlighten. Forgive my low post count newbie naieveity.

All that info is here on the site; but the address is harder for me to remember. But since we are on the point of my "flock" of little-people. (Which by the way would kick ass... I need minions.) I seek out people who know a hell of a lot more than me; since I can't gain any information otherwise. I also reference all of them accordingly, my reason is not financial as of yet - my reason is simply to de-mystify the whole tuning process to the best of my abiity. I am always on the lookout for people to shoot holes in my math; it just hasn't happened in a while; so if you have the goods please please please by all means let me know because I would love some more peer review.

The ridiculousness is that it says and predicts absolutely nothing. 10 psi of air not being equal to 10 psi of air is about as useless a comment as saying 100 lbs of potatoes is not equal to 100 lbs of potatoes. Theres nothing tangible or logical to refute in that statement.

10 PSI of air = X molecules of oxygen = (What is the answer?)

10 PSI of air = Y molecules of oxygen = (What is the answer?)

Prove they are always the same and I will Paypal you $100 in the next 20 minutes.

wow,

another drive by guy that knows it all here to help for as long as he or she gets attention..

btw, this has what to do with the pettit owners thread?

pm is a great thing. or start you own thread.

beers :beer:

While some of this is off topic Swoope; the gist of it matters. Since Morks was trying to see WTF was up with his MAF reading. My point was with his intake being the same (so same MAF voltage for airflow) from his old and new tunes / runs... that his increased mass of air could be a result of temperature / elevation / timing / etc... and that the change from old to new is valid... even if the 400g/s is not 100% accurate.


And further - to scale the MAF to be accurate one simply needs to use the fuel volume and AFR to extrapolate the Air Flow.

Then I got worked up.... plus I am taking a law class right now - so that may have affected my mood - :lol:

While some of this is off topic Swoope; the gist of it matters. Since Morks was trying to see WTF was up with his MAF reading. My point was with his intake being the same (so same MAF voltage for airflow) from his old and new tunes / runs... that his increased mass of air could be a result of temperature / elevation / timing / etc... and that the change from old to new is valid... even if the 400g/s is not 100% accurate.


And further - to scale the MAF to be accurate one simply needs to use the fuel volume and AFR to extrapolate the Air Flow.

Then I got worked up.... plus I am taking a law class right now - so that may have affected my mood - :lol:

not really aimed at you. more the drive by..

great the world needs another fng lawyer!! :lol:

btw, talked with juan today. you know if you add a new un winged trunk lid. the pettit sc goes faster! sorry.

was keeping it on topic..

beers :beer:

HEHE - Yeah if I ever take the bar - all you guys have my permission to beat my ass.

btw, talked with juan today. you know if you add a new un winged trunk lid. the pettit sc goes faster!
beers :beer:

Hey don’t give out my secrets. BTW I do have the formula to back it up but I’m having some issues with changes in gravitational pull and daily solar flares fluctuations. :eyetwitch

10 PSI of air = X molecules of oxygen = (What is the answer?)

10 PSI of air = Y molecules of oxygen = (What is the answer?)

Prove they are always the same and I will Paypal you $100 in the next 20 minutes.
Since other necessary parameters are not defined in the setup to the question, you also can not prove X is not equal to Y without adding more parameters. Here's an analogy to highlight the absurdity of your question:

100 ft/lbs of torque = X kilowatts power?
100 ft/lbs of torque = Y kilowatts power?

I would need to define rpm to complete that question. You would need to define temperature (I assume volume we're talking about is 654cc). I previously stated "perfect intercooling" as an assumption in my first response to simplify the math. With perfect intercooling temperature is always exactly ambient and 10psi of atmosphere in a 655cc volume has the same mass of O2. If you want to bring up humidity here, just stop or I will bring up how ideal gas law starts to fall apart when you start accomodating the specific heats of the consistuent gases and their internal degrees of freedom and this whole discussion will devolve into trivia. If you think I do not understand ideal gas law, you have not seen any of my previous posts.

Anyway, this still has nothing to do with my position on any of the above points I already mentioned and which you have not refuted. I have never even mentioned PP02, power, or how it relates to pressure -- I only brought up how pressure tracks with flow on different FI. You are engaging in classic obfuscation of whats being debated and this is just another invocation of the straw-man logical fallacy. For those that don't know what that is, here's the recipe:
1) Person A has position X
2) Person B ignores X and presents position Y
3) Person B attacks position Y
4) Person B draws conclusion that position X is false/incorrect/flawed.

The above tactic is used incessantly on internet forums. Many fall for it -- those that pride themselves on recognizing reason, logic, and truth do not. A few here I think know when they're doing it (MM) and they do it for fun -- some, like Kane, may not even know he's doing it.

It seems you do not wish to engage productively in the discussion of my previous comments. Probably because you are unable to refute them. Unlike you, my comments were brought up in the discussion of a Pettit supercharger topic and I am a Pettit supercharger owner. You want to talk about pressure, power, temperature and PP02 for some reason. I simply knew why morkusyambo was seeing 411g/s so I posted.

Thanks for the fly-by yourself swoope -- way to add to the discussion absolutely nothing for absolutely no reason.

My last post was my only useless post to the topics of this thread because I used it to call you out to which you ignored. I apologize to thread readers for that off-topic comment and for this one. As an attempt to rescue this post and close this topic since its been beaten to death, I will bring up this new topic related to the Pettit supercharger:

The adiabatic efficiency number advantage of turbos has negligible real world advantage with proper intercooling when compared to twin-screws. I realize anybody that really cares about this math/physics crap is in the minority, but I did just run through some calculations for this is another thread: http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=163536&page=3 There are plenty of advantages turbos have, but adiabatic efficiency is not a big deal on most RX8s.

The only way I can think of to get any reading above 365 accurately would be for someone to calibrate our sensor/MAF/ECU setup with a more accurate flow bench. Simply extrapolating out the curve from 4.7V to 5V is tempting, but not accurate enough for comparison between cars until proven with something more substantial than "it seems to hold the AFR I wanted up there" -- fuel injectors and combustion efficiency are not something to calibrate a MAF against.

As far as your tune goes, what you've done is great and I look forward to hearing more!

I noticed this was the second time you mentioned extrapolating the curve from 4.7 volts beyond. Question: Does it make a difference that the #s I am seeing are all below 4.69V??

Thanks for participating in this discussion publicly, as well as the encouragement.

-Yambo

On a side note; I think it is good that Kane joined this discussion, because it has led to some discussion about things I am not familiar with. Having said that, since its my stupid posts that led to this, I ask that Joff and Kane not get personal(even if only intellectuals understand some of what they are saying) and stay in this discussion.

With everything that has been said up to this point(and my interpretation of it) I still don't know if what I am seeing is wrong or right.

-Yambo

Thank you joff for proving my point (albeit combatively)...

Without other information; pressure is a useless measurement in comparing power and or airflow. Even with perfect intercooling (an assumption that kinda defeats the purpose of trying to get accurate info)... the final airflow information requires ambient temperature information. Not to mention our perfect intercooling will reduce pressure and increase density yada yada....

You argument that the flow not pressure statement = turbo toolbags who suck at math was what I called you out on; not anything related to turbo's vs. superchargers or any of that BS.... so if you want to call me out - stay on topic.

Once again; Flow is king (when I say flow I think PPO2; why cause it is all that really matters anyway; and I am a diver and explosives expert by trade...so it works for me).

I can say that (without any other information) 40 lb/min of air is always greater than 39 lb/min of air.... I need no more information. When you only look at PSI; you will always have to qualify that information. I am not sure how much more succinct I can be.



EDIT: Followed your link.
I see now where you are getting your adiabatic efficiency info.... not from me; and not from any of my posts... if you are trying to have multiple arguments online; please keep them straight.

I noticed this was the second time you mentioned extrapolating the curve from 4.7 volts beyond. Question: Does it make a difference that the #s I am seeing are all below 4.69V??

Thanks for participating in this discussion publicly, as well as the encouragement.

-Yambo

Is your MAF factory sized? Did anyone at Pettit scale it?

If your Volts are all lower than the factory scale... then someone would have to have scaled that bad boy I am pretty sure.

And pre / post the tuning work etc.... did you cahnge any of the intake set-up?

see what a shitstorm your maf readings started morkus - the internet is fun isn't it ?

On a side note; I think it is good that Kane joined this discussion, because it has led to some discussion about things I am not familiar with. Having said that, since its my stupid posts that led to this, I ask that Joff and Kane not get personal(even if only intellectuals understand some of what they are saying) and stay in this discussion.

With everything that has been said up to this point(and my interpretation of it) I still don't know if what I am seeing is wrong or right.

-Yambo

Pettit's MAF housing is stock diameter, so any voltage above 4.7V you see corresponds to some unknown MAF value greater than 365g/s and anything under that value corresponds to less than 365g/s. What I meant by "extrapolating the curve" was that it seems possible to add (e.g.) an arbitrary entry into the calibration for something like 4.8V = 400 g/s if you actually could flow that much, which we can't.

Please understand Yambo that neither Kane or I think what you're doing is wrong. You obviously have a tune that works and without even needing to understand the physics. We are just background noise in the shadow of your accomplishment. The only disputed issue here is whether whats being reported by OBD2 on your logs as g/s is still accurate to make other predictions and comparisons with.

Kane thought I was talking about him when I said "turbo tuners bad at math" and proceeded to get on a soapbox about pressure vs. flow. The misunderstanding was that I was merely poking fun at turbo guys that believe in some "magic pixie dust" coming out of turbos that they use to balance the math when their logs show them constant boost pressure and steady IATs with wildly varying flow. Instead of critically thinking and understanding the reason for this, they just predictably chant in unison: "its all about the flow, its all about the flow" and then manufacture some (wrong) rationale from the better adiabatic efficiency of the compressor wheel. I was never talking about Kane or any particular tuner -- I actually was thinking of somebody on rx7club.com when I wrote it.

Really -- if everybody here were less sensitive and points were brought up in slightly different ways, there would be no "drama" here as basically Kane and I have the same (I think) understanding of things.

I am confused if Yambo is seeing 400g/sec reported by the PCM and it hasn't been scaled - then something is up....


As for me and Joff...I thought I was correcting a pretty common mistake (flow vs pressure and all that crap) and it turned into a physics lesson (some how efficiency came in for whatever reason....).

Obviously, I was being overly-sensitive...

But your still wrong joff ;)

I did scale the MAF, if scaling means changing the expected flow numbers based on voltage. I made those changes for two reasons: 1/The datalogs were showing the higher g/s #s up to 6k rpm than were programmed into the original scale. 2/I had to just to be able to drive the car above 6k rpm because the AFRs were leaning out from 11-something to 13-something at that point. Maybe they would have leaned out even more, but I allways lifted throttle before finding out. Also, I did not change any of the voltage #s. I have that ability with the AP, but have not tried it yet. My max g/s happens below 4.69V.

-Yambo

see what a shitstorm your maf readings started morkus - the internet is fun isn't it ?

I know, right?!? But you have to admit this has been much more civil than some of the shenanigans that have happened in the past:uhh:

-Yambo

I'm not trying to discredit yambos numbers since I think there are plenty of reasons he could reach them.
I logged some strange numbers out of my MAF yesterday. I converted back to NA to fit a new cooler and logger 226g/s @7200rpm and wasn't even at full throttle. that equates to a 135% load. the engine isn't even mapped past 125%. it beats hymee's base line na engine dyno numbers 1000rpm earlier and I know my motor isn't that strong. I'll have to try and do some more runs to see if I can replicate it.

On the MAF reading;
Doesn't cold dense air read higher on the MAF?

Or am I just dense?

But you're still wrong joff

You just don't give up do you?

I did scale the MAF, if scaling means changing the expected flow numbers based on voltage.

What dya know -- I was right all along Kane. How do you like them apples? :lol:


that his increased mass of air could be a result of temperature / elevation / timing / etc... and that the change from old to new is valid... even if the 400g/s is not 100% accurate.


Lets do some math shall we? How about we find out what needs to change in the environment to accomodate a 80-100g/s rise in MAF flow on a twin-screw. For exercise purposes, lets say we see what it takes for 80g/s rise to morkus's 411g/s reading.

Lets say baseline (-80g/s) MAF reading was done at sea level maybe at around 60degF.

80g/s extra air (331g/s -> 411g/s) ends up being about 24% more air density. Now, lets see how much the temperature would have to drop at the same altitude/humidity to realize this delta.

Density of dry winter air at sea level at 60degF(15C/288K) = 1.206 kg/m^3

Okay -- so this + 24% is = 1.496 kg/m^3

Air would have to change density to 1.496 kg/m^3 to accomodate a +80 g/s extra flow rate.

What temperature is that? ... solving for T in 1.496 = 100000 / ( T * 287.05) =

-42 degrees fahrenheit. Thats damn cold. Over a 100degF advantage in ambient temps would be required to accomodate that flow difference! Did it get that cold in lower Alabama yesterday yambo?

You can do the math for elevation. Keep in mind yambo seems to be in lower Alabama and the current best flow I think was taken in Florida.

Looking forward to hearing what inconsequential detail I left out this time...

Its not scaled the same as Deon scaled the Pettit tune. No, I didnt ask anyone but its a thought.

Come on guys. Keep it civil so we can all learn something here.

I don't know if it means anything, but it was less than 40 degrees outside when I recorded those #s.

Also, did you notice a gain while tunning or on a colder day. was there an immediate change in maf when you dumped the base tune from Pettit to the AP, I think I remember Jeff saying somthing about he should do that because it was the rite thing to do, he hadent done it yet.

Check this out:

http://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php?p=2845661&postcount=162

Had fun driving back home from Juan's (aka Smooth Jazz Rotary Yoda) Saturday night. The Sunday morning traditional drive to get fresh baked bread was even more fun. I can't wait to see what this car can do after a tune.

nice dude--nice. I love beta testers!!
The blues are holding ya? The temps staying down?
The real tests will be this summer.
OD

nice dude--nice. I love beta testers!!
The blues are holding ya? The temps staying down?
The real tests will be this summer.
OD

After beating the piss out of it the highest temp I saw was 208F. I think I can survive an autocross event this summer, but we'll see. By then I will probably have the JuanSport supplemental radiator mod. :lol2:

I'm actually using modded yellows, matched at 570 ccs each. I'm getting 11.0-11.4 AFRs, so It'll definitely need a retune. I also need to retune my driving style.

AGGGGGG_--- does make one desire to be a beta!!!
OD

Dont forget about these, I sent Pettit a brand new flow pan a month ago Cam and Moon are now working out all the kinks included a electronically controlled valve so I can cut the flow in the winter...


http://f.imagehost.org/0374/cooling_20solution2.jpg
http://f.imagehost.org/0523/cooling_20solution3.jpg
http://f.imagehost.org/0719/cooling_20solution6.jpg

Thread jack- Have you ever run out of gas and either pushed your car or costed to the next gas station, well!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z985xdXW-3w

I was originally not sure how to take Joffs last post; since I kinda wanted to get my Irish up... which is stupid.

Those that know me personally I think can atest to the fact that ego doesn't really drive my life (or they can all think I am a pretentious a-hole; you never know); and I could rather care less if I am thought badly of someone I will never likely meet... but what I do care about is the people who are trying to get into this stuff keep making mistakes because those that know WTF is going on are too lazy to speak clearly in a public forum... I have an FI-ed car... I don't need myself to tell myself how to build or tune it. But I want everyone to have as much fun as I do; and if I can get peoples head around the physics and math involved then maybe a few more will.

So - I am going to assume among all the cross talk we missed the actual timeline and the core of the argument in order for me to be called out for being a stupid, fanboi seeking individual... I have re-capped the issues in the assumption that I was misunderstood.

I am not going to argue with you. But just so you have something else to think about, I consistently saw 330g/s with my tune from pettit on stock pulleys. Search the internet, or whatever source you wish, and you will find examples of cars with @ the same amount of boost making 60% gains or more over stock.

-Yambo so a Delta from 330g/s to 400g/s.... but we now know things were scaled; kinda of a mute point anyway. But this started it all. An 18%-20% change due to timing / tuning and air temps???? Yeah that would be freaking Impossible.....:banghead:

Just stopping by.. good reading so far.

Brettus et al; just keep thinking FLOW not Pressure! The same size pully will flow different masses of air based on temp; restrictions, motor compression, etc... even at the same PSI numbers. My original statement... that is the entire post; no other "turbo bullshit" was in there. I am not Jeff.

I'm pretty sure morkusyambo's higher MAF readings are due to the fact he rescaled his MAF voltage to g/s table with the accessport. This is a kludge I'm told you're forced into with tuning on the AP. Its not that he magically unlocked significantly more boost or flow with simple fuel/ignition tuning -- thats just silly. - 18%-20% More (a lot but not impossible - but it diesn't matter anyway cause I never said flow accounted for all of the change anyway)......I agree with some of what you are saying... and that was why I asked more than once if the intake was changed or tuned. But so far I haven't done anything except the bold line above.

The unmodified MAF table doesn't even have voltage -> flow mappings above (IIRC) 365 g/s (approx 4.7 volts) You can change/add entries into the interpolation table for voltage/MAF pairs above 4.7V/365g by extrapolating the curve, but its anybody's guess what the real MAF values for voltages above 4.7V really are in stock diameter MAF housings. Even if you did have access to calibrated flow bench equipment to extend the voltage -> flow table, my experience with other types of sensors is that when you get close to the limits of the sensor, they become wildly inconsistant and will vary from sensor to sensor so reports of any readings above 4.7V/365g should be taken with a grain of salt.

In light of this fact, what everybody probably should be comparing instead of MAF numbers is MAF sensor voltages in stock diameter housings. That is a great idea - if everyone used the stock scale....

Thinking in terms of flow versus pressure is a compromise the turbo folks bad at math make because of inaccurate pressure measurement. (The statement I called out) Turbo's create variable exhaust backpressure that not only can impede power, but it re-expands in the carry-over volume from the exhaust -> intake cycle and fights boost in the manifold. This, combined with the aerodynamics of the sensor placement, seems to me whats making turbo tuners distrustful of boost measurement. The exhaust backpressure in a supercharger setup is 1) much less and 2)more predictable and boost tracks with MAF much better than on a turbo from the logs I've seen.

Now read my info....

That is why I go off of fuel.

ALL of these measurements are relative; even fuel is since injectors have a variance and not everyone get's theirs flow tested. But I find the fuel volume to be the most accurate for tuning.

IE - if you flow 1 lb/min of fuel and your AFR's are 10:1 then you can be pretty sure your moving 10 lb/min of air.

The problem with the AP is that is doesn't read injector durations directly... I am still trying to figure out if we can work around that.

As for the flow vs pressure thing....


Um, no - a) we have no port overlap (my point here was that since we don't have a ton of air reversion - variable backpressure isn't a huge deal unless proved otherwise... but still not the original argument....) b) if you can prove that 10 PSI of pressure is the same flow rate regardless of other variables - I'll give you $100. There you go - my entire "argumentative" sensitive turbo gayness statement... and I am still right.

I may not be that good at math; but I have forgotten more about air pressure than most people will ever know.

So now we can go back to the PPO2 argument et al.... if you are bored. Or you can skip to the part where you agree with me....

Since other necessary parameters are not defined in the setup to the question, you also can not prove X is not equal to Y without adding more parameters. Here's an analogy to highlight the absurdity of your question:

So ultimately.... what you are TRYING to say is this...
Once again; Flow is king (when I say flow I think PPO2; why cause it is all that really matters anyway; and I am a diver and explosives expert by trade...so it works for me).

I can say that (without any other information) 40 lb/min of air is always greater than 39 lb/min of air.... I need no more information. When you only look at PSI; you will always have to qualify that information. I am not sure how much more succinct I can be.


So once more... no $100 for you.

If anyone doesn't understand what it is I am trying to say please let me know. If you disagree with my information show me the math so I can refine my thoughts.... if you just want to be a toolbag; then I'm gonna ignore you. If you wanna be an e-thug then don't beat around the bush... just call me a homo and we can skip to the end of the argument.

What's wrong with being a ...................

HEH HEH....

I just bumped my own toolbag thread.

http://f.imagehost.org/0719/cooling_20solution6.jpg

that is a shit load of cooling ya got there ......

not yet but it will be going on my car in spring, thats actually Cam's car...

Dont forget about these, I sent Pettit a brand new flow pan a month ago Cam and Moon are now working out all the kinks included a electronically controlled valve so I can cut the flow in the winter...


http://f.imagehost.org/0374/cooling_20solution2.jpg
http://f.imagehost.org/0523/cooling_20solution3.jpg
http://f.imagehost.org/0719/cooling_20solution6.jpg
Not having been to Flordia in 50 or so years, I don't remember the high temps there during the summer and the road surface temps. I think it's a great idea, looks good but I'm not sure it would work here in Vegas during the summer. The heat reflecting off the road surface is too great. During the really hot days, the asphalt is soft it's so hot (trucks can leave impressions of their weight at intersections). There would be no water in the air to aid cooling. My first impression would be that it would aid heating not cooling (in the summer). I understand heat transfer and if one of you can explain how this would not do the opposite of what is intended I will listen very closely.

I would think that it would work even in Vegas, as long as your not sitting idle for long periods of time. Those radiators are oriented parallel to the ground, so as your moving, I believe both sides are getting blasted by the air, but it favors the air from above, as I think they have some plastic channeling the air downwards into the radiators. It wouldn't work as well, given the lack of humidity, but I still think it would help. Plus you have a greater volume of coolant, that probably helps some too.

You are not a homo, stupid, or a toolbag (whatever that is) -- you're just fun. People take internet arguments so seriously around here. It will soon be a lost sport I fear -- sort of like how many sci-fi utopian visions imply we will ban all sports someday because everybody gets so emotionally hurt when the other team scores. At the end of a game, winners do not call the losers homos and the losers do not seek vengeance outside the arena -- they shake hands and say "good game"

I was originally not sure how to take Joffs last post; since I kinda wanted to get my Irish up... which is stupid.

Those that know me personally I think can atest to the fact that ego doesn't really drive my life


In my experience, people that go on a soapbox about how ego doesn't drive their life -- well -- ego usually drives their life, and they just don't know it yet. Theres really nothing wrong with it as long as you are conscious of it.


So once more... no $100 for you.


Back to that $100 huh? I thought we were done with this. I did have a $100 challenge for you too ya know. Good argument tactic though -- it showed that you were very motivated by ego to prove me wrong and wanted to bring the full brunt of your credibility to the party, which made all this more fun.


If anyone doesn't understand what it is I am trying to say please let me know.


Is this the point of this post? To ask if everybody understands? You are so keen on playing the teacher role here aren't you. Everybody understands flow vs. pressure here (its not rocket science) and that was never the debate, the debate was explaining morkusyambo's MAF readings.

If anything, in explaining the MAF readings, I was bringing up to the class a related discrepancy between flow and constant pressure, volume and temperature for turbo tuners. Normally -- in a classroom setting -- only the teacher is allowed to say when we're going to the next chapter and any student saying so is viewed as subordinate. Maybe thats why you raised the $100 challenge -- a last resort argument to regain control over the class from a troublemaker student on his first day at a new school.

I apologize to thread readers for this off-topic post (I really thought Kane was done with this). I talked to Cam at 7stock about that floorpan radiator setup he was cooking up -- very similar as a sort of hybrid V-mount setup which is very common and effective on FDs. Its great to see it real -- any idea when he's thinking on selling it? Is the floorpan still the same plastic piece or was that new too?

its the stock piece and they utilize two of the a/w intercooler heat exchangers for this job also. It works and all rx8's need it not just the fi guys.
OD

yup, notice the top pic, this is where Cam and Moon are experimenting with how much air flow to direct down through the assembly with different sized scoops... also the final item upon my request was a way to deactivate it during winter(up here its cold) so at first they discussed a manual valve, now on the sketchboard is a electronically controlled valve that could have a switch in the cockpit...

for those that are unaware this system is feed through a non thermostatically controlled supply. Its the return heater hose. It is routed back through the radiator side gap to feed into the thermostat housing as the heater hose normally would.
The electronically controlled thermostat yall are speaking of would affect the heater as the heater would not have any flow until it opens.
I have ran mine (with the stock thermostat) when ambient is at 30F and it took only maybe 3 mins to warm up to 140F. I warmed the car for approx 2 mins idling after cranking and then 1 min of very low load driving(not over 3K). It did fully warm to 180F (coolant and oil) with in 5-7 miles at approx 45mph.
Northen folks may want more warming ability--but for the southeast its not needed.
OD

After beating the piss out of it the highest temp I saw was 208F. I think I can survive an autocross event this summer, but we'll see. By then I will probably have the JuanSport supplemental radiator mod. :lol2:

I'm actually using modded yellows, matched at 570 ccs each. I'm getting 11.0-11.4 AFRs, so It'll definitely need a retune. I also need to retune my driving style.

What cooling upgrades do you have? What water/coolant split?

What cooling upgrades do you have? What water/coolant split?

From the original Pettit setup, only bigger intercooler reservoire with a rerouted return hose (away from the alternator), and water/methanol injection. I'm sure 208F is not where I'd be in the heat of the Florida summer if I drive it hard, as I'm now running signifcantly more boost. I will definitely get the extra heat exchangers before this summer.

I autocrossed June/July/August/September of last year at least once each month (with only 8-9 lbs of boost), and my engine still pulls 19 inHG of vacuum at normal operating temperatures.

Well, I'm still not sure what to make of my MAF readings, but I created my own tune with the AP(took me a long time) and I am enjoying it. If Joff, or anyone else with an AP wants to try it, let me know and i'll send you the map. My disclaimer is that it is still a work in progress, and is VERY aggressive in the bottom 2/3 of the powerband. Use at your own risk. I take no responsibility for what happens.

-Yambo

Well, I'm still not sure what to make of my MAF readings, but I created my own tune with the AP(took me a long time) and I am enjoying it. If Joff, or anyone else with an AP wants to try it, let me know and i'll send you the map. My disclaimer is that it is still a work in progress, and is VERY aggressive in the bottom 2/3 of the powerband. Use at your own risk. I take no responsibility for what happens.

-Yambo

I think you probably did the right thing by scaling the MAF. My best guess is that the reason everybody is finding they have to scale the MAF is because at high flow rates our fuel pressure is dropping and the effective fuel pressure across the injector -> manifold junction is less because of the presence of boost in the manifold. The stock ECU algorithms probably (?) are not accomodating this sufficiently and we have to tell the ECU there is more air going into the engine than there really is to force the ECU to give us the right injector duty cycle. The injector flow may also be slightly non-linear with higher duty cycles which may not be figured in by the ECU either.

Basically, what you're doing is calibrating out fuel system inconsitencies with your MAF -- not the other way around (calibrating your MAF with your O2 sensor and fuel injectors) Your MAF in its stock calibration is as good as Mazda originally designed in -- hard to improve on that.

If you wouldn't mind, please send me your tune to joff@embeddedARM.com -- I'd very much like to see it.

i wouldnt doubt fuel issues at all in the upper bands ---see my battle with the fuel pump x 2 yrs--i have warned several that the pumps capacity is very much at risk--with no warnings beforehand.
it is one of the reasons i try not to go over 8K in the car. we are operating at 100% duty cycle.
it seems the 09's pump is better and as soon as mazmart cant get it inventoried i will have one. They have made several changes.
i do need a fuel pressure gauge----sigh
od

Joff, I just sent you the file

-Yambo

Had fun driving back home from Juan's (aka Smooth Jazz Rotary Yoda) Saturday night. :eyetwitch

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/yoda-1.jpg

“I went over to Juan's house yesterday morning, and spent all of the morning and most of an afternoon listening to testosterone reducing Smooth Jazz 94.1FM. Fortunately we were also installing some headers, some bigger fuel injectors, a bigger crank pulley, and some engine bay bling which sort of helped balance out the testosterone levels a little bit. (Juan's the man, don't let his taste in music fool you)”

Keep making fun of my garage ambiance music cuz I have an outfit for you to wear after I smoke your car on the 13th at Moroso. :eyetwitch

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/clown.jpg

“I went over to Juan's house yesterday morning, and spent all of the morning and most of an afternoon listening to testosterone reducing Smooth Jazz 94.1FM. Fortunately we were also installing some headers, some bigger fuel injectors, a bigger crank pulley, and some engine bay bling which sort of helped balance out the testosterone levels a little bit. (Juan's the man, don't let his taste in music fool you)”

Keep making fun of my garage ambiance music cuz I have an outfit for you to wear after I smoke your car on the 13th at Moroso. :eyetwitch



hahahahah! Your images are becoming more and more disturbing :)

It's on like donkey kong, beeeeotch. Hopefully we won't break an axle.

Not having been to Flordia in 50 or so years, I don't remember the high temps there during the summer and the road surface temps. I think it's a great idea, looks good but I'm not sure it would work here in Vegas during the summer. The heat reflecting off the road surface is too great. During the really hot days, the asphalt is soft it's so hot (trucks can leave impressions of their weight at intersections). There would be no water in the air to aid cooling. My first impression would be that it would aid heating not cooling (in the summer). I understand heat transfer and if one of you can explain how this would not do the opposite of what is intended I will listen very closely.

Another idea that were going to incorperate is the ability to add another set of coolers in that are kinda humping the original set with moduler ducting. The idea is get as much cooling area out of the hot zone as possible. Especialy in places like Arizona. You do have a good point of how hot the pavment gets but since you have alot more surface area and the heat is channled in the front and out the bottom at even the slightest foward motion im sure its gona help alot.

i wouldnt doubt fuel issues at all in the upper bands ---see my battle with the fuel pump x 2 yrs--i have warned several that the pumps capacity is very much at risk--with no warnings beforehand.
it is one of the reasons i try not to go over 8K in the car. we are operating at 100% duty cycle.
it seems the 09's pump is better and as soon as mazmart cant get it inventoried i will have one. They have made several changes.
i do need a fuel pressure gauge----sigh
od

I aggree I m still having problems with startups a gas stations, I can only derive that it has to do with the fuel pimp...

I aggree I m still having problems with startups a gas stations, I can only derive that it has to do with the fuel pimp...

That's the only time my car stalls as well. It doesn't do it every time I get gas, but often enough to be noticed.

yup thats exactly what happens and I premix everyother time I visit a gas station and those are the only times it happens so I definately think it has to do with the fuel pump...

Folks, have you ever try using good old Marvel Mystery Oil? I use it on all my cars with no issues whatsoever. When I removed the fuel pump at 33k the screener looked cleaned.

I ran the last quarter mile pass at Moroso, the last autocross run last month and last night log with the low fuel yellow indicator light on without noticing any fuel starvation issues. :eyetwitch

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/Presentation1-1.jpg

I've used MMO in every car I have ever owned including this one. My car now has over 100k, at least 25 of which have been boosted. No fueling issues whatsoever. Put a quart in the crankcase during an oil change and one in a full fuel tank every month or two.

-Yambo

you mean that atf + kerosene stuff---lol. Yep that is what I have started using for the last couple months or so. I even dropped some in the tranny:) Believe it or not --it helped with the noise.

Ok--need advice----has anyone pulled a lower intake without pulling the engine?
I havent done it yet--but the way I see it--it should not be a real problem. Just will have to remove passenger motor mount and lossen the drivers side + all the usual stuff?
My super duper, custom, one of a kind, purty, lighter and atomic powered lower intake is ready to go on and I have a REAL phenolic gasket for it. Plus I have made a custom heat shield between the exhaust header and the intake.
I am even thinking of removing the steel lining inside the exhaust header to increase the internal diameters some.
I dont think this is going to affect my tune any---not really. The volumne of flow may be increased slightly due to smoothing out the inside of the intake runners , but this is post maf and I dont think it will be THAT much of a change. WIll watch carefully however.
Advice on the swap?
OD

Advice on the swap?OD

Yes, take lots of pictures.

Also, I ported/polished my intake and polished the entrance of my Pettit intake last week. Give it a try as it might help also. Sorry no pics. :eyetwitch

smarty--now i can take LOTS of pics--hope i can rememebr how I posted the last bunch
OD

Denny, try reading this its as easy as pie http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=164860,,, I use Imagehost.org.

Off to the track to watch Bill in his champ car. Man this is gona be fun.

Off to the track to watch Bill in his champ car. Man this is gona be fun.

Take pictures and videos if you can.

Another idea that were going to incorperate is the ability to add another set of coolers in that are kinda humping the original set with moduler ducting. The idea is get as much cooling area out of the hot zone as possible. Especialy in places like Arizona. You do have a good point of how hot the pavment gets but since you have alot more surface area and the heat is channled in the front and out the bottom at even the slightest foward motion im sure its gona help alot.
I don''t seem to have much an overheating problem while moving (unless I push it hard) so what I have is close to adequate for highway driving. Unfortunately I have to get to the highways and that is stop and go driving that kills me for overheating. Shutting down the air conditioner and blasting the heater is not something I enjoy doing when it's 117+ out there.

Now we have done several things to the complete system this winter and the problem may not return but I am pessimistic with the heating problems of this car. The pan coolers may be viable to pass some of the heat off. Let's see what happens this summer.

Ill tell you what, ill build the first 4 core unit and have you test it. How does that sound?? Call Cam jr and ask him to order the plastic pan. I have 1 order sofar but that pans for Greg and im sure itl cover 105 temps seen on the east coast. Yours will probly get tied into 2 different locations.

Moon Phil may need an extra fan for stop and go--since he is in a extreme demand area?
with 4 coolers he will have a little extra coolant volumne also and a timer delay may be good to address parked heat soak issues? Just brainstorming here.
He may also need the 180degree thermostat set up?
If nothing else he can strap 2 bags of minute market ice on top of the coolers!!
OD

On an AT - i would go with putting the extra rad. where the 2nd oil cooler goes on an MT and stick a fan behind it for for hot climates/heavy traffic .
I have that setup (less the fan) and no cooling issues whatsoever on my 6MT .....

On an AT - i would go with putting the extra rad. where the 2nd oil cooler goes on an MT and stick a fan behind it for for hot climates/heavy traffic .
I have that setup (less the fan) and no cooling issues whatsoever on my 6MT .....

I hope you put a real tranny cooler there phil. Think about it, the stocker gets as hot as your rad and if your engine overheats so does the tranny fluid.

thats a nice idea Brettus...

Ill tell you what, ill build the first 4 core unit and have you test it. How does that sound?? Call Cam jr and ask him to order the plastic pan. I have 1 order sofar but that pans for Greg and im sure itl cover 105 temps seen on the east coast. Yours will probly get tied into 2 different locations.

I need to see what is going to happen with the changes that are already made. If they do not work then it's time for radical changes. Some of my knee jerk experiments with other problems were not necessary and if I had just held off a little longer I would have saved both money and time. They say that when you get old you get more patient.......not me. My complaining here was out of my pessimism with the past heating problems. As summer approaches (quickly here) I will know and then I may be PMing you.:uhh:

Bad News…Good News

I little bird (well more like a Dodo Bird) just informed me that someone is having issues with clutch slippage after upgrading his Pettit SC and increase of whp. Not to worry fellow Pettit SC owner cuz it is Juan to the rescue. Just get a new Exedy Stage 1 plus an aluminum flywheel and we can hook the brother up, yo.

The good news you wonder…

Well let’s say I just upgraded my garage totally obsolete tiny radio to a one of a kind mega blast dream come true ultra ghey smooth jazz music radio 80’s boomboxes garage wall. The clutch/flywheel swap should take @ 4 hours give or take how much you bitch about my music selection. :eyetwitch

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/group.jpg

/\ cool boom box collection . That's a new one to me ...
Tell Bastage to worrring about pussy magnets and get his slippage sorted

What's a clutch???:):) Now marsredr100 has class with the smooth jazz: Sirus chanel 71 Watercolors:celebrate

hahah!

Yeah, I'm totally having some slippage issues now. I noticed on Monday during a few throttle mashing momments on the way home from work. When I finally got home I got a good whiff of what's left of the clutch. I can shift through the gears ok, but any mashing of the throttle becomes counterproductive.

I haven't launched the car yet, and I don't think I want to until I get this issue resolved.

New lightweight flywheel and new exedy stage I (or II) coming soon.

Man, this will never end.

Bad News…Good News

I little bird (well more like a Dodo Bird) just informed me that someone is having issues with clutch slippage after upgrading his Pettit SC and increase of whp. Not to worry fellow Pettit SC owner cuz it is Juan to the rescue. Just get a new Exedy Stage 1 plus an aluminum flywheel and we can hook the brother up, yo.

The good news you wonder…

Well let’s say I just upgraded my garage totally obsolete tiny radio to a one of a kind mega blast dream come true ultra ghey smooth jazz music radio 80’s boomboxes garage wall. The clutch/flywheel swap should take @ 4 hours give or take how much you bitch about my music selection. :eyetwitch



Ear plugs, or I can bring my headphones and an iPod and we'll both be happy :)

Bad News…Good News

I little bird (well more like a Dodo Bird) just informed me that someone is having issues with clutch slippage after upgrading his Pettit SC and increase of whp. Not to worry fellow Pettit SC owner cuz it is Juan to the rescue. Just get a new Exedy Stage 1 plus an aluminum flywheel and we can hook the brother up, yo.

The good news you wonder…

Well let’s say I just upgraded my garage totally obsolete tiny radio to a one of a kind mega blast dream come true ultra ghey smooth jazz music radio 80’s boomboxes garage wall. The clutch/flywheel swap should take @ 4 hours give or take how much you bitch about my music selection. :eyetwitch

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/group.jpg

Do you have a seprate breaker for all those. Looks like sublims house after that 1 brick made that window drop.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGAs-i32t5c

Ear plugs, or I can bring my headphones and an iPod and we'll both be happy :)

I have somthing from back in the day. I used to use them in the engine rooms to listen to music while I was workin. Call it a Moonguyver. Im pretty sure they even worked with the 50cal.

Ear plugs, or I can bring my headphones and an iPod and we'll both be happy :)

Sure bring all your safety equipment and fancy state of the art sound equipment. I must warn you that it could get very loud. See what happened to my garage door window. :eyetwitch

BTW, let’s not get too happy while working in the garage if you know what I mean. :nono:

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/broken-window2.jpg

Do you have a seprate breaker for all those.

Negative Ghost Rider. I have my own way to plug all the boomboxes and I do tape the breaker in the on position. So far, so good. :eyetwitch

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/ElectricalMaintenance_02.jpg

Sure bring all your safety equipment and fancy state of the art sound equipment. I must warn you that it could get very loud. See what happened to my garage door window. :eyetwitch

BTW, let’s not get to happy while working in the garage if you know what I mean. :nono:

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/broken-window2.jpg

$20 theres either 1 a brick on the other side, 2 a 80s boom box on the other side, 3 hammer, lol.

Negative Ghost Rider. I have my own way to plug all the boomboxes and I do tape the breaker in the on position. So far, so good. :eyetwitch

http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm205/doorcombo/ElectricalMaintenance_02.jpg

Man, I just choked on what I was eating. Taping that breaker up ey.

i will listen out on my back deck---changing pilot bearing??? heheheheh---good luck!
OD

http://www.rotaryeng.net/16B.jpg
mine
OD

Ear plugs, or I can bring my headphones and an iPod and we'll both be happy :)

do not buy a new one.

i have a really almost new one.. you can look at it..

stage 1. and the upgraded to bearing to boot.

beers :beer:

do not buy a new one.

i have a really almost new one.. you can look at it..

stage 1. and the upgraded to bearing to boot.

beers :beer:

PMed

well found out that the mazsport double resonated midpipe(love it) will not allow the beat rush trans brace to be used---it hangs too low and the brace will not clear it---anyone want one at a discount?
OD

the brace or the midpipe???

the midpipe is too big to allow the brace to fit--hangs too low and one re senator is in the wrong place.
so i have an axial flow short shifter and beat rush trans brace for sale!!!
od

Are you not happy with your AFE SS???

yea i like it, ran it for over 2 yrs. but as i was waiting for an updated knob i placed my oem one back in and i found out that the a s s likes a trans in which the synco's are in good shape.
when they are not---like mine--it makes it noisier and 4 th gear grinds. with the oem --now my old trans is quiet and doesnt grind.
OD

OD, have you upgraded your clutch pedal yet? I also had grinding in 4th, as well as the AFSS, and the grinding went away once I installed a reinforced pedal.

done that long time ago.--adjusted it also many differant ways-- even made sure the ppf was right. Dont ask.
OD

done that long time ago.--adjusted it also many differant ways-- even made sure the ppf was right. Dont ask.
OD

denny,

call me.. pm coming.. i think i know what it is.. i noticed it as mazcare..

beers :beer:

If the trans is grinding, then it is grinding. If one shifter masks the sound of it, it doesn't mean it isn't happening still!!

Cheers,
Hymee.

If the trans is grinding, then it is grinding. If one shifter masks the sound of it, it doesn't mean it isn't happening still!!

Cheers,
Hymee.

+1 :eyetwitch

+1 :eyetwitch

funny,

i talked to rp today. mentioned something i noticed. hey, but what do i know..

and you have my #.!

btw, this is tread crapping..

beers :beer:

It is if your gonna be that generic
Care to share? many of us have the AFE SS and I know I have tranny noise, specifically in 2nd 4th and 6th gears so I think my Synchros are goin...
Anyone got any advice...

It is if your gonna be that generic
Care to share? many of us have the AFE SS and I know I have tranny noise, specifically in 2nd 4th and 6th gears so I think my Synchros are goin...
Anyone got any advice...

does not involve that. maybe start a thread about your poblems. or pm is a great idea.. :)

beers :beer:

not the first time thats happend..

:rollingla

does not involve that. maybe start a thread about your poblems. or pm is a great idea.. :)

beers :beer:

Or maybe because Im a Pettit owner I can talk about whatever the F*** I want in here, biatch!!!:)

exactly Hymlee---bad syncos do not go away with a shifter change---it only made it liveable a little while longer.
I know it was the synco as when double clutching--it goes away. The oem shifter pushs/pulls things slower therefore more liveable at present? I would still have my ss in if the trans was good. i still remember going from redline in 3nd to 2nd at Road Atlanta with the oem in!
But -- I am willing to sell mine if someone wants it--its all relative. My trans issues (other than a little noise) has nothing to do with the ss. Period.
I used too much Royal Purple in it maybe?
Rote 8---pm me any news
OD

and you have my #.!

beers :beer:

867-5309??? :eyetwitch

late will call tomorrow night.
OD

Another thread jack, this has gota be the sickest looking critter ive ever seen.

Another thread jack, this has gota be the sickest looking critter ive ever seen.

New Pettit mascot?
:)

YEA!!!
Well--- i hooked up a vacuum gauge with boost readings on it also and ran around awhile. I dont know how accurate the gauge is but it seemed my system kinda struggled to get to 8 lbs and that was after 7K. Is that about normal---or maybe by bypass valve (turbotecnic something) needs "upgrading"
That was with the w/m on.
OD

I usually somewhere between 7-8lbs when WOT, and usually tappers back down to 6-7lbs by the time im reachin 8500-8600rpms,,,

OK then--thanks
WHats new--anything?
OD

I'll ask again since it was really wasn't talked about when I first asked...
I get a really loud raspy airflow noice near high rpms with different throttle positions,,,
Its not the ports its almost like something comes loose and is blowing in the wind, like a small flag in a hurricane(thats the best I can do for a description of the noise)...
It comes in under throttle and is anywhere from 53000-8Krpms depending on engine load,,,
It doesnt seem to effect my performance and generally my needle in my boost gauge stays put during the transition into the noise...

Anyone have any ideas???...

What are your logs telling you??? You need to be watching them since your having that stalling after a fillup and suspect your fuel pump might be on its way out.

Well I dont need data to tell me my cars stalling,,,, but my last log contains a run where I got the noise and a stall at a light,,,, Ill look at them now,,,
ohh if you've been trying to call me Moon my phone is down and probably wont be up til next week...

Okay guys. I had to know for sure if I was making any improvements. I reset the MAF scaling back to stock. I figured out another way to keep my AFRs in check. Keep in mind my MAF scale is now the same as yours and Pettits'. How does 360g/s sound?? Ambient temp of @65.

-Yambo

That sounds pretty good. Good job. Now you gotta share the tune, lol.

I saw my highest this week as well 344g/s

Ive been doing some reading up on the 09s, seems they only have 4 injectors wether man or auto.

Juan and I are heading down to Pettit/PBIR tomorrow for some drag race action. Although my car will be sidelined, I am bringing a fairly high horsepower camera to record the action for everyone's enjoyment (ok, mostly mine).

Hopefully by the time I get back from the event a nice box from UPS containing the Exedy Stage I clutch kit will be waiting for me on my desk.

Hmmm, just got in my 1000 mile break in. Contemplating a before and after run. The only thing that sucks is I have 225 tiny tires but traction isnt an issue yet so I might just hold off. Im in the market for a good deal on a sexy staggered set of 18 rims, maybe a 285 rear and a 265 front.

See ya at the shop. Bring your cam.

Juan and I are heading down to Pettit/PBIR tomorrow for some drag race action. Although my car will be sidelined, I am bringing a fairly high horsepower camera to record the action for everyone's enjoyment (ok, mostly mine).

Hopefully by the time I get back from the event a nice box from UPS containing the Exedy Stage I clutch kit will be waiting for me on my desk.

hmmm ? only a Stg I would think you would want a Stg II,,,
I just ordered a Spec Stg II... Semi aggressive street use, AutoX, and track events...

hmmm ? only a Stg I would think you would want a Stg II,,,
I just ordered a Spec Stg II... Semi aggressive street use, AutoX, and track events...

I'm much nicer to my clutch now that I'm no longer a rookie with a manual transmission (this is the first MT car I've owned). I didn't learn to drive stick with this car, but I might as well have. I think Stage I will be good enough to last me a while. This clutch lasted 36k, the Stage I will hopefully last twice as long.

With the kind of power in our 8s now theres not that much of a need for super aggressive shifting,,,

Are you also getting a lightened flywheel???

With the kind of power in our 8s now theres not that much of a need for super aggressive shifting,,,

Are you also getting a lightened flywheel???

ACT Prolite

Good choice,,,
Just remeber break in time, as tempting as it may be you deffinately dont wann glaze your clutch...

I'll give it about three gas tanks worth of city driving... at least.

Really fast break in, rev you motor till it bounces off the rev limiter, stick it in 2nd then drop the clutch. Just kidding.

That sounds pretty good. Good job. Now you gotta share the tune, lol.

I'd be more than happy to.

HMM, now how to do that without buying an AP.

Does the EFI Dude log throttle body position/duty cycle? I can't remember, and my datalogs are showing a maximum duty of 67% even though it is programmed for 84%.

Some PCM's will just log everything above XYZ % as WOT. I dunno if ours are one of those.

If that is true, and I set my maximum duty cycle to 90%, would it still say only 67% on the datalogs??

I just don't know - my flash tuner has been down with health issues since I got it....

Not sure yet, I just started playing with the EFI dude. Im comp chalenged so it takes me some time to pick it up. I have a different injector settup also. I might have to punch out my 2ndaries, dont know yet. Im gona pull alot of timming out for my first logs so I dont ping if its to lean because I cant supply the fuel. Crawl walk run. I also noticed that what I think is the 2nd OMP is in the area were the blower sits. I wont know exactly what it is till I pull the intake off but I do see a metal mounted somthing in that area. If it comes to me relocating the 2nd OMP I might have to make a new set of oil lines.

...Crawl walk run...

Army nerd...

I talked with someone on the phone earlier today who said their throttle body was showing the same 67% on the APs screen, even though they were looking right at the TB and it was wide open.

Army nerd...

LOL, well you cant forget that one can you. Your Army nerdier

HAHA - no that is a good point.

If you ever make it to Florida we gotta go sink. I like 8 pounds over weight drops and I have a good friend who owns a good dive shop.

I'll be there in May - already book the room.

I'll be there in May - already book the room.

Were, buisness or pleasure?

What kind of diving do you like???

This is totaly the funniest thing ever

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2NUVvt4R3g

I will be there for First Class Dive school - three months.

I like diving to blow shit up. ;)

I will be there for First Class Dive school - three months.

I like diving to blow shit up. ;)
Homeland Security....where are you........There is a Hawaiian terrorist on the loose!!!!:ar::yelrotflm

Yeh, and its not me I swear. But wait, who dosnt like to blow shit up. Kane, were you involved in this, lol.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rf1Bn3Rg0o&feature=related

Kane probably wasn't even born when that happened. BTW, we'll be down there sometime between 3:30 and 4:00.

See you soon.

Nope - but I did do this....

http://www.esnips.com/doc/4873b04e-3b78-4d11-ac8f-f9d15285aca7/Kwaj-Demo-from-the-ground

I talked with someone on the phone earlier today who said their throttle body was showing the same 67% on the APs screen, even though they were looking right at the TB and it was wide open.


my dudelogger logs show max. TPS at 78.43% :dunno:

Nope - but I did do this....

http://www.esnips.com/doc/4873b04e-3b78-4d11-ac8f-f9d15285aca7/Kwaj-Demo-from-the-ground

See, he admits it, Homeland Security....where are you........There is a Hawaiian terrorist on the loose!!!!:ar::yelrotflm

You'd be right a home in Vegas, they are always blowing up something.:Eyecrazy:

well Courtnay of Mazmart-- i now have a 09 fuel pump. And a long consult with Rick.
If ANYONE has ever had fuel starvation issues get the 09 pump. MUCH better design, appears to be a much better pump--install tomorrow.
There many significant changes to the assembly design.
olddragger

part of that discussion was the difference in micron size between sock and filter?

well Courtnay of Mazmart-- i now have a 09 fuel pump. And a long consult with Rick.
If ANYONE has ever had fuel starvation issues get the 09 pump. MUCH better design, appears to be a much better pump--install tomorrow.
There many significant changes to the assembly design.
olddragger

I will definately do that, let us know how the install goes...

Hey Denny...what's the part # for the pump? Is it the same unit the Supra's had?

Dan--part number is N3R1-13-35Z--can get it through mazdaspeed.
Yes Rick talked about the sock. the new sock is a fabric type and although the micron size is not known at present, it is much less restrictive when wet per the old blow test.

There are MANY changes to the 09 unit.
First the can is car specific --the older one wasnt. it is much better designed. no "overhanging lip" anymore etc
The pump is now a denso and appears MUCH better built-easily seen
The sock is much different--now fabric type, not as restricted ,more securely attached
The filter fuel outlet (fuel to the car) is now at the bottom of the filter--not the top--know why thats important?
The venturi is also at the bottom as is the fpr.
course fuel filter and sock is now replaceable.
the pump is totally in closed (except the bottom of course) but the canister is assessable.
The only thing that MAY keep this from being a plug and play is the venturi line hookup appears to be a bigger size(diameter)
Will install tomorrow
Remember we are looking for good functionality ABOVE 1/4 tank.
Swoope pm me or call? You want this pump.
OD

OD. Mind writing up a DIY for the new pump??

Hey gang. I maxed out the MAF yesterday!! It was close to 9000rpm. I wonder if I should leave the MAF curve stock, or up it a little bit?

-Yambo

+1 on that morkus,,,,
Pics would be awesome too , side by side comparos and DIY pics...

I AM WORKING ON IT AND TAKING A SMALL BREAK---WELL THE BAD NEWS IS IT AINT PLUG AND PLAY
Opps excuse the capitals--didnt realize lock was on.
It aint plug and play but all you have you do is:
1- change the fuel sender connector the earlier one will not fit in the 09 recepticle
2- the venturi hook up will have to be attached by hose and clamp. Remember that this is is not a pressured line anyway. You will have to use the special gas submersible hose--luckily i had some.
Almost done---and I HAVE PICTURES!! Its a much bigger hose than before--i dont think using the smaller hose on our cars will have any detrimental affect.
OD

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=133687&stc=1&d=1234653861\
http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=133687&stc=1&d=1234653861
lets see how this worked
Ok in the 1st pic--the 09 pump is on the right(i am editing this entry)--see how the can is taller and and a little bigger, that connector on the bottom is the venturi hookup--it is too big for our line--you have to cut the connector off the gas tank line and then mate it up to the pump line with 5/16 rated fuel hose--make sure you get the fuel hose that is rated for submerged application. It is not a pressured line--just a suction hose.
2nd pic is the sock of course--hard to tell by the picture but it is now a fabric type(like most other socks) and there is MUCH less resistance. It is now a replaceable item
OD

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=133689&stc=1&d=1234654113
I am now a pic ho!!
the assembly in my hand is the pump and filter, the pump is now totally enclosed, the small black hose is part of the venturi workings. notice how there is only one black ribbed hose from the pump assembly to the car connector, see how it feeds from the bottom of the filter
OD

So I assume from your description above that the one on the right is the 09?

ok --pump is in an appears to be working fine.
it ended up not being plug and play as stated.
The only other thing is that the pump cannot be mounted with the forward facing arrow facing forward:) The reason is due to the direction of the fuel out connector on the top of the pump--( look at pic) and the fuel line connector angle--so the pump has to be rotated so the little arrow is at approx 3 oclock so the fuel line and connector will be at the proper angle.
I do not anticipate any problem in doing this--just be sure the fuel sender wiring and the venturi hose is ok.
The sock doesnt look any bigger but as you can see it is a totally different design.
See how the fpr and the fuel out from the filter is at the bottom. Less likely to be affected by an airbubble that way, the way the fuel gets into the can is also much better.
Just in weight --the 09 pump and filter assembly feels heavier although the bottom of the 09 pump appears the same size. The entire bottom of the pump (not the can) is more metal than the earlier one.
Mazda does not change things unless there was a reason.
Hands down--this appears to be a much better pump assembly.
I guess time will tell.
olddragger

correct--the one that doesnt look like the one we now have. That is the 09:)
OD

correct--the one that doesnt look like the one we now have. That is the 09:)
OD

great work denny.

mar 7, frankenpump and frankenpump v 2.0 vs 09pump in old car.. :)

btw, i have some franken socks for you to play with..

and you really need to start a new thread with this info.. i am getting killed with fuel pump pms..

beers :beer:

ok --------reluctantly said:)
OD

Thanks for the write up Denny...looks to be the route I'm going too.

Well, last night wasn't as great as we hoped it would be, but Juan did improve his 1/4 time by more than a tenth, and he did smoke a Mustang once and a Corvette a couple of times. Here are some pictures:

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc7/bastage_2005/DSC_0005-1.jpg

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc7/bastage_2005/DSC_0007-1.jpg

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc7/bastage_2005/DSC_0033.jpg

Videos coming soon.

Nice pics Bastage..

Here are the videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ve0Uajy5bEw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uVQVCG7ficA

Well, last night wasn't as great as we hoped it would be, but Juan did improve his 1/4 time by more than a tenth, and he did smoke a Mustang once and a Corvette a couple of times.

and a G35

Well folks I was not able to break into the 12s but there’s always another time. Will try next time near my home http://www.bradentonmotorsports.com/

I had a hard time getting used to my new M/T slicks trying to find the sweet spot between tire air pressure and launching rpm. I also need to concentrate on smooth=fast shifting rather than speed shifting. However, the car ran great and like always no issues whatsoever. :eyetwitch

1.9 60ft is good.....hmmm....wonder why your hitting a wall at 13.4-5......with 330 whp you should get better than that like 12.8-12.6

Enjoyed the vids a lot!

Next time Juan! Edging ever closer to the 12's!!!!

and a G35

Well folks I was not able to break into the 12s but there’s always another time. Will try next time near my home http://www.bradentonmotorsports.com/

I had a hard time getting used to my new M/T slicks trying to find the sweet spot between tire air pressure and launching rpm. I also need to concentrate on smooth=fast shifting rather than speed shifting. However, the car ran great and like always no issues whatsoever. :eyetwitch

The time slip looks like the other guy red lighted, and you still beat him to the 60' mark. :spank:

The time slip looks like the other guy red lighted, and you still beat him to the 60' mark. :spank:

The timing system doesn't start counting your own time until you cut your own light. So the other guy can redlight, and you can wait there all day until you launch.

Same if he didn't red light. You could do a better time, but since your reaction time is "slow" he can beat you across the finish line. That is what counts - the first to finish (assuming no DQ).

Cheers,
Hymee.

More videos from West Palm Beach Raceway (Moroso).

Enjoy :eyetwitch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xM39f82_0ro

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFaB451sU0M

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vM6xltQUHcc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1snzN2xl3s

Hey guys. I'm going to be upgrading my suspension and I can't decide whick shocks to get. I'm looking at the Bilstein HDs(good price), Koni Sports(good rep on track), and the Tokico Ds(lots of adjustability). Any ideas??

Alot of people praise the Koni's
If you decide to coilover I personally like the Tiens(I have the Type Flex coilovers w/EDFC) which can be upgraded to include and EDFC Electronic Damping Force Controller, 16 way adjustabilty, and thier also rebuildable if a shick blows out which Ive never actually heard of happening....

juan knows what is killing him from getting into the 12's.
he is having to shift to many times and he cant do a hard take off.
drop rears to a 17" and a 24.5 height and put skinny's up front and do a 2nd gear lauch.
he will be a 12 sec car with just that.
OD

juan knows what is killing him from getting into the 12's.
he is having to shift to many times and he cant do a hard take off.
drop rears to a 17" and a 24.5 height and put skinny's up front and do a 2nd gear lauch.
he will be a 12 sec car with just that.
OD

Thanks for the advice Denny. Actually it did not cross my mind but even at 19 psi I still had to launch at 3k rpm. Next time I’ll try launching on 2nd gear and at higher rpms. The car felt a bit unstable going over 85 mph so I decided not to go any lower on tire pressure. :eyetwitch

it looks like 4th gear is really holding you back. At the 1/8 mile, you were at 83.xxx mph and th other guy (corvette?) was at 81mph. At the end of the quarter mile you were @ 105 and he was at 109mph...

put some 4.77 gears :D


edit: Ignore my comment....

/\ the 4.1 diff + would be better

smaller diameter tire guys would get his ratio lower--a 24.5 or so would almost get him to a 4.77 --allow 2nd gear launch and eliminate a shift---added "skinnys" up front(you wouldnt believe how much rolling resistance those big street tires are!) and the 2nd gear launch would also allow higher rear tire pressure (you need a LITTLE spin) which furthers reduce the rolling resistance.
Juan it did sound like a very controlled bust out--figured--something was up.
olddragger

/\ the 4.1 diff + would be better

Yeah, that's why I edited my comment... It would be better.

I think having smaller rims (17's) would make a big difference too,unless you already said that OD.

I never tried launching in second gear. Does that put more stress on anything?

not with the right gear ratio--would not try that with the 18 inch wheels on.
17's with a 40 sidewall?
olddragger

I never tried launching in second gear. Does that put more stress on anything?

the clutch.

not with the right gear ratio--would not try that with the 18 inch wheels on.
17's with a 40 sidewall?
olddragger

Yep

Autocross this weekend on the PBIS kart track.

dudes---stop this low speed stuff and get it on the road course!!!!
OD

dudes---stop this low speed stuff and get it on the road course!!!!
OD

^^^^^

what he said! :)

beers :beer:

dudes---stop this low speed stuff and get it on the road course!!!!
OD

Well let’s see. :uhh:

AutoX once a month, less than an hour away, $25 fee including lunch/drinks and less than a quarter of a tank of gas.

However it is on my future plans once retirement sets in. :eyetwitch

Well, the plus about this is its on a track and not a parking lot.

just curious, but what kind of lap time (any road course) improvements are people making with the SC?

Good question!!! Well, lets base it off of the best time that I get this weekend since my car is still stock, except I scored a set of wheels and tires from Cam. Ill probly use the same tires after the blower install next time they autocross the kart track wich shouldnt be that far away. I think that will give a general idea.

Lots!
Od

ok more seriously --easy 5-10 seconds per lap on a typical 2 mile coarse.
OD