^^^
280hp was also the voluntary Japanese limit when the RX-Evolv concept was released. In other words, 280 NA in the Renesis was a pie in the sky number for marketing purposes.

I pretty clearly recall numbers around 280hp for the Renesis back before the car hit production. I'd say that 280-300 is entirely reasonable taking proper ECU, fuel, and other supporting mods into account... but I'm not exactly a rotary scientist :)

Which is why I want to see some damn movement in this thread! Come on, lets get portin'! ;) It also had a higher redline. (10,000rpm IIRC)

Hmm.. might have been 10,500.. that sounds a bit familiar. Raising the redline wouldn't be a bad thing necessarily either, although I believe I read sometihng about certain flywheels not being rated for rpm's that high.. not interested in "needing" a scattershield.

So someone please tell me.. what is the highest amount of NA power anyone has gotten out of a 13B? I'm having a hard time swallowing the notion that the 8's 13B is *the most powerful*. And if it's NOT the case, then we DO have room to grow ;)

I'm having a hard time swallowing the notion that the 8's 13B is *the most powerful*
Have you read this article? It's 40% more powerful than the old 13B :D

http://www.rx7.com/techarticles_rx8power.html

Yes of course it is, when both are stock.

I'm interested in what ported 13B's put out. More than a Renesis?

Yes of course it is, when both are stock.

I'm interested in what ported 13B's put out. More than a Renesis?
Theoretically speaking, if you tuned 2 NA engines to their limits and could properly control every aspect necessary in either car (fuel, ignition, throttle body, everything), the renesis would produce more power unless the 13b was fully peripheral ported and even that may not help.

How much air can you possibly flow into an NA engine? Is it enough to even take advantage of a P-Port or would that hurt you more than it helped? I don't know the answers to these questions.

Anyway, tuning is the biggest problem with the renesis. If you want to achieve maximum NA power, expect to spend a ton on tuning.

what good are giant ports if the stock intake manifold with the tuned variable length runners(s-dais) doesnt flow anymore air? what good does raising the rpm do if the air runs out? what good does making huge exahuast ports do if you cant make a header that actually flows any more/better?

this engine with the stock injection and manifold is already tuned to nearly all it can be. porting isnt ever going to big gains to 280crank hp unles the air systems are changed. period.

port the engien in and out put on a bigger throttle body and intake system tuned to use it plus get rid of your cat so you can have a decent exhaust manifold(ask rg about where it would need to collect;)) change the injectors new computer etc etc etc

really when you think about it- it wouldnt be that difficult or consume much money

what good are giant ports if the stock intake manifold with the tuned variable length runners(s-dais) doesnt flow anymore air? what good does raising the rpm do if the air runs out? what good does making huge exahuast ports do if you cant make a header that actually flows any more/better?

this engine with the stock injection and manifold is already tuned to nearly all it can be. porting isnt ever going to big gains to 280crank hp unles the air systems are changed. period.

port the engien in and out put on a bigger throttle body and intake system tuned to use it plus get rid of your cat so you can have a decent exhaust manifold(ask rg about where it would need to collect;)) change the injectors new computer etc etc etc

really when you think about it- it wouldnt be that difficult or consume much money
So many bottlenecks.. I'm gonna replace my cat with a coffee can! I think that'll flow the bestish!

My personal belief is that the lack of overlap between the opening of the exhaust and closing of the intake ports is the biggest factor affecting the achievable NA power with the Renesis. The overlap was eliminated when the exhaust ports were moved to the side instead on the periphery. Perhaps you could port it in such a way was to gain overlap, but without it, you can't scavenge.

Hm.. hadn't thought about the intake system and how well that flows. Of course one "mod" always precipitates another, thats the name of the game. You just have to know where to stop to maintain maximum reliability and driveability. And power :)

I just assumed that porting would be part of the complete NA package...

well mad dog is right. i actually was going to write something "and make a port job that will give us some overlap for scavenging" but decide against it. pobably should have tho given that this is a poting thread

This is what I've been saying all the while. The lack of overlap is going to limit the potential. Right now this thing is a marvel to create what it does with low emissions. It has wonderful intake manifold design and huge ports. If you give it back overlap you will kill some low end performance and the idle will lope like a good street-port. Without bridged intakes I doubt we'll see much more than maybe 260 flywheel hp.
Paul.

There are good and bad benefits of zero overlap. The old way of thinking says that you want less overlap for lower rpms and loads and more as the rpms rise. While the highest powered rotaries all have huge overlap, there is no denying that the Renesis with zero overlap makes tons more power across the board than the nonturbo 13B's did. It takes some pretty nice porting to get the older nonturbo rotaries up to this power level and they still did it at the expense of other areas.

I feel there is still more to be had from this engine without getting into the world of overlap. How much more remains to be seen. The exhaust ports do not flow very well. The stock exhaust manifold isn't the greatest either but it isn't as bad as the ports which makes it good from a functionality point of view. I am leaning towards a process called negative supercharging. This can only be accomplished with a zero overlap engine. In order to take advantage of negative supercharging we also need to have very high velocity intake and exhaust ports. This is where some heavy exhaust port work (not making them larger but rather flow more air) and a properly designed exhaust will come into play.

There is room to make the stock exhaust smaller on the Renesis and still make more power! This can't be done by just bolting on a small exhaust pipe though. It will take a complete redesign of the exhaust sleeves in the engine. Fortunately they are removable so new ones could be made and inserted. These new sleeves would keep total runner area as small as possible yet with good shaping and port profiling, they would still flow what they do now. I'm not too concerned with making them flow better than they do now as this would be a larger port with less velocity. Now that we would have a smaller exhaust port (and searate for the center iron), we need to make a perfectly done header that also matches this size. The runners would collect at a merge collector that would expand in size over a short distance to promote scavenging then we'd have a nice exhaust all the way out.

What will all of this do? Notice I mentioned scavenging. Scavenging however is useful during overlap and not zero overlap so what do I really mean? We need to get the combustion chamber as clean as we can before the intake air hits it. With traditional scavenging, during port overlap the exhaust velocity creates a low pressure zone which interacts with the incoming air to help speed up the air in the intake and help pull it into the engine. A little intake air may pass through the overlap zone though and go out but overall it will benefit. By doing it my way, we are relying on a high velocity exhaust stream that scavenges with the other side of the engine really well. These exhaust gasses will be moving very fast and they will suck the chamber clean behind them. The faster we can get these gasses moving, the lower the pressure behind them in the chamber will be. The goal is not only to remove everything out of the engine, but to remove more than that. In other words, we want to let these gasses actually pull the pressrue in the engine down below atmospheric pressure to give us negative pressure. This will leave the chamber open to only good gasses when the intake opens but it will also do another thing. It will scavenge the intake. When the intake ports open, the negative pressure will want to equalize with the incoming air. This will get the intake velocity up very quickly and suck in more air and you'll make more power. This technique is mroe beneficial at lower rpms than at higher rpms and what you would find by doing it this way is that low end power and economy would go up noticably. We are still boosting the engine. -2 psi is no different than 2 psi. Does it matter if we left 2 psi worth of space in the engine waiting to get filled up or that we are forcing 2 psi into a smaller space with boost? It's the same thing. Either way we are getting more air into the engine. I'm not specifically saying that we will get 2 psi from this technique. You might get 1 or you might get 7. It all depends on how it is done but the point is that there are gains to be had by thinking differently. Look up "negative supercharging" on the internet to see more info about how it works. You can not do negative supercharging with overlap or forced induction. I feel this would be more beneficial to the Renesis powerband.

Speaking of different ways of thinking, I am currently running my RX-7 with negative timing split. That means that under most loads and rpm's, I am firing the trailing plugs first! The car runs great!

you want to do what the intake does only going out as well

Basically what I am saying is there is no need to go bigger when going smaller or staying where we are but thinking unconventionally can get us power gains. The first thing everyone always wants to do is to make things bigger. More, more, more... More runner area, more rpm's, more port overlap. Bigger is not always better. Find ways to optimize what we have first but think differently. Get the terms more and bigger out of here. Bigger is only better after you have maxed out smaller. We haven't. Thinking differently is what will make us all better. Remember, I am firing my trailing plugs first and not only at idle!

has anyone tried expansion chambers on a rotary?

That almost sounds like what rg is implying with the negative supercharging idea. I'd love to have something like that on my car.. I can only imagine what that would sound like! *drool*

I used to build two stroke race bikes. we would use the hot gas flow to do the initial scavenge, when the ports overlap we use the scavenge to pull from the intake, but the major difference is the exhaust port actually stays open after the intake closes, so the idea is we pull fresh charge into the pipes, then use sonic wave resonance and a converging chamber to push the fresh charge back into the combustion chamber. Somewhat like passive supercharging.

Norton Played with the first part off the expansion chamber on their race bike rotaries, using the opening cone to do a chamber scavenge making sure all the spent charge was out and creating more of a vacuum to pull more charge into the chamber.

Look up "negative supercharging" on the internet to see more info about how it works.

http://img173.imageshack.us/img173/2530/headerdiagram2my.gif

From http://www.impulsengine.com/newproducts/index.shtml

Hmm...small exhaust ports...no overlap...super long headers...where have I heard of that before? Actually if the factory exhaust ports are so small, maybe Mazda had something like this in mind from the beginning, but had to change it for some reason? Like, long headers = slow warmup time for the catalysts?

BTW, that website, are they for real? How come you don't hear about anything like this in Hot Rod or whatever magazines? Or did I just miss an issue. :confused:

Those guys are for real but understand that they are actually choking their engines down to get more low end but at the expense of top end. I do not fully want to do what they did by choking our engines off but rather utilize the same principles to give us more power everywhere. Maybe not to the extent that they are getting it, but a gain never the less. Since I want an exhaust port that flows what it does not but has a much higher velocity, I know that we can get a gain at lower rpm's but still flow enough for good top end. We don't want to flow less than stock so we can keep the same redline as stock.

Their headers actually collect at a shorter distance overall. It's their expansion that makes it long. I would rather just use an expansion cone rather than multiple steps. Overall I'm not trying to copy everythig about their system and then apply it to the Renesis. I just feel that there are certain aspects of it that would work very well with the Renesis.

as far as the porting goes,

our initial 4th gear run was 150whp....dismal
after the porting (same gear), we got like 186, but that was at like 50% throttle!!!

now 50% throttle doesn't necessarly mean 50% power, but if we hooked up a cable to the throttle plate or found some other way to defeat the factory safeguard, we'd see an easy....EASY 200-210+ to the tires.

i've been talking with snoochie about doing the haltech or some other method of controlling this thing and it pretty much boils down to lack of money and time.


if anyone else wants to give it a go with porting+ ems, let me know.

Richard responded on this topic but in the wrong thread so I thought I would address it back here.

Yes I am running negative split on my RX-7. The trailing plugs fire first. The most positive split I have is...well I never have positive/conventional split! It goes to no split at full load/higher rpms. As load decreses and rpms decrease, the split widens, just negatively. I can only run -12.5 degrees of split this way since I am doing it mechanically through a distributer but others have gone as high (low?) as -35! The RX-8 runs a 5 degree negative split at idle and low loads but quickly gets it up to the conventional positive split up to 15 degrees. Negative split should NEVER be used when under boost! Only under vacuum. It won't do anything useful for your needs. Negative split is still a fairly new concept to me but it does work. That I can attest to.

i've heard of a few guys talking about that lately, but i've never been able to do it since i'm mainly into haltech and microtechs. i'll definately try it once i use an ems capable of doing so.

i've heard good things about the fuel economy with a negative split.

Looking at the impluse headers I have to say that stepped headers are nothing new. Aftermarket complanies have been making them for years. The basic principle is the same as with impulse but only the primary tubes are stepped not the collector. I can say from personal experience that stepped header do have a real effect on low and midrange torque but lose effectiveness at high rpms where they're roughly equal to a standard header of similiar length. The reason that the steps lose effectiveness is because the overlap happens to quickly at high RPMs for effective scavenging ( I know I'm stating the obvious but I don't want to assume that everyone knows. ). I do have to wonder what effect a simple stepped header would have on an engine with no overlap. Will it work until redline or will it perform like with conventional valve openings and drop off to no gains as RPMs increase.

Looking at the impluse headers I have to say that stepped headers are nothing new. Aftermarket complanies have been making them for years. The basic principle is the same as with impulse but only the primary tubes are stepped not the collector. I can say from personal experience that stepped header do have a real effect on low and midrange torque but lose effectiveness at high rpms where they're roughly equal to a standard header of similiar length. The reason that the steps lose effectiveness is because the overlap happens to quickly at high RPMs for effective scavenging ( I know I'm stating the obvious but I don't want to assume that everyone knows. ). I do have to wonder what effect a simple stepped header would have on an engine with no overlap. Will it work until redline or will it perform like with conventional valve openings and drop off to no gains as RPMs increase.

You need to go read their entire engine design to understand their use of it. I want to apply certain aspects of it to the Renesis. The most important part for me is the merge collector but this is one of the most important and overlooked areas of headers anyways. I really have no desire to make the primary tubes stepped. I am more concerned with velocity.

Didn't Racing Beat make serveral FB exhaust headers/systems that took advatange of the scavenging effect, I remember browsing their website said it was good for some 20-40hp on the FB

How big are expansion chambers? Is there room to fit one on the underside of the Rx-8? If so how much does an expansion chamber really help in producing a negative atmoshereic pressure inside the chamer?

Headers on the old rotaries and headers on a Renesis are 2 totally different phenomenon. Racing Beat did try a couple of header designs on the Renesis with very small gains (4-5 peak horsepower). I feel that by taking a different approach to headers and the Renesis exhaust ports we can find some bigger gains. Will they be what the old headers got on older rotaries? Probably not but I want a gain over the usable rpm range. This is what the car really needs. On the old RX-7's, it wasn't uncommon to see a 30% gain in power from a set of headers and a good exhaust! Too bad those days are gone.

I don't want an expansion chamber but rather just a megaphone type of expansion. An expansion chamber as used on a 2 stroke does 2 things. The expanding side helps scavenge the exhaust gasses behind it. The contracting side on the far end sends a reverse pulse back towards the engine and actually pushes some exhaust back into the engine. We don't want this. That may be fine on an engine with overlap which has very good scavenging and some intake comes into the exhaust, but on a no overlap engine such as the Renesis, why would anyone want to put some of the exhaust back into the engine? 2 stroke engines have alot of intake charge get pushed out of the engine which is why this chamber needs to be designed well to push some fresh charge back in. We don't need that. We just want the good scavenging of the divergent megaphone side of an expansion chamber. Our goal should be to over scavenge and leave a vacuum inside the engine that will help pull more air in as the intake ports open.

The sound is going to be thunderous with a megaphone header. Are you thinking to increase up to 3"?

It depends on how small the pipe starts out at. It might go up to 3" or it might only go to 2.5". It really will be affected by how large the primaries are. As far as noise goes, that's what mufflers are for.

those were my thoughts, Just the megaphone part of the chamber without the closing cone.
Divide the siamesed port in the center completely and have each rotor's two ports feed to a pipe that starts out about 1.75" and opens to 5" then stays that way for a few feet before entering some sort of resonator or chamber sort of muffler.
the idea is to eliminate backpressure to the point that you create a scavenge and create a vacuum in the chamber before it gets to the intake.
Even with some port overlap the idea is to suck through the intake port. that should create a intake tract vacuum to suck more air in and if velocity gets built it could create a stacking effect to get even more air in.
BUT, Port overlap will create unburnt hydrocarbons into the atmosphere (excess pollution) so for enviromental reasons, no overlap or direct injection into the chamber after the exhaust port closes would be the best solution there.

Back I go into my shop and play with my good old fashioned two strokes.

I don't want an expansion chamber but rather just a megaphone type of expansion. An expansion chamber as used on a 2 stroke does 2 things. The expanding side helps scavenge the exhaust gasses behind it. The contracting side on the far end sends a reverse pulse back towards the engine and actually pushes some exhaust back into the engine. We don't want this. That may be fine on an engine with overlap which has very good scavenging and some intake comes into the exhaust, but on a no overlap engine such as the Renesis, why would anyone want to put some of the exhaust back into the engine? 2 stroke engines have alot of intake charge get pushed out of the engine which is why this chamber needs to be designed well to push some fresh charge back in. We don't need that. We just want the good scavenging of the divergent megaphone side of an expansion chamber. Our goal should be to over scavenge and leave a vacuum inside the engine that will help pull more air in as the intake ports open.

The best your going to be able to do short of using mechanical means is to equalize the pressure in the chamber near atmospheric pressure. You can only create areas of lower pressure until the exhaust hits open air and you can't have any area within the exhaust be lower than atmospheric. Simple physics proscribe the limit without a mechanical pump involved somewhere. Secondly, since the renesis internaly scavenges would it be wise to pull the small amount of unburned fuel off the edge of the epitrochoid? I don't want to discourage you in your experimentation but I don't see you getting a vacuum without an external pump. If your reffering to increasing the mechanical vacuum that the engine itself produces there is still a practical limit with regards to proper internal scavenging.

I do think that the edge of the NA envelope is nowhere near being pushed but since this is the first practical no overlap engine I think that everyone ( including Mazda ) is facing a steep learning curve.

Let me fully clarify what I mean by leaving a vacuum in the chamber. It would be more accurate to say I want closer to a vacuum left in the chamber than any traditional currently available setup can give. It is very possible to have a pressure lower than atmospheric in the engine through incredibly good scavenging. It has been done before. There's nothing physics defying about it. You just can't get it without doing so at the expense of something else. The cleaner I can leave that chamber and the lower the pressure I can get in it, be it atmospheric, above, below or otherwise, the more power the engine will make everywhere.

That is correct RG. The word vacuum indicates a total lack of pressure. We use it incorectly. But to get a low pressure area is most certainly possable. Partial vacuum might be a phrase but a pain in the ass to write all the time.

The problem you have Fred is that they expect you to be perfect all the time. You no longer have any slack. Price you pay buddy.

As told by our resident 2 stroker getting the exhaust to work for us is done all the time. It is a pain in the butt to get right but that's why it's an art. One can get a good start on the art of it by reading the book "Intake and Exhaust" by Smith.
This is a British publication and I belive has been up dated since my copy was writen. As have most of my text. :( Damn I'm getting old. :mad:

Speaking of that I got my new copy of Ricardo and while I will comment on it later there is something of note. I never read a book starting at the front and rarely have ever read a "Foward". For some reason I did this one and this was my bible years ago and never saw it but Sir Harry made note of the rotary in his foward, saying that maybe it would be the next breakthrough. I'll have to get it and give you guys the direct quote. This is like God validating your engine.

Bump-a-t-bump

When you ported, did you change this edge any that Mazda is talking about in this pic?

http://www.rx8club.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=65178&stc=1

In that picture, the left side of the port can't be changed as a corner seal would fall in. I could be backcut though to smoothen out the runner to port transition. The right side can't change because it would cross an oil seal track. Only the top and bottom edges can change. If the casting thickness is as it shows in that picture, you can't go up very much at all.

That's an image from the Mazda Press Release, so who knows if it is accurate for casting thickness. I thought it was interesting to read about that shot of high pressure air.

Really curious as to the status of this project. Any more tuning done? What about the interceptor as a way to unleash the power this porting was going to deliver?
Thanks!

I read where the inserts in the exhaust ports speed start up of the catalytic converter. What does this mean? Do they transfer heat or something?

In that picture, the left side of the port can't be changed as a corner seal would fall in. I could be backcut though to smoothen out the runner to port transition. The right side can't change because it would cross an oil seal track. Only the top and bottom edges can change. If the casting thickness is as it shows in that picture, you can't go up very much at all.I found this bit of info:

"The anti-wet port is a bulge cast into the primary intake port of the intermediate housing. It works with the jet air nozzle to create air fuel mixing and atomization. This increases air flow and fuel efficiency at low RPM."

i'm baaaaccckk!! Its been a few months since i came here. i am recently in a position(soon) to get an rx8. Is snoochies car any further than what is posted a few pages back? if not and time/ money is the issue i would look into it. however i plan i=on going FI and in a bigger way so whatever i do would have to compliment that. i remember that it was a NA project first and then FI possibilities later... am i right. I am interested in seeing what is going on lately.

Any up dates on the porting process ?

never got to do the ems in snoochies car.

OK.... it took me 2 days but i just read through this whole thread starting from day 1.

guitarjunkie- from what i understand, the second time you ported snoochis car, you didnt bridge port it like you wanted to right? you just cut through the water jacket. how is that holding up? how close where you the first time from punching through?

there was a post that said he got the canzoomer, then in the last post you said you guys never got to tune it. has that changed since then?

RG- did you ever persue porting the renesis and flow testing? i know you were more interested in keeping things the same size and against breaking through the water jacket. do you still take that stance on these issues?

also did you ever finish your true dual exhaust system/header/sleeve idea?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


sorry for all the questions. there is just soo much info in this thread! its been a while since the snoochi porting day, what have we learned since? im still waiting on snoochi to lean out his mix a bit.

Unfortunately the engine I thought I was getting back then, never panned out like I thought so no I've done nothing. It's still just on a list of things I'd like to do. I am trying to get Dave (guitarjunkie) to send me an intermediate housing so I can at least get that project started (hint, hint!!!).

you hint one more time and i'm gonna epoxy that corner and use it myself :p:
but since we're on the subject, i did find it and pulled it off the shelf this morning. i'll find a box and ship it out...just be patient with me.


ghost--
the best we could manage in a 4th gear pull was 185 whp with the canzoomer, but the afr's never steadied out in the low-mid 13's, like i wanted. even so, it only pulled 150~someodd in 4th gear stock, so it's a substantial improvement.

the water jacket stuff i think you're a little confused on. the aux. ports have a secondary bridge to them, but i didn't go through the water jacket there. it was the exhaust i went through the water jackets on, then had welded up. i haven't talked to snoochie in a while, but i saw him a couple months ago on the 210, so makes me believe it's still rollin'. i'm sure i would have got a phonecall if it wasn't, anyway.

this whole project was pretty much cancelled due to lack of funding for an ems.

i've got a ported engine, interceptor, and modified greedy turbo kit i'm going to toss in my fc and have some fun with. i think i'll put it in n/a style to get some factual ported engine numbers, since i never got the results i was looking for.

after i have some n/a fun, i'll go ahead and put that turbo on and have some more fun with the car. i don't think the porting will increase the turbo engine's power output significantly, since the turbo is the limiting factor, but i do believe it'll spool the thing up quicker and have a bit broader power curve.

after all that's done, i want to get rid of the 6-port engine and use a 4-port for the turbo. i think the turbo will like the port timing of that one better.

you hint one more time and i'm gonna epoxy that corner and use it myself :p:
but since we're on the subject, i did find it and pulled it off the shelf this morning. i'll find a box and ship it out...just be patient with me.

LOL!

Are you still interested in that 36-1 wheel?

hey,
i'm new to this site & have some rx8 mod questions if anyone is willing to help out.
thanks

LOL!

Are you still interested in that 36-1 wheel?


gimme gimme!


lukky-1
wuzzup?

i'm looking at a 04 rx8. i drove the car & like it except feel it should have more power. are there turbo kits available for the car that are somewhat easy to install, with fuel & spark management, an external wastegate, that is not too dificult to set up? also reliable?

hehe.. sorry for the misunderstanding. i knew going through the water jacket was just on the inside corner of the exhaust port. i just worded my question funny because i asked about the bridge port idea (not sure if you did it yet) and the concerns about breaking the water jacket (the exhaust port) at the same time.

i guess snoochi never got an exhaust/midpipe or header. thats too bad. going from 156 to 185 is huge for the amount of porting done. did you have numbers from the first port untuned ( i think it was 170 or so) to the larger port untuned? in short, did the additional gain from the second attempt come from the canzoomer tuning or the actual enlarging of the exhaust ports?

if i can find a used canzoomer, i wouldnt mind getting a small bridge port done just for the sound and for the persute of knowlage. my only concern would be how drastic the flow path in the motor would be affected. heaven forbid if i decrease up atomization.

you hint one more time and i'm gonna epoxy that corner and use it myself :p:
but since we're on the subject, i did find it and pulled it off the shelf this morning. i'll find a box and ship it out...just be patient with me.


ghost--
the best we could manage in a 4th gear pull was 185 whp with the canzoomer, but the afr's never steadied out in the low-mid 13's, like i wanted. even so, it only pulled 150~someodd in 4th gear stock, so it's a substantial improvement.

the water jacket stuff i think you're a little confused on. the aux. ports have a secondary bridge to them, but i didn't go through the water jacket there. it was the exhaust i went through the water jackets on, then had welded up. i haven't talked to snoochie in a while, but i saw him a couple months ago on the 210, so makes me believe it's still rollin'. i'm sure i would have got a phonecall if it wasn't, anyway.

this whole project was pretty much cancelled due to lack of funding for an ems.

i've got a ported engine, interceptor, and modified greedy turbo kit i'm going to toss in my fc and have some fun with. i think i'll put it in n/a style to get some factual ported engine numbers, since i never got the results i was looking for.

after i have some n/a fun, i'll go ahead and put that turbo on and have some more fun with the car. i don't think the porting will increase the turbo engine's power output significantly, since the turbo is the limiting factor, but i do believe it'll spool the thing up quicker and have a bit broader power curve.

after all that's done, i want to get rid of the 6-port engine and use a 4-port for the turbo. i think the turbo will like the port timing of that one better.

Why are you asking those questions in this topic? Do you even know what the internet is?

www.search the friggin site.com

wow...


easy buddy. he addmited hes new so lets welcome him before you chew his head off.

Lukky- welcome to this board. to answer your question, the greddy kit is the most popular kit due it being the only kit availible up until only recently. its cheap and is pretty much bolt on so intallation is easy from what ive seen IMO (some would disagree). keep in mind though, you get what you pay for with this kit so dont expect fuel or spark upgrades.

if your looking for the whole enchilada, id recomend looking up mazsport in the vendor section.

for now, please keep these questions off this thread. the reason i love this thread is becuase its managed to continue for 70+ pages WITHOUT STRAYING OFF TOPIC. Keef is right though, most your questions will be answered by using the search function provided to you. PM me if you have any more questions.

in short, did the additional gain from the second attempt come from the canzoomer tuning or the actual enlarging of the exhaust ports?



that's a question i can't really answer. maybe it did....or maybe thecomputer was just in a good mood that day.

but all that set aside, i should be able to get some good numbers with the renesis/fc project i'm doing. that one is my personal vehicle, so it'll bet played with daily until i get something noteworthy.

from what i've seen from other people, i'm hoping for maybe 210 whp conservatively, but hopefully a bit more. but only time and a lot of work will tell that whole story.

i should hopefully get the car running by the end of the year, so look for some results (positive, OR negative) sometime in january. i'm a relatively humble persn, and i'm not afraid to post up any mistakes i make just so the info is out there and other guys can learn from them and correct them. but hopefully we'll be able to get some true-to-life idea about what the engine itself is capable of, without the factory ecu limitations.

after all the ported n/a, ported turbo, then maybe a bridgeport in the not-too-distant future, i'm hoping to see something in the neighborhood of 230-240 n/a whp, with good street manners, and not too much noise. don't hold me to that, but that's the tentative goal, anyway. and i still want to go all out with a bone-stock engine too, just to see what the story is....exhaust port only, intake port only, etc etc.... if i had the time, money, and enough engines and donor vehicles to play with, i'd be more than happy to devote a substantial amount of time to all this.

and if all THAT works out, i'll be offering renesis swaps for fc's and fd's. i do have one potential fd/renesis pj in the works, but that'll probably not be until next summer, so i'll just post up when and if it comes to life.

so for now, let's just stick with what we got, and hope for some more impressive results in the future. my knowledge, not only on the renesis, but tuning and rotaries in general has grown by leaps and bounds since the beginning of this thread. i honestly expect some good, solid, REPEATABLE numbers in the future.

this is really exciting, being able to be a part of the "ground floor" of all this stuff.

btw, if anyone wants to do a ported renesis with an interceptor, i'm willing to do all the work involved for next to nothing as far as $$ is concerned--just to get more experience, and more information available to everyone.

Not too much noise?

all my vehicles set off car alarms. I just have to try harder with my -8

Noise is good.

Porting is the next step in the hunt for power id say. So id say this is valuable data. Im pretty interested in your work and hope it all goes well and according to plan.

Not too much noise?

all my vehicles set off car alarms. I just have to try harder with my -8

Noise is good.


renesis don't make no noise :p:
i've driven a gutted renesis with a catback and you could still hold a conversation right next to the tailpipes.

my fd, on the other hand..... well, 3 1/2" exhaust ;)

My Renesis is ported, but the stock GReddy turbo can't even come close to feeding it.

If anyone has a 3071 or gt35r they want to get rid of, I am soooo there!

Hey GuitarJunkie, would you be game to help me fit a bitter turbo to my car?

I'm using an XEDE vs Interceptor. The XEDE takes full control of fuel & spark, has a built in boost controller, and the software rocks so it's pretty sweet.

:spank: I'm sorry if it was posted earlier in this thread but I gest I was too lazy to go through all the 70 pages so.....anyone saw that those guy did ported the renesis here's the link...

http://www.rotaryheads.com/news/index.html

Hmmm I wonder whos site that is? :Wconfused

But whomever he is, he seems kinda lazy. Definitely doesn't seem like the site of someone who will post mind blowing mouth watering porting goodness to a forum or anything.

P.S. Would you guys be willing to give Snoochie a call and at least find out who the car is doing? To bad he hasn't spent the last $100 or so to get the most out of this mod after paying close to $1000 so far.

mm..... :hahano:

Hint: Look at the first post in this thread. (Ok, that'swaaaaay, more than a hint. Hint. Hint.)

Hey GuitarJunkie, would you be game to help me fit a bitter turbo to my car?




i've got a modded greedy turbo with a clipped turbine and 57-trim t4 compressor wheel. easy bolt on an 300+ whp capabilities.

thanks for the help for those that offered direction. as for keef, you should consider donating sum of your time to a proctology class as you would make a good study specimen.

renesis don't make no noise :p:
i've driven a gutted renesis with a catback and you could still hold a conversation right next to the tailpipes.

my fd, on the other hand..... well, 3 1/2" exhaust ;)

my best car alarm activator is my Ducati.
11.5:1 Compression. Straight through 50mm (2.5 inch) dual exhaust. dual throttle bodies that I think are 66mm each. (I woill have to check on the throttle body size if people really want to know exactly)

it shakes the house if I start it in the garage.

stupid question time.

I used to build formula 2 Two stoke race bikes.

How similar is porting and port timing to a high strung two stroke?

not at all

Hey GuitarJunkie...

hey mang,
you know you pm'd me, but turned your pm's off so i couldn't respond?

hey mang,
you know you pm'd me, but turned your pm's off so i couldn't respond?

tre strange...my account blew up (I'm now 'SlideWayz' versus Sapphonica)

in a nutshell, it'll be $550 to mod your turbo to the same specs as mine.

clipped turbine, 57-trim t4 compressor wheel, stock housing punched out, rebuilt and balanced. so it'll look identical to the standard greedy turbo on the outside, but it'll pack a lot more punch up top.

next step up from that is the mazsport turbo, unless you wanna go apeshit and weld a t3 flange on your greedy manifold and bash away at your firewall so we can fit a bigger turbine housing in there.

if you wanna go that route, a gt35r "hifi"ish kinda turbo might work. just like the 60-1's in the t04b compressor housings, i bet we could do the same thing with a 35r. if you're on a budget and don't want the gt stuff, i'm sure we can find a t3 housing that'll take a p-trim turbine, then we could do a t3/t4, 60-1 hifi with it. that thing would put out.

see how much the mazsport motor mounts are so we have some room to work with and we can go as crazy as you want with it.

in a nutshell, it'll be $550 to mod your turbo to the same specs as mine.

clipped turbine, 57-trim t4 compressor wheel, stock housing punched out, rebuilt and balanced. so it'll look identical to the standard greedy turbo on the outside, but it'll pack a lot more punch up top.

next step up from that is the mazsport turbo, unless you wanna go apeshit and weld a t3 flange on your greedy manifold and bash away at your firewall so we can fit a bigger turbine housing in there.

if you wanna go that route, a gt35r "hifi"ish kinda turbo might work. just like the 60-1's in the t04b compressor housings, i bet we could do the same thing with a 35r. if you're on a budget and don't want the gt stuff, i'm sure we can find a t3 housing that'll take a p-trim turbine, then we could do a t3/t4, 60-1 hifi with it. that thing would put out.

see how much the mazsport motor mounts are so we have some room to work with and we can go as crazy as you want with it.

Thanks, GJ. I've absolutely got to stay under $1,000, so maybe the 'bolt on' option is best. Do you do dyno-tuning too? If so, I can get some dyno time if you're able to fly up to the Bay area.

i could work my way up there if we schedule it at least a month in advance.

guitarjunkie-

did the HP gains from the second porting attempt come from making the ports bigger, or just leaning out the mix with the CZ?

the port.

the first one i dyno'd after the porting was actually running richer than stock...somewhere around ~11.8, iirc.

Now that I just read through all 72 pages in 7 hours, is snoochie done bringing his car to you gutiarjunkie?

no idea. i haven't talked to him for a while.

last time i saw the car in person was at the body shop sometime last year. he got rear-ended, and the body shop left his lights on or something, so i went down there and unflooded it. that's actually the last time i talked to him, i think.

any one mind giving me a summary of the 72 pages? lol... so people are runnign ported + greddy turbo?

summary: porting has potential, but i need to do it on a car with an ems to get more accurate results.

Anyone have a sound clip of the Renesis ported? :Freak_ani

doesn't change the sound much.

I haven't noticed any difference at all.

so is anyone on the forum running an 8 thats ported? (besides that guy whos 8 was like dying and the porting brougt him to like 180whp)

as soon as i trade motors with richard, i'm gonna put the ported renesis into my fc and see what kind of power it can make.

look for real results in january or february.

hell yea!

if you check out the rrotaryheads website, i've got my contact# on there. we've got a lot of options for doing an engine. i've even got almost enough parts to build one in advance and ship it out to save on downtime.

The factory maf will never be a restriction in the system.

since i've got an engine with intake and exhaust ported already, how about i build you one with just the exhaust ported, and the intake left untouched? that should build extra power through efficiency, but not have to use any extra air... that might be a good trial for keeping all the ecu stuff stock.

naw, pulling the engine is an absolute piece of cake. it's easiser than any of the 2nd and 3rd gen rx7's.

i'm wondering if you've considered using alcohol, instead of gasoline with a wet nitrous kit. i think that'd give all sorts of headroom for a larger nitrous hit.

any news on hp gains with aftermarket exhaust on the renesis?

Sorry dude but guitarjunkie is no longer with us. Thus he will not be completing his project....

really bad thread to bump with a bad question.

Dave the original poster died in a car accident.



this is a simple question so ill just answer it. there are only a few hp (3 maybe) to gain from a new exhaust. nothing you will feel, mainly just a different sound. please use the search function for simple questions like this next time

Sorry dude but guitarjunkie is no longer with us. Thus he will not be completing his project....
yeah im bummed he seemed like a nice guy and i was really looking forward to the results of this

i know all about the accident, and it is definetly a damn shame, not only because of his passing but also because i, along with everyone on this message board, was looking forward to those results and i was just curious if anyone else has done this yet.

wow i feel like a moron... what I meant to ask was hp gain with the engine ported, not stock. sorry about the misunderstanding.... i already have an aftermarket exhaust and it was a total waste of money, other than the nice sound. i'd just like to make it worth while and bridge port the engine. I have a machinist that will do it but he would like exact specs from me. anyone know where I can get those?

just on a whim, i called acosta motorsports and asked them if they have ever ported a renesis... and guess what! they do a mild port for $4200 with a 30whp gain, or an aggressive port with custom intake and headers for $6500 and up with a 300whp potential!! its crazy pricey but everyone has seen their beautiful 20b swap, and i'm sure they will do a custom turbo setup (i forgot to ask) that can push another 250+ extra horses out! any questions call acosta @ (201) 791-2204
:rock: :ylsuper: :rock: :ylsuper: :rock: :ylsuper: :rock: :ylsuper: :rock: :ylsuper: :rock: :ylsuper: :rock: :ylsuper: :rock: :ylsuper: :rock: :ylsuper:

$4200 for 30hp? not worth it.

yeah its definetly pricey, but at least now we know it's full potential with a race ported NA setup. $4200 is rediculous for an engine rebuild with a mild port job, i'd rather buy a set of housings and race port them myself. only problem is u still need custom intake/headers to reach ithe engine's potential (possibly getting rid of that ugly plastic upper). plus i'm not an expert by any means in porting, so i would be nervous about taking too much off the housings. too bad there were never any kind of templates made available before Dave's passing.

God bless you when you get your car back those guys are butchers!

heh i doubt i'll be sending my car anywhere anytime soon. i'll more than likely race port it myself and worry about the intake/headers later... butchers? how so?

If you live in new jersey try jpr imports its about an hour drive but well worth it the guy does very good work.

I can bet my life you will not get 30 hp just from porting. from the looks of it and from what people are talking the only thing you can port is the exhaust .

please have enough respect to start a new leghumping thread :hahano:

Originally Posted by smRX8:
I can bet my life you will not get 30 hp just from porting. from the looks of it and from what people are talking the only thing you can port is the exhaust .


if u look on page 71 of this thread GuitarJunkie noted a 35hp improvement...

I don't care who claims what, you aren't going to get 300 hp from just porting, intake, and exhaust on a Renesis. It won't happen. A full peripheral port motor is a different story but that wouldn't be a Renesis anymore.

from my discussions with dave, he said that this thread was still inconclusive. thats why he was going to do it to his own motor in hopes of getting more definitive answers. its also why he refused to port my motor until he was sure that he could produce gains with his own.

if i remember correctly, he said the porting alone gave about 14hp to the wheels and the CZ added another 15 or so. BUT... the dynos were done several days apart and the initial dyno was a bit on the low side.

so..... anyone have anything to report on this 2+ year old thread on porting the renesis?

Yep. Read this thread.

http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=173190