When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Kg of torque was until some time ago the way specs were published in Greece. And other eu countries. Now it has faded, apparently for the reasons stated above. But we boomers, still use kg for torque. So I guess there's a misunderstanding here.
Kg of torque was until some time ago the way specs were published in Greece. And other eu countries. Now it has faded, apparently for the reasons stated above. But we boomers, still use kg for torque. So I guess there's a misunderstanding here.
Thank You~
Appreciate ur time to clear it out , still Suprise
That some members think I am making BS out lol
Any how
I think one reason it get fade out , the number don't sound too big ,
But In Japan KG of Torque is much use in Media and tuning shop
it’s just more generic horse pucky for saps who can’t think for themselves
otherwise why not just post up the dyno sheet or actual output numbers rather than state “like a stock MSP”.
It doesn’t really mean anything other than somebody concluded you're naive enough to believe anything so that’s exactly how they’ll spoon feed the narrative to you.
the actual metric torque referenced is kg-m; output torque is always (force-distance)
2 kg-m = 19.6 n-m = 14.5 lb-ft
referenced to what though?
strong NA Renesis stock-port peak torque value = 150+ lb-ft, 203+ n-m, 21+ kg-m **at the rear wheels**
the Dynapak reads at the rear hub though without the wheel inertia, tire friction, and so on. It will generally always indicate higher output as a result; 8 - 10% higher than a dynojet, which in general will indicate 10-12% higher than a mustang dyno. That assumes they’re all running on the same output standard; SAE, etc., but again all you get is generic references that mean little.
again, a datalog at wot on a reasonably level surface with all the particulars and details will reveal plenty, which is why there’s no soup for you!
.
.
DIYman
I never accused you of BS ..... just didn't recognise Kg as a measure of torque because ...it isn't used here, plus it doesn't really make sense unless you call it Kg-m as Team pointed out.
So 2Kg-m (20 Nm) is actually quite significant.
If it were my engine ..... I'd be thinking that could be coming from scavenging and maybe changing the header length might alter where the extra power comes in the power band. Any plans to do that ?
even if we entirely ignore you stating that without any reference starting point, it’s still just more of people who refuse to see what’s right in front of their face
DIYman
I never accused you of BS ..... just didn't recognise Kg as a measure of torque because ...it isn't used here, plus it doesn't really make sense unless you call it Kg-m as Team pointed out.
So 2Kg-m (20 Nm) is actually quite significant.
If it were my engine ..... I'd be thinking that could be coming from scavenging and maybe changing the header length might alter where the extra power comes in the power band. Any plans to do that ?
Ok la , no hard feelings
usually in here we reference as kg only
Won't list as KG-M
Buddy shop is quite busy , so I think next step would be Custom intake ( aem style )
And use Obd flash to tune it .
But as this point , this custom engine have no issue at all !!! To be honest
I am quite Suprise on that self cast material to exhaust port , this might be my biggest concern
after all is a experimental work , but until that
Let continue the journey
Here is the problem Team.
The figures you present are NOT what the rest of the world sees. I personally have dynotuned over 30 race prepped rx8s on at least 6 different dynos. Most people (apart from you) would consider that a good range of experience and enable me to give a good assessment of reality. One of those dynos gave inflated numbers IMO (in the 230-240 range) . All the others were consistently showing a strong engine at around 205-210whp. To me that is a great baseline because these engines are stock , rebuilt for maximum power , have free flow exhaust systems with stock manifolds and intakes.
There is a possibility that your engine builder is doing a better job than the rest of the world I guess, in which case your numbers would have some relevance IF we had access to those engines at a similar price to what we are currently paying. Otherwise - not so much.
One I dynoed last week which was a good strong engine on a conservative dyno.
again, there is no basis established at all from which to make any reference. Because if you follow this guy at all; on this forum or RX7Club, this is the standard promotional procedure.
the only problem is your ego coupled with a heart hardened personally against me. That’s the only reason you argue it; nothing from me is good enough, but this guy pulling generic rabbits out of a zero-reference hat is just peachy and there’s no problem with that at all.
again, your eyes are blinded, and your ears are blocked, and your mind closed as well to all that which is convenient to ignore, forget, or refuse to accept.
personal testimony, dyno graphs, datalogs, videos; nothing from me is good enough
I stated many times what the correct parts and understandings are, but nobody is willing to accept any of it
yet this is the real truth before you for a properly built stock-port Renesis engine
I'm interested to hear what, if any, decent results come from this project because I think it has merit. So I'm trying to encourage them to try things and present better information. If you think that I'm ignoring what you present because of past disagreements and blindly accepting what is presented here, then that is your problem.
I'm open to seeing something positive here ...you are obviously not. That's it in a nutshell.
again, this was a Renesis engine specific national Formula car race series that ran for 12 years straight in the US typically in conjunction with the Indy Car race series. Literally hundreds of Renesis engines built, most of them by Daryl Drummond up until the last several years of that period. Why wouldn’t they evolve up to a certain level when it’s solely the focus of so many engines? Who else ever did that specifically for the Renesis? It may not be a familiar name on an island at the far south end of the world, but he’s well known in the rotary circles here and by Mazda in Japan. Which you can see further below he worked with directly below before RX8 production even began:
So here’s some unknown history for you and the forum, what he shared with me back in early 2010 when the motor for that dyno sheet above was built. Some things I’m not at liberty to share, but seeing as he’s mostly retired now I hope this is ok to release just to establish some reality to offset this kind of egotistical intraweb jockey bull crap:
Also, sometimes I wonder if people really notice the difference or is the dyno number and so
on real. I'll share a little history with you on what I've seen in the
Renesis engine. I got a proto-type before production release to begin work
for the Formula Mazda car in conjunction with Star Race Cars. Those engines
were making about 238 hp, 175 ft. lbs of torque, run through a Motec M 4.
The first production engines were 245, a good one 250 hp. We were able to
get, as time passed and build technique was developed mid 250s and
eventually with evolution of parts and understanding of how they interacted,
we worked our way up to where we are today. Mazda has done the same. They
really cleaned up some really loose ends, but need to address the balance,
in my opinion. We had an engine last week that only got to 267 and 187 ft
lbs of torque and were disappointed. Actually took it apart again. It's
funny, because two years ago, we'd have killed for that!
The power is where they are coming out, 268-271. Torque is good as well.
.
.
.
Understand that this series existed previously before 2004 with a much lower output 13B NA engine and the chassis/body work was different too, but they ramped it up to a higher level when the Renesis came out. Those earlier engines had a side draft carb intake setup and such.
There’s some good Renesis specific info to be gleened from this document; 100 octane minimum (R+M/2) and 2 oz. premix (OMP is removed), do not exceed 8600 rpm limit, etc.
and with respect to my earlier comment about a roller vs hub dyno results, this is a Porsche with 19” wheels/tires run back-back with zero changes other than to remove the rear wheels for putting it on the hub dyno
all I hear you saying is you want the results you were hoping for, because again results without a basis of true reference are just as meaningful as the usual intraweb forum blah-blah-blah. Yet real race engine builders for Mazda with 40+ years rotary experience carry no weight.
.
You seem to have missed this the first time around so :
Originally Posted by Brettus
There is a possibility that your engine builder is doing a better job than the rest of the world I guess, in which case your numbers would have some relevance IF we had access to those engines at a similar price to what we are currently paying. Otherwise - not so much.
Car made about same HP like stock 13B MSP
But mid range TQ is about 2Kg higher then MSP
When I test drive it back then , it does feel more TQ then my
Just gunna post this here because it may be relevant. Posted on FB group 'RX8-lovers' :
Rick Shaw : Did both Brett. Built 5 different sets of headers. Worked all much the same. What made the difference was the inlet manifold design. We had one that only Reved to 7500 but had all the Tourque in the world. Phil Lard also played with exhaust and found same results, not a lot.
"both" here refers to both a five port hybrid exhaust and a two port pp exhaust ........
I have some info I will be posting up here soon that may or may not further the hybrid PP conversation, I have had some trouble finding the info I am looking for, and I haven't had enough time to keep searching.
That info that Team posted from DD was interesting. Thank you for that. I have no doubt that he built excellent engines, and figured out angles that others have not.
On a side note, Team (or anyone else) do you have any RX8 chassis dyno results that you have found with a DD build? Since we all look at and compare chassis dyno results, it would be helpful.
I have only found one, it was Eric Meyer which was 223whp on a Dynojet. It sounds like he had an adequate setup to support the power potential of the keg.
223 RWHP DynoJet NA 4th gearSince we don't run Koni Challenge anymore, I'd thought I'd share what was under the hood of both of our cars. For these particular pulls:
-Fresh Daryl Drummond rebuild. 100% legit/stock/no trickery
-Bosch 4.3 Engine Mangement running .92 Lambda
-11 Plugs
-Custom Header by Pete w/1 7/8" long primarys, extry, extry long collector to 4", very low restriction dual mufflers after "Y" split behind diff.
-Premium gas
-Lots and lots and lots of dyno time. Lots. So much that the dyno operator gave me a key to his shop. True.
-ACT flywheel w/stock clutch
-Air pump removal and oil injection delete
at least they didn’t waste the resources to build a professional bundle of snakes version only to find out it it’s not any better.
Most people don’t realize that the FD3 RX7 Twin Turbo was only ~217 whp from the factory, but it had a lot more torque through the midrange thanks to the sequential twin turbo setup and was also 200 lbs lighter than an RX8.
A proper Renesis is really quite remarkable for an NA rotary engine, but again it has differences with the prior 13B that aren’t going to mesh well together. Anybody that’s been on here since the beginning knows that all the rotary engine experts came and went packing when all their knowledge and experience fell flat. It was a long time coming before I reached this understanding myself.
.
so again, imo the FD3 should serve as a model for those seeking to turbo their RX8 and is why I focused in on a BW EFR7163 with sufficiently sized turbine housing. Because you don’t need to be shooting for a lot of boost at high rpm to have a quick, fun car. You just need reasonable boost early in the powerband to jump the torque and lowend response up. I would probably choose a Garrett G25-660 now though. I bought the EFR a few years before it came out.
no, it was in reference to my previous reply about the FD3 only making 217 whp as delivered from Mazda. This isn’t a turbo thread per se, but I was posting the OE FD3 dyno graph and just side tracked there.
.
, 
