No. Should be about equal, though the Bosch tuners usually give up a bit of low end performance by altering the intake valve timing and such.

It is important to note that there is a definite difference in what can be realized by "general" tuning based on basic data logging and the results of running a car on the dyno in a closed environment for hours.
When I work on purpose-built cars, it is not unusual to spend 4 or more hours and dozens of pulls just on the fuel curves alone.

Of course. But the actual "lag" as described applies far more to a NA rx-8 than a FI one. With 9 psi of boost and as low as 2800 rpm, I already have MORE torque than a NA car at it's peak. And it just keeps going all the way to redline. Oh, and the 3071R can do 12 or even 14 PSI of boost at similarly low rpm ranges.

A NA setup really needs to hit 5k range to get going, and even then it's pretty uneventful.

Absolutely agree. I guess their car should be considered the highest we should ever expect to get to NA. EG: They represent the experimental limit.

Unless the ST class has some rules restriction that leaves something big on the table that we can do on the street.

ST rules prohibit them from altering anything from the throttle body to the exhaust ports, so the insides of the motor and the intake manifold are off-limits.

https://www.rx8club.com/series-i-aftermarket-performance-modifications-23/dyno-gotham-racing-tuned-accessport-racing-beat-parts-153312/

Stock motor with Racing Beat bolt ons at 224whp. What's the driveline loss? 15%? 17%?

224wph x 1.15 = 257hp at the flywheel

224whp x 1.17 = 262hp at the flywheel

:eyetwitch :eyetwitch :eyetwitch

Nice. So 260 with bolt ons and tuning. Seems to be consistent with what I was saying.

Now if someone has some dyno information with a ported motor...Ray...;)

sorry it was 208 RWHP on a Mustang dyno, 224 is a fantasy number

the 220 RWHP graph was the last of 10 similar back-back runs made that day on the Cobb Mustang dyno dialing in the fuel ratio, the best peak graph was several HP/TQ values higher that occurred with 14.x AFRs that were too high for my comfort. Your AC doesn't run at WOT, not having one is a greater effect on weight distribution than engine drag, but that this output was fully emissions legal is where my pride in the numbers is; no CELs or CEL-deletes and easily passed the tailpipe sniffer test

The Speedsource/GrandAm engines quoted are blueprinted with ceramic seals and MoTec ECUs, they are not emissions legal having cat and air injection deletes etc.

and a certain somebody needs to quit playing number games and say what dyno he's using, which is historically known to read much higher than a Mustang dyno. You can't accurately compare dynos, but there are some variations between them that help put the numbers into context. In the end, it's just a numbers game anyways .... emphasis on game

and finally, multi-tube Renesis header dreams are for 'tards, some people will never accept fact over fantasy :lol:

Bosch, not Motec.

Tell that to Roar, Pipelayer and Brass Mitchell.

And some people are too stubborn to accept any idea that contravenes their own...:lol:

you can afford to be cocky with results to back it up, I walked the walk, talking the talk is all anybody else has been capable of

:squint:
We've had our car running our header for 3 months, we're happy with it, thanks.

lets see the dyno that backs it up as being something more than special :dunno:

the whole issue is whether or not a tube header makes any real difference. I went against the grain to prove that on a zero-overlap timing engine that it not only doesn't make any difference, going to large sizes doesn't hurt lowend powerband either etc.

anybody can build a header, maximizing Renesis output is an entirely different matter

Yet there is quite substaintial theory already present by several, including myself, to show that resonance effects can still benefit the rotary, yet you simply ignore it and blow it off as 'well I've built this and works'.

Well, I've built a different one, and it works.

well getting back onto the actual thread topic, I proved my theory here on the forum with a dyno from an extremely reputable company to back it up, I did this entirely on my own interest without any commercial intent, I have no need to make marketing claims etc.

FWIW they all work

the question is by how much, when, and where

my claim is that you won't find anything that I already did with a much simpler, less expensive design

if you can prove otherwise, I'm listening ...

The Speedsource ST class cars used MOTEC. Bosch is mandated in DP and GT

ST is mandated for Bosch or OEM as well.

mazda published the VE of the renesis engine in the SAE paper. at 8500rpms its more like 105%

they dont give a bsfc chart for anything other than 1500rpm unfortunately

Ok then, we're pretty free over winter as we've built all the new cars for next season already, if you don't mind me having the pipe lengths, bend radius, etc, of your header, we'll fab one up when we have chance and do a back to back dyno with our own.

:dunno:


edit: dyno graph deleted so bite me, it's irrelevant now anyways :smoker:

^^ Shrink that sh*t!

lol, caught me before the edit, attached the wrong file ...

Not much use to me for a back-to-back comparison though...;)