All of this turbo talk? whats the highest HP NA Rensis?
08-12-2008, 07:27 PM
#51
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.
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.
08-12-2008, 07:39 PM
#52
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.
A NA setup really needs to hit 5k range to get going, and even then it's pretty uneventful.
08-12-2008, 09:15 PM
#53
Power!!
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.
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.
Unless the ST class has some rules restriction that leaves something big on the table that we can do on the street.
08-12-2008, 10:30 PM
#55
Registered User
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speedsource dyno'd 260hp at the crank on their ST class Renesis race engines. I think that's probably the number we should be shooting at without serious internal design changes.
Although it would be interesting to have some of the RX7 folks take a look at our Renesis rotors and see what they think.
Although it would be interesting to have some of the RX7 folks take a look at our Renesis rotors and see what they think.
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
08-13-2008, 12:31 AM
#56
Power!!
https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=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
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
Now if someone has some dyno information with a ported motor...Ray...
08-13-2008, 08:47 AM
#57
https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?t=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
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
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
The following users liked this post:
Rocket Lanch (11-17-2020)
08-13-2008, 04:03 PM
#59
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-19-2008, 03:24 AM
#61
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-19-2008, 02:59 PM
#62
lets see the dyno that backs it up as being something more than special 
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
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
08-19-2008, 03:37 PM
#63
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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, I've built a different one, and it works.
08-19-2008, 07:08 PM
#64
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 ...
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 ...
08-19-2008, 09:49 PM
#65
Registered
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: n.c.
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-19-2008, 11:38 PM
#67
08-20-2008, 11:00 AM
#68
Registered
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
SimonT182
RX-8 Parts For Sale/Wanted
4
10-02-2015 10:33 AM
{WTB/WTT} WTB Right Undertray Riser and Guard
archon
RX-8 Parts For Sale/Wanted
3
10-01-2015 06:08 AM
