Any word from YAW lately?
09-20-2003, 04:40 PM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Morristown Tennessee
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would be interesting if somebody tried dynoing the RX-8 with the front jacked up so the front wheels could spin. Then dyno the car with the front wheels still, and then hand spin the front tires as fast as they will go by hand and dyno again. If the computer is looking at the front wheel speed, it would probably show some difference.
09-20-2003, 06:34 PM
#27
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by yawpower
To keep inertial losses to a reasonably low level, the run is normally done in high gear. (That's why I mentioned the speeding tickets.)
To keep inertial losses to a reasonably low level, the run is normally done in high gear. (That's why I mentioned the speeding tickets.)
09-20-2003, 06:39 PM
#28
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by BRealistic
I would be interesting if somebody tried dynoing the RX-8 with the front jacked up so the front wheels could spin. Then dyno the car with the front wheels still, and then hand spin the front tires as fast as they will go by hand and dyno again. If the computer is looking at the front wheel speed, it would probably show some difference.
I would be interesting if somebody tried dynoing the RX-8 with the front jacked up so the front wheels could spin. Then dyno the car with the front wheels still, and then hand spin the front tires as fast as they will go by hand and dyno again. If the computer is looking at the front wheel speed, it would probably show some difference.
or better yet find the speed sensor, determine the electric output (usually 4-20milliamps DC), and use a signal generator to fake the speed.
However, there may be even more complicated programming which would compare intake pressure (which is related loosely to speed) to wheel speed. Cars are getting more complicated all the time.
09-21-2003, 12:19 AM
#29
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Suwanee. Ga
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not just send the signal from the rear tires to ecu input that normaly wouls be from the fronts? That way the computer thinks all 4 tires are spinning at the same rate. Shouldn't be too much harder than diconnecting the front sensor wire and running 2 wires from the rear sensor ecu input to the front speed sensor ecu input. That should work and you could undo it in about 10 mins and shouldn't have any ill effects on the car. Could be wrong but what do you think?
09-21-2003, 06:26 PM
#30
tyranosaurus rex-8
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: los angeles
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by pr0ber
in 6th you have no chance of reaching redline, in 5th there is a slim chance if conditions are perfect. Considering drag is proportional the square of the speed, I doubt you would want to do a pull in anything higher then 3rd gear.
in 6th you have no chance of reaching redline, in 5th there is a slim chance if conditions are perfect. Considering drag is proportional the square of the speed, I doubt you would want to do a pull in anything higher then 3rd gear.
09-23-2003, 07:15 AM
#31
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Herts - UK
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by yawpower
The service manual details the way that the ECU monitors the engine, and other sensors, and how those inputs are processed. In the case of running on a chassis dyno, the computer will "investigate" the situation. And try to determine what is wrong. In other words, why is the driver asking for full throttle while I am sitting still?
For instance, DTC number P0500 States that under the following conditions, there is a vehicle speed sensor problem:
Car in gear
Engine speed more than 2,500 rpm
Load (Throttle Opening) more than 40%
In put signal reads less than 2.3 miles per hour.
It does not explain what actions will be taken once it thinks this problem exists.
In the ignition timing control section, it mentions one of the modes called Acceleration correction. It states: "Performs retard correction of ignition timing to prevent knocking at acceleration from a standstill."
The service manual details the way that the ECU monitors the engine, and other sensors, and how those inputs are processed. In the case of running on a chassis dyno, the computer will "investigate" the situation. And try to determine what is wrong. In other words, why is the driver asking for full throttle while I am sitting still?
For instance, DTC number P0500 States that under the following conditions, there is a vehicle speed sensor problem:
Car in gear
Engine speed more than 2,500 rpm
Load (Throttle Opening) more than 40%
In put signal reads less than 2.3 miles per hour.
It does not explain what actions will be taken once it thinks this problem exists.
In the ignition timing control section, it mentions one of the modes called Acceleration correction. It states: "Performs retard correction of ignition timing to prevent knocking at acceleration from a standstill."
I have one theory that might explain this: what if the cars are generating all sorts of ECU errors in normal operation, due to software bugs or problems with sensors? Lots of people seem to be seeing spurious Check Engine Lights so it looks like there are some problems in this area, and not all error codes would generate a CEL anyway (but they may still affect engine operation). This would also explain why some cars can actually achieve the stated performance - perhaps not all cars are affected and not all the time.
09-27-2003, 07:56 AM
#32
Momentum Keeps Me Going
Originally posted by ChrisW
If we assume that the car is performing poorly on the dyno due to this kind of intervention by the ECU, that still doesn't explain the poor performance and G-Tech results
If we assume that the car is performing poorly on the dyno due to this kind of intervention by the ECU, that still doesn't explain the poor performance and G-Tech results
It seems highly likely the ECU WILL need further development, esp. if someone QUICKLY came up with a last minute ECU redo at port (who knows?) that has been done supposed to meet emmisions. If that is true is is highly likey that was not a well developed ECU effort, more like a FAIL-SAFE effort to get the cars out of port. Did someone say BUGS?
Bottom line, with:
1) a VERY HIGHLY complicated ECU-ENGINE dynamic
2) cutting edge protocol used in the ECU
3) few new-gen protocol readers
4) the tight-lipped philosophy of Mazda and its engineers
5) unknown DYNO testing possibilities
there is going to be an extended development effort required to get PROVEN results. Paul Yaw has said it best, and most dispassionately, and I'll be waiting to see what he comes up with, IF he comes up with something!
09-28-2003, 02:14 PM
#33
uhhhhh....hello?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,024
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by P00Man; 04-16-2011 at 08:20 PM.
09-30-2003, 08:17 AM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Bloomfield, NJ
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fooling speed sensor to get proper dyno
Originally posted by Mazda Family
Why not just send the signal from the rear tires to ecu input that normaly wouls be from the fronts? That way the computer thinks all 4 tires are spinning at the same rate. Shouldn't be too much harder than diconnecting the front sensor wire and running 2 wires from the rear sensor ecu input to the front speed sensor ecu input. That should work and you could undo it in about 10 mins and shouldn't have any ill effects on the car. Could be wrong but what do you think?
Why not just send the signal from the rear tires to ecu input that normaly wouls be from the fronts? That way the computer thinks all 4 tires are spinning at the same rate. Shouldn't be too much harder than diconnecting the front sensor wire and running 2 wires from the rear sensor ecu input to the front speed sensor ecu input. That should work and you could undo it in about 10 mins and shouldn't have any ill effects on the car. Could be wrong but what do you think?
09-30-2003, 10:36 AM
#35
Senior Geek
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 1,005
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Spin9k
Yea, that IS the rub in all these arguments. Others, and my own GTECH Pro Competition simply show the WRHP just isn't there, save extrodinary power train losses. The other "MOST HOPEFUL" answer is we need to wait for SP1, or SP2, or SP? on the ECU at least! It's apparently one complicated piece of software that!
It seems highly likely the ECU WILL need further development, esp. if someone QUICKLY came up with a last minute ECU redo at port (who knows?) that has been done supposed to meet emmisions. If that is true is is highly likey that was not a well developed ECU effort, more like a FAIL-SAFE effort to get the cars out of port. Did someone say BUGS?
Bottom line, with:
1) a VERY HIGHLY complicated ECU-ENGINE dynamic
2) cutting edge protocol used in the ECU
3) few new-gen protocol readers
4) the tight-lipped philosophy of Mazda and its engineers
5) unknown DYNO testing possibilities
there is going to be an extended development effort required to get PROVEN results. Paul Yaw has said it best, and most dispassionately, and I'll be waiting to see what he comes up with, IF he comes up with something!
Yea, that IS the rub in all these arguments. Others, and my own GTECH Pro Competition simply show the WRHP just isn't there, save extrodinary power train losses. The other "MOST HOPEFUL" answer is we need to wait for SP1, or SP2, or SP? on the ECU at least! It's apparently one complicated piece of software that!
It seems highly likely the ECU WILL need further development, esp. if someone QUICKLY came up with a last minute ECU redo at port (who knows?) that has been done supposed to meet emmisions. If that is true is is highly likey that was not a well developed ECU effort, more like a FAIL-SAFE effort to get the cars out of port. Did someone say BUGS?
Bottom line, with:
1) a VERY HIGHLY complicated ECU-ENGINE dynamic
2) cutting edge protocol used in the ECU
3) few new-gen protocol readers
4) the tight-lipped philosophy of Mazda and its engineers
5) unknown DYNO testing possibilities
there is going to be an extended development effort required to get PROVEN results. Paul Yaw has said it best, and most dispassionately, and I'll be waiting to see what he comes up with, IF he comes up with something!
On a different note:
Spin9K, let's do a quantitative comparisson. Can you install your Gtech on another car with known Dyno figures? Don't change any parameters on the GTech from your run on the RX8. And compare the results. We don't care about drivetrain losses here. We would simply be comparing 2 different data sources and we could come up with a scaling model for it.
For example, if you have a car X that is Dynoing at 150RWHP; you then plug in the GTech to it and do a couple runs, and results in 170HP (assuming the GTech is not 100% accurate). Verify that the results are consistent. Then you move the GTech to the 8, run it a couple times with the exact same parameters. Let's say you get 180HP on the 8.
Then we can scale this as follows:
CarX
Dyno: 150RWHP
Gtech: 170HP
RX8
Gtech: 180HP
Dyno: 150*180/170 = 158RWHP
or even bettet, you will get the following coefficient: 180/170 = 1.058 which could be applied to the RX8's GTech HP curve to correct it and compare against the original dyno'd X car.
Alright, I made it complicated. Sorry.
10-15-2004, 09:32 PM
#36
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bump. Anybody know what Mr. Yaw is up to these days?
If you're reading this yawpower, can you tell us things you've learned about the RENESIS in the past year?
Are there new products in the pipeline?
If you're reading this yawpower, can you tell us things you've learned about the RENESIS in the past year?
Are there new products in the pipeline?
04-27-2006, 01:36 PM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to check his site periodically, but after a while gave up. I haven't heard anything about them in regards to the RX-8 in a long time.
04-27-2006, 01:51 PM
#45
Registered
He mostly works on different types of rotary projects such as SCCA cars, rotary airplanes, boats, custom built motors for special applications, etc. He never really did get into the retail side of things like he intended to. As a result of this and the fact he stays so busy, he doesn't really update the website anymore. You might see an update from him every year or 2 but that's about it and even then it will only be on what project he has worked on lately.
04-27-2006, 02:33 PM
#47
Registered
He was originally working on a Vortec supercharged Renesis for a Speedworld GT cup car but I think the project fell through. I don't think the car owner ended up going ahead with it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MC36
SE RX-8 Forum
1
09-24-2015 10:02 PM
Austin22
New Member Forum
5
09-23-2015 04:46 PM
hoffdaddy
New Member Forum
10
09-06-2015 11:42 AM