Well is that two aftermarket WB sensors? Because you mentioned the OE sensor being one and the WB module being the other somewhere else. So I’m confused why you had to drill more than one hole in that scenario?

 

Hi Mark,

I am going to do my best to explain this -

I have a 13B-MSP engine - known as the Renesis engine - it is a two rotor engine - This type of engine has 4 exhaust output ports exiting out a 3 tube manifold - the 2 center ports are joined as one for each rotor - the two outside ports are larger and one for each rotor - Factory uses a log type manifold which is way to close to the engine to have a 4.9 widenband for each rotor - Most aftermarket manifolds use a 3 to 1 design with some lenght on the runners so that is what I use - I am using the X-Force manifold form Summit racing for $265.00 aka China power - I have removed the original bung from the manifold that was located in the collector of the three to one design - I added a O2 bung on the two outside runners about 3" from the collector - thus giving me a spot to have an O2 sensor per rotor - I purchased two Adaptronic Lambda Modules that come with 4.9 Bosch wideband sensors - I installed one sensor per rotor - This allows me to read the AFR from each side of the motor - This also allows me to use closed loop fueling for each side of the motor - Thus I needed to make TWO spots in the ecu enclosure in order to run the wires into the factory ECU harness

Cheers,

Shawn Christenson

 

I only asked if you were using two WB modules, not what a Renesis is etc. were you boozing last night or something?

my preference is a single WB and two EGT probes, but whatever floats your boat. That “header” only has 1-5/8” primaries and is just the usual budget copycat part sold under a dozen or so different brand names.

 

Na it just seems that when I say something it can become confusing so its best I just explain it in full detail thus to make sure the individuals paying attention are not confused. I am also finding EGTs to be any were near to being accurate as having two widebands per rotor - you can have matching AFR and egts can differ - you add or subtract fuel and the AFR will change per rotor to either be too rich or too lean when trying to match EGTS..

 

That is interesting to hear. Do you think it is the varying compression between faces and trying to accommodate all three on one fuel table? Is it at all possible to tune per rotor face? Or is that just asking too much?

 

As the compression/power drops over time just keep reassuring yourself that the AFRs are perfect

 

Right and how much wideband per Rotor testing have you done? EGTs leave way to much room for end user mistake also I am not discrediting the egt sensors entirely but they are really only there to show gross difference and peak temps.

 

My question is how long the sensors are lasting if they are that close to the exhaust ports.

They would be in a position that the heat would be way over spec

 

They are roughly 20ish inches from the exhaust ports... each wideband is about 2-3" away from were the original wideband would be located so no they are not seeing any different heat than normal.

 

I think routing through the existing ECU harness grommet might be better than holes through the ECU enclosure. If when you ever need to pull the engine you won't have to monkey with depinning the wideband just to disconnect the ECU harness from the ECU. Unless you slotted the top of the holes in the ECU box, that would work too...

 

A 6 pin Deutsch connector wired in properly would be much better. Then you can heat shrink it and seal it properly. Not much sense having a potentially leaking connection to a circuit board

 

That too tho rtv sealant could be added if you go thru the rubber grommet. The main thing I was just suggesting was to take a route that didn't keep the wideband sensors captive when removing the ECU harness.

 

pretty much none since I've been entirely focused on the uniqueness of the cylinder-less Renesis engine for the last 14 years and counting ...

 

Oh you got me! come on now... there I changed it.. lets hear your answer to my question rather than a redirect about the wrong word I chose..

 

Many ways to do it and your suggestion is a great one - I did do mine quickly and for some individuals who have limited resources it works - yes I agree you should not wash down your engine bay with my method without first removing the ecu...

 

Technically the OEM Case lid would come out with the harness letting you completely remove it from the car if you needed so other than having an extra piece of plastic you still have full mobility.

 

Ah, you went thru the lid. I assumed the side of the box. Makes sense

 

Also if you read in the actual instructions I provided specifically for Rx8 customers (note no other company is doing so in the world publicly) the first option is to go through the vent in the front of the ECU enclosure which is by far the easiest method for the average enthusiast.

"

• Once you have the module installed you will need to pin the 6 wires from the lambda sensor harness into the OEM connector - I recommend two options to getting the wires into the OEM ECU enclosure - Option 1 is to go through the vents for the ECU in the front of the OEM ECU enclosure Note you will need to cut the cooling plate inside of the OEM ECU enclosure which is recommend anyways for better fitment of the ecu. Option 2 is to drill a hole in the OEM ECU enclosure cap and fishing the 6 wires through with a grommet to help with keeping it water resistant."

https://www.tunedbyshawn.com/pages/e...azda-rx8-guide

 

It’s the same answer doing the same edit as you made.

It’s not a piston engine, it’s not a 13b rotary, it’s uniquely a Renesis.


.

 

I guess I'm confused... I didn't read back prior to this page so perhaps that's my problem.

So you're able to read AFR from each rotor, got it. Are you managing multiple fuel maps or simply using the two readings to capture your richest / leanest chamber and tune from there?

Or is it more of a sanity thing so that you don't inadvertently detonate a seal by a misleading "mixed" reading from the tail end of the manifold?

 

Once again you deflect from the question....

 

Just easier to make individual combustion chamber adjustments - IE if one is running leaner than the other then I can add fuel to that chamber.

 

I didn’t deflect anything. It was never my intention to either argue or convince you of anything. I don’t agree with your method. You’re convinced it’s correct. That’s fine by me, and seems like you feel the same.

 

by changing the duty on individual injectors?

 

Standard feature: