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.
I assume you have a full bridge, but i suppose the question would be whether an upper half bridge would work with that timing or just go with an aggressive street port.
1. Bridgeport has always been a fail for a Renesis.
2. The Renesis siamese exhaust port + overlap will always be a fail regardless
3. If you’re going to have overlap then all the overlap theory and design has to be employed, except the dynamic of the siamese port timing between the two rotors will always be in conflict with this. Never going to happen.
1. Bridgeport has always been a fail for a Renesis.
2. The Renesis siamese exhaust port + overlap will always be a fail regardless
3. If you’re going to have overlap then all the overlap theory and design has to be employed, except the dynamic of the siamese port timing between the two rotors will always be in conflict with this. Never going to happen.
but you’ll get there eventually ...
1/ Agree with you re the bridgeport ...that was a mistake . But easy to say that in hindsight.
2/Disagree ..... I don't think you have thought this through . But would be interested to hear if you have ever done anything that would back up that theory.
3/Again disagree ... see 2
Waiting patiently for the lockdown to ease atm before I can test an idea. As mentioned earlier , I think the bridgeport (on the primary port) is not helping matters. So ..... I have been thinking about what could be done to improve on that. I've made the SSV adjustable . In this way I can limit the amount of air flowing through the secondaries and maximise the amount through the primaries. The idea being to keep the velocity high in the port that has the BP to prevent exhaust backflow into the intake.
Hopefully this will limit the loss of power due to exhaust contamination from the BP while maintaining some of the scavenging.
Obviously I might end up losing power up top from the diminished overall flow potential ...but I'm hoping that wont happen. I have noticed that when you run without the SSV opening , you lose midrange but not much up top . Fingers xd!
There is always something someone hasn't tried that may be the answer. Look at the new Cosworth V12 that puts out 1000hp NA, who would have thought that was possible even 5 years ago.
Here we see the point where the BP is about to open . Note that the exhaust stroke is not yet complete and there will be an imbalance which will allow exhaust gas to enter the BP and head on into the intake.
Below is the point where the PP opens/closes . Note the secondary port is almost fully open so intake air can easily bypass and go through the PP.
virtual flow is not the same as actual power flow on a dyno, the virtual program cannot ascertain the difference
Also, while the added port itself may not be closed by the apex seal until that point, you have to understand that what is in play here is flow momentum. The flow space between the rotor face and housing closes down and choked off what little flow exists through that small flow path. Additionally, flow is being split off into multiple paths; two side ports and your little pp (chuckle). Flow is always going to take the path of least resistance, meaning the side ports are carrying the majority of the exhaust out. Splitting it up results smaller pieces of divided energy being made smaller still by increased losses overall.
There’s a reason the PP housing hybrid Renesis engines don’t produce the anticipated results. You’re starting to learn why. There’s also a difference between the Renesis siamese port and most other modern reciprocating engine versions that you’re overlooking. Frankly, I’ll give you the credit for making me ponder upon it over the last several years, think it through, and having come to that understanding. I can’t say this as a fact, so ... my “feeling” is that Mazda dumped it in on the turbo patent with good reason. I suspect they regret having ever having done it to begin with.
Haven't done any testing ...but have been driving it a lot lately. Working on the turbo setup atm .... after that is done I'll turn my attentions back to the N/A
Went up to Auckland today to dyno several rx8 race cars. Things went pretty well with that and we had some time left over so I asked Maz if I could put Bluey on the dyno.
First couple of runs went ok . We noticed that she was still making good power at 9000 so decided to up the rev cut to 9500 and Voila! She makes power all the way . Maybe she would go even higher as there was no sign of dropoff at 9500..... but I wasn't game to try that.
Anyway ...pretty happy with this result .
Green line is fully race prepped and balanced with a free flow 3" exhaust that we dynoed half an hour earlier. This is at the high end of the engines I've dynoed on this dyno (have had over a dozen race prepped rx8s on it)
Red line is Bluey . The loss early on is nowhere near as bad as it looks .... The wheel dropped off the roller and hit the rear roller .
Looks like there might be promise in this idea after all !
Hilarious . I'll tell ya what Team ...you just keep posting your make believe made up BS and I'll just keep posting actual unbiased honest results.
I'll let others decide who walks the talk around here.
you mean the Mustang dyno results from over 12 years ago on the original factory engine with OE coils as a Cobb beta tester that this still hasn’t matched yet?
that wasn’t from the multiple blueprinted Superflow engine dyno results which are also posted on here, those came later
a Renesis engine doesn’t lose 50 hp, let alone more, from the flywheel to the rear wheels, it only means it never had it at the flywheel to begin with.
the results aren’t lacking, it’s an inability to discern them ...
.
I was addressing your comments about me posting results, not making some magic standard
which by your own admission, this hasn’t even matched your own Stock engine results then, thanks for making my point I suppose
the only ranting is your own, just as I predicted. I stated that the markup was an “illustrative” example, meaning it’s not necessarily 100% accurate (wheel speed is listed rather than rpm). The entire point is; this experimental tiny-pp port concept might be revving higher, but it’s down on power everywhere overall compared to what a strong Stock port engine can do. Which you even now admit to.
as far as dynos go, the same engine dyno results from same builder dyno around 240 whp in the Pro Formula Mazda race car series that he was the original Renesis engine builder/supplier for, which the transaxle drivetrain they use is slightly more efficient than an RX8 .
(only posting vid this for anyone who doesn’t understand the reference context, so please don’t flip out by making more ridiculous accusations and assertions).
Any more progress on this? Props for being the only person to build a hybrid motor with an N/A focus and actually post results!
It would appear the combination of adding the late closing PP and the BP shifted power further up the rev range, wonder what it would do at 10k or 10.5k?
Seems like this concept but using GSL-SE housings and deleting the Siamese port while retaining the stock intake ( at least no BP) could potentially produce even more power without having to rev quite as high.
I was addressing your comments about me posting results, not making some magic standard
which by your own admission, this hasn’t even matched your own Stock engine results then, thanks for making my point I suppose
the only ranting is your own, just as I predicted. I stated that the markup was an “illustrative” example, meaning it’s not necessarily 100% accurate (wheel speed is listed rather than rpm). The entire point is; this experimental tiny-pp port concept might be revving higher, but it’s down on power everywhere overall compared to what a strong Stock port engine can do. Which you even now admit to.
as far as dynos go, the same engine dyno results from same builder dyno around 240 whp in the Pro Formula Mazda race car series that he was the original Renesis engine builder/supplier for, which the transaxle drivetrain they use is slightly more efficient than an RX8 .
(only posting vid this for anyone who doesn’t understand the reference context, so please don’t flip out by making more ridiculous accusations and assertions).
To continue the discussion a bit, I seem to remember that someone had a Drummond build dyno'ed and it ended up under 200 rwhp. I will try to find that post if I can. It might be interesting to discuss further.
Thats where I was hopping to be, suffered high RPM misfires and only managed 190WHP at 7K RPM. Have not been able to resolve the issue yet, so waiting until summer to try it again.
This was not the post I was thinking of, I remember, I think, a dyno sheet also. It might have been the same car though. I think Team knows him, maybe he can chime in...
Any more progress on this? Props for being the only person to build a hybrid motor with an N/A focus and actually post results!
I have tried a few more manifold ideas but nothing I've done had any positive impact. I do rev it out to 9500 every now and then and it does seem to like it up there . Not game to go higher though as the engine hasn't been prepped for that.
I've been driving it a lot lately (engine has maybe 15000kms on it) and enjoying the response I get to 'da braps' , but I keep eyeing up that spare GTX3582 I have sitting on the bench ...........................
04-17-2020, 02:53 AM
