Engine Dyno testing of Renesis
06-20-2006, 01:09 PM
#251
Listen to Zoom44
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Overland Park
Posts: 1,330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by zoom44
dont start with the 250. htey sold the car with 247 down to 238 which = 232 under the new standard. the tested number that hymee got is within the legal allowed variance.
06-20-2006, 01:18 PM
#252
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tirminyl
Which is 5% right? Or somewhere in there. As for the 250 they said "up to" or their goal was 250.
06-20-2006, 01:22 PM
#255
Administrator
Originally Posted by Ike
They had print advertisements and brochures with 250hp. The people who preordered early believed the hp number would be 250.
06-20-2006, 01:57 PM
#256
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
*sigh* We know what Hymee's baseline is, all I want to know at this point is how his SC improves the power curve and by how much on that same engine dyno.
06-20-2006, 02:03 PM
#257
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by zoom44
only as a targeted nymber ike- i ordered an hour after the system went live- it was always targeted and never final. when thecars went on sale the official advertised rated hp was 247. do not keep repeating that statement. i am tired of seeing you make it. it is untrue.
In the grand scheme of things it really doesn't matter, I think most will agree now that 250 or 247 doesn't matter, both numbers were infalted. At the time of restating horsepower to 238 I still think that number was chosen by lawyers trying to cover all their bases. Even if the hp was never officially 250 there was certainly a good amount of print material with that number. In todays sue happy society Mazda was just covering their ***.
06-20-2006, 02:37 PM
#258
Registered
The engine is most certainly capable of hitting the target number (it's been done) and I'm sure before the car was released that Mazda did in fact hit it or get closed to it with a different state of tune. The difference between 247 and 250 isn't enough to complain about or go to the trouble of changing adds over. However emissions regulations caused a reflash and that killed their nice tune and dumbed down the engine to what it is now. The car was released with a higher stated power number because at that time, it did hit it. It didn't change until the cars hit U.S. shores and were reflashed. It turns out the restated numbers were stil more optimistic than the reflash numbers but if 5% off of stated is within tolerances, it is still pretty accurate as 5% less than 238 is 220 and that number we all believe.
A target number is a goal. It's what they wanted. It doesn't mean that they'll get it. It's not an advertised claim by any means and can't be construed as such.
A target number is a goal. It's what they wanted. It doesn't mean that they'll get it. It's not an advertised claim by any means and can't be construed as such.
06-20-2006, 03:02 PM
#259
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotarygod
The engine is most certainly capable of hitting the target number (it's been done) and I'm sure before the car was released that Mazda did in fact hit it or get closed to it with a different state of tune. The difference between 247 and 250 isn't enough to complain about or go to the trouble of changing adds over. However emissions regulations caused a reflash and that killed their nice tune and dumbed down the engine to what it is now. The car was released with a higher stated power number because at that time, it did hit it. It didn't change until the cars hit U.S. shores and were reflashed. It turns out the restated numbers were stil more optimistic than the reflash numbers but if 5% off of stated is within tolerances, it is still pretty accurate as 5% less than 238 is 220 and that number we all believe.
A target number is a goal. It's what they wanted. It doesn't mean that they'll get it. It's not an advertised claim by any means and can't be construed as such.
A target number is a goal. It's what they wanted. It doesn't mean that they'll get it. It's not an advertised claim by any means and can't be construed as such.
I may be wrong on this, I can't recall for sure. Don't the Japan RX-8s trap the same, run the same 1/4 mile, and dyno almost identical to the US cars. Seems if the reflash was really the only cause for the lower horsepower the Japanese cars would be more powerful. Seems the most simple explaination is still the real explanation. Mazda lied about how much horsepower the car really makes.
If you want to claim it's because of tune that's fine. But automakers don't make claims based on what the car is capable of with a different tune, you make them based on the way the car stands at production.
06-20-2006, 03:30 PM
#262
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by MazdaManiac
Ike - you are trolling. This isn't the thread to discuss the whole "Mada Lie" issue (beside the fact that it has been beaten to death).
This thread is in place to discus Hymee's (incredibly slow) R&D.
This thread is in place to discus Hymee's (incredibly slow) R&D.
06-20-2006, 03:36 PM
#263
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
whao! another hp threat, I thout that topic was covered
Ike, we have dyno 3 RX-8 several times, they all dyno over 190 rwhp and one dyno 204 rwhp, they are japanesse imports JDM with there original tune, imported by the owners.
we have dyno a renesis equiped rx-7 race car and the best dyno was 233 rwhp
, no porting only external changes and a rx-7 transmision this engine came from a crash JDM rx-8
Ike, we have dyno 3 RX-8 several times, they all dyno over 190 rwhp and one dyno 204 rwhp, they are japanesse imports JDM with there original tune, imported by the owners.
we have dyno a renesis equiped rx-7 race car and the best dyno was 233 rwhp
, no porting only external changes and a rx-7 transmision this engine came from a crash JDM rx-8
06-20-2006, 03:43 PM
#264
Registered
Originally Posted by Ike
I think you have 50+ other posts to delete. But if you only want to delete mine on the subject that's fair 
.
.
06-20-2006, 03:50 PM
#265
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotarygod
I actually deleted 2 of mine and 1 of zoom44's as well so I'm working on it. Don't think you are anything special.
06-20-2006, 03:59 PM
#266
As far as I know, this is the only thread discussing actual engine dyno testing of the Renesis.
Lets keep the transmission out of it, FFS. There wasn't a transmission in sight!
As to the MoTeC being able to make more power or not than the stock ECU - it seems some don't get it. The engine will make the most power when it gets the optimum fuel and spark. It doesn't care what is making / delivering the fuel or spark. And the engine was being run as it was being tuned and measured in real time - continually adjusting things to reach the optimum. So the excercise was to find the potential of the "hardware".
As for being slow - well, if only we are able to spend 100% of our time on it. Unfortunately, that is not reality. If the truth is known, in terms of elapsed time "drive in - drive out" when we first had the S/C running and driveable, it would be much faster than anyone else. It was about 2 or 3 days. But what does that count for?
Cheers,
Hymee.
Lets keep the transmission out of it, FFS. There wasn't a transmission in sight!
As to the MoTeC being able to make more power or not than the stock ECU - it seems some don't get it. The engine will make the most power when it gets the optimum fuel and spark. It doesn't care what is making / delivering the fuel or spark. And the engine was being run as it was being tuned and measured in real time - continually adjusting things to reach the optimum. So the excercise was to find the potential of the "hardware".
As for being slow - well, if only we are able to spend 100% of our time on it. Unfortunately, that is not reality. If the truth is known, in terms of elapsed time "drive in - drive out" when we first had the S/C running and driveable, it would be much faster than anyone else. It was about 2 or 3 days. But what does that count for?
Cheers,
Hymee.
Last edited by Hymee; 06-20-2006 at 05:15 PM.
06-21-2006, 12:17 PM
#272
Registered
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 3,754
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Hymee
And the engine was being run as it was being tuned and measured in real time - continually adjusting things to reach the optimum. So the excercise was to find the potential of the "hardware".
Cheers,
Hymee.
Cheers,
Hymee.
06-22-2006, 05:21 PM
#273
Originally Posted by rotarygod
It works out to 89 octane.
edit - reason for asking is that i'll be dyno tuning with a piggyback ECU soon & I know the interceptor x tuned cars are getting best power on US 87 octane .
Just trying to work out if i should tune on 95 or 91 Ron.
Did not mean to hijack the thread Hymee .
Last edited by Brettus; 06-22-2006 at 05:58 PM.