Mazdatrix/DNA Procharger Kit Available
10-15-2007, 08:15 AM
#77
Registered
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't judge a pd blower solely on Petit's kit. I have my opinion of it but needless to say it's not the be all end of of PD supercharger kits and wasn't meant to be. My money would say the DNA will have nothing on Hymee's when it gets done. If it does it'll only be on the extreme top end right before the shift point which would be irrelevant as it would be staring at tail lights long before then anyways. A centrifugal has NO business being on a small high revving engine when there is another alternative available. DNA couldn't convince me of it and neither could a ride in one. I'd basically say that was fun but next time use something better and I'd make no reservations of telling that to the creator. That's the whole truth and nothing but the truth. A centrifugal can never get cheap enough (free) to justify it's existence on a small high revving engine. IF you could somehow find a race series that only allowed centrifugal supercahrgers and nothing else, then it would be viable.
10-15-2007, 05:36 PM
#78
Don't judge a pd blower solely on Petit's kit. I have my opinion of it but needless to say it's not the be all end of of PD supercharger kits and wasn't meant to be. My money would say the DNA will have nothing on Hymee's when it gets done. If it does it'll only be on the extreme top end right before the shift point which would be irrelevant as it would be staring at tail lights long before then anyways. A centrifugal has NO business being on a small high revving engine when there is another alternative available. DNA couldn't convince me of it and neither could a ride in one. I'd basically say that was fun but next time use something better and I'd make no reservations of telling that to the creator. That's the whole truth and nothing but the truth. A centrifugal can never get cheap enough (free) to justify it's existence on a small high revving engine. IF you could somehow find a race series that only allowed centrifugal supercahrgers and nothing else, then it would be viable.
if you set a centrifugal sc to peek at 8.5k rpm like all the turbos you would get a better set-up IMO.
10-18-2007, 08:57 AM
#79
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WOW
Rotarygod im prety sure if you read back, that nowhere did i say that turbos are no good on the rotary engine. ONLY on the RENESIS !!!!!! Type less and READ more.
Also the fact that you bag centrifugal superchargers for rotary engines makes question your understanding of thr RENESIS and forced induction in general. An interesting bit of data on a PD SC is the temp curve on the compressor maps, look up the Lysholm/Autorotor data. The temp is very important because the screws of the SC heat up, expand and rub. AND THIS IS A FACT, just ask any drag racer using Autorotor, Whipple or Lysholm. And they dont like the high revs due to this fact. Not to mention the high inlet temps. So the only sensible option for a small capacity high reving engine that a turbo is not suitable for, is a centrifugal SC.
Reading back through all the related posts, the whole problem here appears that mysql101 fuddged the dyno graphs, and appears to have no idea of how much injustice he has done to the SC kit. I can guarantee that at no point does the engine make less power than standard, that just shows me how little you guys understand on how a chassis dyno works and the effect of ramp rates. Any engine that has the pumping losses eliminated, by a forced induction system, at the very low RPM's will make more power than NA. You dont need positive manifold pressure to make some power, you can just reduce the vacuume at low RPM. An NA engine is an air compressor in simple terms, it has to work to ingest the greatest volume of air to compress it with the fuel mixture. You make it easier for the engine to breath at low RPM, you make power, especially if your engine has port timing with zero degrees of overlap. Where you CAN NOT take advantage of cylinder/rotor scavenge.
The Hymee kit will never come close to the procharger kit, because the PD is no good on a rotary, many have tried from street cars to drag cars and failed. This is not rocket science guys. This is all very simple, you do your calculations on making a match up of SC/turbo, you figure out what engine management you will use, you bolt it all up and see where you are. Many iterations and design changes latter you come up with the best option, it may be a comprimise. But in simple terms, it either works or NOT. I read that the DNA/Rotormaster had a turbo kit at tried different turbo configs, and in the end they went with the procharger. Hmmmm im thinking that is the case becasue it worked the BEST !!!!! I may be guessing here, but surley if the turbo kit was cheaper and worked the best they would be selling them. They would be crazy not too.
If the PD SC would have worked, Im sure that with a Motec and all the other gear and knowledge base, that Hymee would have got it up and running. I take my hat off to them for trying because that is the frist step.
The Pettit kit is in the same books, these people have the resources and the knowhow to make it work. But it dont look all that good to me. The procharger kit is the only one that makes power all the way to 9k, as they ALL should. Because that is how the Mazda engineers intended the engine to behave.
Its good to see that there are some sensible people on this forum.
Rotarygod im prety sure if you read back, that nowhere did i say that turbos are no good on the rotary engine. ONLY on the RENESIS !!!!!! Type less and READ more.
Also the fact that you bag centrifugal superchargers for rotary engines makes question your understanding of thr RENESIS and forced induction in general. An interesting bit of data on a PD SC is the temp curve on the compressor maps, look up the Lysholm/Autorotor data. The temp is very important because the screws of the SC heat up, expand and rub. AND THIS IS A FACT, just ask any drag racer using Autorotor, Whipple or Lysholm. And they dont like the high revs due to this fact. Not to mention the high inlet temps. So the only sensible option for a small capacity high reving engine that a turbo is not suitable for, is a centrifugal SC.
Reading back through all the related posts, the whole problem here appears that mysql101 fuddged the dyno graphs, and appears to have no idea of how much injustice he has done to the SC kit. I can guarantee that at no point does the engine make less power than standard, that just shows me how little you guys understand on how a chassis dyno works and the effect of ramp rates. Any engine that has the pumping losses eliminated, by a forced induction system, at the very low RPM's will make more power than NA. You dont need positive manifold pressure to make some power, you can just reduce the vacuume at low RPM. An NA engine is an air compressor in simple terms, it has to work to ingest the greatest volume of air to compress it with the fuel mixture. You make it easier for the engine to breath at low RPM, you make power, especially if your engine has port timing with zero degrees of overlap. Where you CAN NOT take advantage of cylinder/rotor scavenge.
The Hymee kit will never come close to the procharger kit, because the PD is no good on a rotary, many have tried from street cars to drag cars and failed. This is not rocket science guys. This is all very simple, you do your calculations on making a match up of SC/turbo, you figure out what engine management you will use, you bolt it all up and see where you are. Many iterations and design changes latter you come up with the best option, it may be a comprimise. But in simple terms, it either works or NOT. I read that the DNA/Rotormaster had a turbo kit at tried different turbo configs, and in the end they went with the procharger. Hmmmm im thinking that is the case becasue it worked the BEST !!!!! I may be guessing here, but surley if the turbo kit was cheaper and worked the best they would be selling them. They would be crazy not too.
If the PD SC would have worked, Im sure that with a Motec and all the other gear and knowledge base, that Hymee would have got it up and running. I take my hat off to them for trying because that is the frist step.
The Pettit kit is in the same books, these people have the resources and the knowhow to make it work. But it dont look all that good to me. The procharger kit is the only one that makes power all the way to 9k, as they ALL should. Because that is how the Mazda engineers intended the engine to behave.
Its good to see that there are some sensible people on this forum.
10-18-2007, 09:13 AM
#80
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WOW
Rotarygod im prety sure if you read back, that nowhere did i say that turbos are no good on the rotary engine. ONLY on the RENESIS !!!!!! Type less and READ more.
Also the fact that you bag centrifugal superchargers for rotary engines makes question your understanding of thr RENESIS and forced induction in general. An interesting bit of data on a PD SC is the temp curve on the compressor maps, look up the Lysholm/Autorotor data. The temp is very important because the screws of the SC heat up, expand and rub. AND THIS IS A FACT, just ask any drag racer using Autorotor, Whipple or Lysholm. And they dont like the high revs due to this fact. Not to mention the high inlet temps. So the only sensible option for a small capacity high reving engine that a turbo is not suitable for, is a centrifugal SC.
Reading back through all the related posts, the whole problem here appears that mysql101 fuddged the dyno graphs, and appears to have no idea of how much injustice he has done to the SC kit. I can guarantee that at no point does the engine make less power than standard, that just shows me how little you guys understand on how a chassis dyno works and the effect of ramp rates. Any engine that has the pumping losses eliminated, by a forced induction system, at the very low RPM's will make more power than NA. You dont need positive manifold pressure to make some power, you can just reduce the vacuume at low RPM. An NA engine is an air compressor in simple terms, it has to work to ingest the greatest volume of air to compress it with the fuel mixture. You make it easier for the engine to breath at low RPM, you make power, especially if your engine has port timing with zero degrees of overlap. Where you CAN NOT take advantage of cylinder/rotor scavenge.
The Hymee kit will never come close to the procharger kit, because the PD is no good on a rotary, many have tried from street cars to drag cars and failed. This is not rocket science guys. This is all very simple, you do your calculations on making a match up of SC/turbo, you figure out what engine management you will use, you bolt it all up and see where you are. Many iterations and design changes latter you come up with the best option, it may be a comprimise. But in simple terms, it either works or NOT. I read that the DNA/Rotormaster had a turbo kit at tried different turbo configs, and in the end they went with the procharger. Hmmmm im thinking that is the case becasue it worked the BEST !!!!! I may be guessing here, but surley if the turbo kit was cheaper and worked the best they would be selling them. They would be crazy not too.
If the PD SC would have worked, Im sure that with a Motec and all the other gear and knowledge base, that Hymee would have got it up and running. I take my hat off to them for trying because that is the frist step.
The Pettit kit is in the same books, these people have the resources and the knowhow to make it work. But it dont look all that good to me. The procharger kit is the only one that makes power all the way to 9k, as they ALL should. Because that is how the Mazda engineers intended the engine to behave.
Its good to see that there are some sensible people on this forum.
Rotarygod im prety sure if you read back, that nowhere did i say that turbos are no good on the rotary engine. ONLY on the RENESIS !!!!!! Type less and READ more.
Also the fact that you bag centrifugal superchargers for rotary engines makes question your understanding of thr RENESIS and forced induction in general. An interesting bit of data on a PD SC is the temp curve on the compressor maps, look up the Lysholm/Autorotor data. The temp is very important because the screws of the SC heat up, expand and rub. AND THIS IS A FACT, just ask any drag racer using Autorotor, Whipple or Lysholm. And they dont like the high revs due to this fact. Not to mention the high inlet temps. So the only sensible option for a small capacity high reving engine that a turbo is not suitable for, is a centrifugal SC.
Reading back through all the related posts, the whole problem here appears that mysql101 fuddged the dyno graphs, and appears to have no idea of how much injustice he has done to the SC kit. I can guarantee that at no point does the engine make less power than standard, that just shows me how little you guys understand on how a chassis dyno works and the effect of ramp rates. Any engine that has the pumping losses eliminated, by a forced induction system, at the very low RPM's will make more power than NA. You dont need positive manifold pressure to make some power, you can just reduce the vacuume at low RPM. An NA engine is an air compressor in simple terms, it has to work to ingest the greatest volume of air to compress it with the fuel mixture. You make it easier for the engine to breath at low RPM, you make power, especially if your engine has port timing with zero degrees of overlap. Where you CAN NOT take advantage of cylinder/rotor scavenge.
The Hymee kit will never come close to the procharger kit, because the PD is no good on a rotary, many have tried from street cars to drag cars and failed. This is not rocket science guys. This is all very simple, you do your calculations on making a match up of SC/turbo, you figure out what engine management you will use, you bolt it all up and see where you are. Many iterations and design changes latter you come up with the best option, it may be a comprimise. But in simple terms, it either works or NOT. I read that the DNA/Rotormaster had a turbo kit at tried different turbo configs, and in the end they went with the procharger. Hmmmm im thinking that is the case becasue it worked the BEST !!!!! I may be guessing here, but surley if the turbo kit was cheaper and worked the best they would be selling them. They would be crazy not too.
If the PD SC would have worked, Im sure that with a Motec and all the other gear and knowledge base, that Hymee would have got it up and running. I take my hat off to them for trying because that is the frist step.
The Pettit kit is in the same books, these people have the resources and the knowhow to make it work. But it dont look all that good to me. The procharger kit is the only one that makes power all the way to 9k, as they ALL should. Because that is how the Mazda engineers intended the engine to behave.
Its good to see that there are some sensible people on this forum.
As for you statements regarding Lysholm/Autorotor and "The temp is very important because the screws of the SC heat up, expand and rub. AND THIS IS A FACT." I spoke with Lysholm engineers extensively a year ago and have seen all the compressor maps, efficiencies, parasitic losses, etc...I've also spoken with Mustang owners of the lysholm units that push upwards of 1 bar, and ZERO mention of what you claim to be "FACT". These are guys with NASA racing licenses, so not drag racing. But drag racers will push significantly more boost than a street application. So even if what you're claiming is true, it's a non factor for a RX-8 running at most a 1.82 pr.
Instead of guessing Pettit's intentions - maybe try asking them what they were. Many of us, myself included, have spoken with Pettit and get very clearly their intentions.
We're all aware there is no overlap/scavenging in the Renesis. This is why the RX-7 crowd can use straight T4 turbos, and we're using smaller T3 turbines...and with the high compression/low boost, it really doesn't appear to be a factor.
Oh and your statement: "Type less and READ more" is very entertaining.
10-18-2007, 09:31 AM
#81
Before you bash me you would have done well to have at least looked at the dyno charts posted by mazdatrix.
Http://tinyurl.com/2b6gvf
They show less power and cut off the sc graph so a clear view of how much less isn't shown. You can take their dyno charts and plop them over a stock graph and verify for yourself.
I have no desire to make any kit look bad as its extremely easy to validate my results using the charts that have been posted.
Http://tinyurl.com/2b6gvf
They show less power and cut off the sc graph so a clear view of how much less isn't shown. You can take their dyno charts and plop them over a stock graph and verify for yourself.
I have no desire to make any kit look bad as its extremely easy to validate my results using the charts that have been posted.
WOW
Reading back through all the related posts, the whole problem here appears that mysql101 fuddged the dyno graphs, and appears to have no idea of how much injustice I can guarantee that at no point does the engine make less power than standard, that just shows me how little you guys understand on how a chassis dyno works and the effect of ramp rates. Any engine that has the pumping losses eliminated, by a forced induction system, at the very low RPM's will make more power than NA. You dont need positive manifold pressure to make some power, you can just reduce the vacuume at low RPM. An NA engine is an air compressor in simple terms, it has to work to ingest the greatest volume of air to compress it with the fuel mixture. You make it easier for the engine to breath at low RPM, you make power, especially if your engine has port timing with zero degrees of overlap. Where you CAN NOT take advantage of cylinder/rotor scavenge.
The Hymee kit will never come close to the procharger kit, because the PD is no good on a rotary, many have tried from street cars to drag cars and failed. This is not rocket science guys. This is all very simple, you do your calculations on making a match up of SC/turbo, you figure out what engine management you will use, you bolt it all up and see where you are. Many iterations and design changes latter you come up with the best option, it may be a comprimise. But in simple terms, it either works or NOT. I read that the DNA/Rotormaster had a turbo kit at tried different turbo configs, and in the end they went with the procharger. Hmmmm im thinking that is the case becasue it worked the BEST !!!!! I may be guessing here, but surley if the turbo kit was cheaper and worked the best they would be selling them. They would be crazy not too.
If the PD SC would have worked, Im sure that with a Motec and all the other gear and knowledge base, that Hymee would have got it up and running. I take my hat off to them for trying because that is the frist step.
The Pettit kit is in the same books, these people have the resources and the knowhow to make it work. But it dont look all that good to me. The procharger kit is the only one that makes power all the way to 9k, as they ALL should. Because that is how the Mazda engineers intended the engine to behave.
Its good to see that there are some sensible people on this forum.
Reading back through all the related posts, the whole problem here appears that mysql101 fuddged the dyno graphs, and appears to have no idea of how much injustice I can guarantee that at no point does the engine make less power than standard, that just shows me how little you guys understand on how a chassis dyno works and the effect of ramp rates. Any engine that has the pumping losses eliminated, by a forced induction system, at the very low RPM's will make more power than NA. You dont need positive manifold pressure to make some power, you can just reduce the vacuume at low RPM. An NA engine is an air compressor in simple terms, it has to work to ingest the greatest volume of air to compress it with the fuel mixture. You make it easier for the engine to breath at low RPM, you make power, especially if your engine has port timing with zero degrees of overlap. Where you CAN NOT take advantage of cylinder/rotor scavenge.
The Hymee kit will never come close to the procharger kit, because the PD is no good on a rotary, many have tried from street cars to drag cars and failed. This is not rocket science guys. This is all very simple, you do your calculations on making a match up of SC/turbo, you figure out what engine management you will use, you bolt it all up and see where you are. Many iterations and design changes latter you come up with the best option, it may be a comprimise. But in simple terms, it either works or NOT. I read that the DNA/Rotormaster had a turbo kit at tried different turbo configs, and in the end they went with the procharger. Hmmmm im thinking that is the case becasue it worked the BEST !!!!! I may be guessing here, but surley if the turbo kit was cheaper and worked the best they would be selling them. They would be crazy not too.
If the PD SC would have worked, Im sure that with a Motec and all the other gear and knowledge base, that Hymee would have got it up and running. I take my hat off to them for trying because that is the frist step.
The Pettit kit is in the same books, these people have the resources and the knowhow to make it work. But it dont look all that good to me. The procharger kit is the only one that makes power all the way to 9k, as they ALL should. Because that is how the Mazda engineers intended the engine to behave.
Its good to see that there are some sensible people on this forum.
10-18-2007, 10:47 AM
#82
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So RedDevil, from being chummy with the Lysholm engineers and reading the compressor charts what conclusions have you come too????
Which Autorotor is suitable for the Renesis and why????
The fact that the rotors do rub is not the only reason that a PD blower is not suitable. However to get any worthwhile performance on a rotary with a Autorotor you would need to overdrive it too much. There was a 3 rotor 20B drag car here in Australia with an Autorotor, they tried three different models from what i heard. The boost levels were in excess of 40 psi, and the engine power output was less then 600HP and was cooking the engine non stop. Yet the turbo version makes over 1300Hp on the engine dyno with less boost. http://youtube.com/watch?v=RomCIKez7Lw
So what is Petits intent? Please would like to know. Its quite clear what the intent of the procharger kit is. Before you jump, their aim was to complement the factory power output and delivery. It's obvious.
So zero inlet/exhaust port timing has little effect on forced induction, interesting. Very interesting. Please explain your self !!!!
mysql101, dude you need to understand that the dyno runs are not made back to back. And that different ramp rates would need to be used, also the different ambient conditions would also effect the graph. Also the RPM the engine load was applied on would also vary the graph, a 500 RPM difference would alter the graph signinficantly. So either way you are WRONG. Worst still you are comparing graphs from different chassis dynos, that alone is crazy.
In this case data is not translational, one variable that you cant account for is engine load. Engine load is what determines how much power you make, and the shape of the power curve, the reason that free revving an engine too 9k will not yield the same power output. You need to put load on the engine, the rate and type of load applied will vary the graph, even tyre temp will vary this. So plotting the graphs like you said is plain CRAZY. You are just pulling figures out your, you know what.
Stop quoting posts. Wasting space. LOL
Which Autorotor is suitable for the Renesis and why????
The fact that the rotors do rub is not the only reason that a PD blower is not suitable. However to get any worthwhile performance on a rotary with a Autorotor you would need to overdrive it too much. There was a 3 rotor 20B drag car here in Australia with an Autorotor, they tried three different models from what i heard. The boost levels were in excess of 40 psi, and the engine power output was less then 600HP and was cooking the engine non stop. Yet the turbo version makes over 1300Hp on the engine dyno with less boost. http://youtube.com/watch?v=RomCIKez7Lw
So what is Petits intent? Please would like to know. Its quite clear what the intent of the procharger kit is. Before you jump, their aim was to complement the factory power output and delivery. It's obvious.
So zero inlet/exhaust port timing has little effect on forced induction, interesting. Very interesting. Please explain your self !!!!
mysql101, dude you need to understand that the dyno runs are not made back to back. And that different ramp rates would need to be used, also the different ambient conditions would also effect the graph. Also the RPM the engine load was applied on would also vary the graph, a 500 RPM difference would alter the graph signinficantly. So either way you are WRONG. Worst still you are comparing graphs from different chassis dynos, that alone is crazy.
In this case data is not translational, one variable that you cant account for is engine load. Engine load is what determines how much power you make, and the shape of the power curve, the reason that free revving an engine too 9k will not yield the same power output. You need to put load on the engine, the rate and type of load applied will vary the graph, even tyre temp will vary this. So plotting the graphs like you said is plain CRAZY. You are just pulling figures out your, you know what.
Stop quoting posts. Wasting space. LOL
Last edited by The_Don; 10-18-2007 at 11:13 AM.
10-18-2007, 11:08 AM
#83
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mysql101, from looking at that graph it is obvious that the load was applied at different engine rev rates, roughly 1000RPM difference. I don't know why. It would seem like they didn't expect that people would make such a big deal out it. So this makes your analysis using this graph even more useless. Dude if you made this type of assumptions in the real world as an engineer you would be looking for new employment at McDonalds.
Hell I'll go even further, I think you them an apology. LMAO
Hell I'll go even further, I think you them an apology. LMAO
10-18-2007, 11:09 AM
#84
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So RedDevil, from being chummy with the Lysholm engineers and reading the compressor charts what conclusions have you come too????
Which Autorotor is suitable for the Renesis and why????
The fact that the rotors do rub is not the only reason that a PD blower is not suitable. However to get any worthwhile performance on a rotary with a Autorotor you would need to overdrive it too much. There was a 3 rotor 20B drag car here in Australia with an Autorotor, they tried three different models from what i heard. The boost levels were in excess of 40 psi, and the engine power output was less then 600HP and was cooking the engine non stop. Yet the turbo version makes over 1300Hp on the engine dyno with less boost. http://youtube.com/watch?v=RomCIKez7Lw
So what is Petits intent? Please would like to know. Its quite clear what the intent of the procharger kit is. Before you jump, their aim was to complement the factory power output and delivery. It's obvious.
So zero inlet/exhaust port timing has little effect on forced induction, interesting. Very interesting.
Which Autorotor is suitable for the Renesis and why????
The fact that the rotors do rub is not the only reason that a PD blower is not suitable. However to get any worthwhile performance on a rotary with a Autorotor you would need to overdrive it too much. There was a 3 rotor 20B drag car here in Australia with an Autorotor, they tried three different models from what i heard. The boost levels were in excess of 40 psi, and the engine power output was less then 600HP and was cooking the engine non stop. Yet the turbo version makes over 1300Hp on the engine dyno with less boost. http://youtube.com/watch?v=RomCIKez7Lw
So what is Petits intent? Please would like to know. Its quite clear what the intent of the procharger kit is. Before you jump, their aim was to complement the factory power output and delivery. It's obvious.
So zero inlet/exhaust port timing has little effect on forced induction, interesting. Very interesting.
No on cares about 40psi on a Renesis. That application has nothing to do with what works and doesn't on a streetable engine. That you are comparing such an extreme application as that to street cars is misguided.
Take your own advice, "Type less and READ more". The answers are everywhere on here, or you can simply write them. Why does anyone have to spoon feed you? You've come to the forum professing you know so much, and everyone else knows so little...so why take our word for it? Ask them.
Where did I claim it had "little effect"? If anything, I acknowledged it was having implications by stating the use of T3 turbines on the Renesis as opposed to the usual T4 that has been so widely matched to previous 13B applications.
Last edited by Red Devil; 10-18-2007 at 11:12 AM.
10-18-2007, 11:52 AM
#85
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RedDevil, my comparison of the 40psi is to show you the difference of using a Autorotor vs a Turbo on a rotary engine. To demonstrate that it is not a good match up at all. They are crap on a conventional rotary and yet you are under the impression that it will do something magic on a Renesis, WAKEUP will you. The laws of thermodynamics don't change because you wish it so.
If your so confident in your choice with the Autorotor why not do it, would love to see your results. Bet they will be the same as all other attempts. You will make some power down low and thats it, noting worth while in the mid range or top end. Wasted effort.
Before you jump back on me, i do own one of the procharger kits, I was the sixth or so to have it fitted when it come out. Love it. Have blown away guys with GReddy kits and other custom turbo kits in RX8's. So as far as the procahrger kit is concerned, I'm speaking from experience.
Had a new diff ratio fitted to the RX8 some time ago. Now there is not many cars that can keep up. You want more down low, change your diff ratio.
When the kit first came out there was so much talk on this and other forums. I read most of the crap people were posting then upto now. And one thing has not changed, the over whelming majority of people who were bagging this and that and waiting for something new to come out still have not made a commitment. And i belive they never will, unless it costs $50 and makes 500Hp. I just cant belive you guys are still talking crap about something that works, and works so well. People allover the world are using this kit for rally cars, circuit cars street cars. But yet the people on this forum are oblivious to the fact.
I try and stay off these forums because they drive me nuts.
If your so confident in your choice with the Autorotor why not do it, would love to see your results. Bet they will be the same as all other attempts. You will make some power down low and thats it, noting worth while in the mid range or top end. Wasted effort.
Before you jump back on me, i do own one of the procharger kits, I was the sixth or so to have it fitted when it come out. Love it. Have blown away guys with GReddy kits and other custom turbo kits in RX8's. So as far as the procahrger kit is concerned, I'm speaking from experience.
Had a new diff ratio fitted to the RX8 some time ago. Now there is not many cars that can keep up. You want more down low, change your diff ratio.
When the kit first came out there was so much talk on this and other forums. I read most of the crap people were posting then upto now. And one thing has not changed, the over whelming majority of people who were bagging this and that and waiting for something new to come out still have not made a commitment. And i belive they never will, unless it costs $50 and makes 500Hp. I just cant belive you guys are still talking crap about something that works, and works so well. People allover the world are using this kit for rally cars, circuit cars street cars. But yet the people on this forum are oblivious to the fact.
I try and stay off these forums because they drive me nuts.
10-18-2007, 12:36 PM
#87
Registered
The Don:
This is going to come across as harsh and for that I apologize. If you think a twin screw is a poor match for a Renesis, you really don't know much about them or how they work. Sorry. Just because you own a centrifugal really only means that you've got money and nothing else. Lots of people think that because their wallets are big enough to buy into a hyped up product that all of a sudden their experience means alot. Supra guys are a good example and most of those cars, as high as their power numbers are, are not done very well. You can have all of your buddies and even Procharger engineers come on here and proclaim all they want but at the end of the day I'm going to laugh at it. Centrifugals are a poor choice for small high revving engines and no one anywhere can prove that wrong. There has never been a single centrifugal in the past that has worked well on these engines and simple physics would dictate that this isn't about to change unless of course you get a variable internal gearing on one.
If someone had an autorotor on a 3 rotor and it was running at 40 psi and only pushing 600 hp, it was too small!!!!! That's easy to explain. Stick a Renesis Greddy turbo on a 3 rotor and push 40 psi and see what you get. You'll get crap because the turbo is too small!!!! Duh?
The Pettit kit was never designed for more than 300 hp. It's designed to augment the powerband for the street to make it feel like the engine is larger everywhere and not only at redline. It does that. They are working on a kit with a larger supercharger that will be intended for more power. All they need to do is set a goal and hit it. They don't need to have a unit that is capable of twice that much. That's a wasteful design.
Hymee is still working on his kit. He hasn't failed. If you had been at Sevenstock and seen his presentation you'd realize where he is with the project and why things are being done the way they are. He is not a shop. He has a day job and it isn't designing supercharger kits. That is a hobby that he is trying to share. Can he really be faulted for taking so long? He also has addressed some pulley issues that the Procharger has done wrong but that's because he thinks like an engineer and not an accountant. He will be happy if his kit hits 330 hp or so. If his hits that and the Procharger hits 330hp, the Procharged car would be so far behind in a race that it wouldn't even be funny. That's average power for you.
When you see it displayed you whine and complain that they dyno charts must have been fudged because someone doesn't understand how chassis dynos work? WTF? I think you're in denial because you see what is actually happening but you don't want to believe it. The info presented backs up my personal opinion of these expensive hairdrying paperweights. FWIW: I never said a turbo was a bad match for the Renesis. I said a centrifugal supercharger is but that's only because it's true.
If you want low end power change the rear end ratio? Are you serious??? How about just using a form of forced induction that works everywhere rather than only up high? That makes far more sense. Now you want to bandaid performance back in due to deficiencies in other areas. Wow!
You tell me to read more and type less and I find that funny considering the source of that statement. I'm not the one that needs to do any homework here. You are. You are flat dead wrong on almost every account. Take your own advice. Spend some of money on homework material. If I could make alot of money selling a pile of dog crap just by convincing people that they needed it, I probably would too!
This is going to come across as harsh and for that I apologize. If you think a twin screw is a poor match for a Renesis, you really don't know much about them or how they work. Sorry. Just because you own a centrifugal really only means that you've got money and nothing else. Lots of people think that because their wallets are big enough to buy into a hyped up product that all of a sudden their experience means alot. Supra guys are a good example and most of those cars, as high as their power numbers are, are not done very well. You can have all of your buddies and even Procharger engineers come on here and proclaim all they want but at the end of the day I'm going to laugh at it. Centrifugals are a poor choice for small high revving engines and no one anywhere can prove that wrong. There has never been a single centrifugal in the past that has worked well on these engines and simple physics would dictate that this isn't about to change unless of course you get a variable internal gearing on one.
If someone had an autorotor on a 3 rotor and it was running at 40 psi and only pushing 600 hp, it was too small!!!!! That's easy to explain. Stick a Renesis Greddy turbo on a 3 rotor and push 40 psi and see what you get. You'll get crap because the turbo is too small!!!! Duh?
The Pettit kit was never designed for more than 300 hp. It's designed to augment the powerband for the street to make it feel like the engine is larger everywhere and not only at redline. It does that. They are working on a kit with a larger supercharger that will be intended for more power. All they need to do is set a goal and hit it. They don't need to have a unit that is capable of twice that much. That's a wasteful design.
Hymee is still working on his kit. He hasn't failed. If you had been at Sevenstock and seen his presentation you'd realize where he is with the project and why things are being done the way they are. He is not a shop. He has a day job and it isn't designing supercharger kits. That is a hobby that he is trying to share. Can he really be faulted for taking so long? He also has addressed some pulley issues that the Procharger has done wrong but that's because he thinks like an engineer and not an accountant. He will be happy if his kit hits 330 hp or so. If his hits that and the Procharger hits 330hp, the Procharged car would be so far behind in a race that it wouldn't even be funny. That's average power for you.
When you see it displayed you whine and complain that they dyno charts must have been fudged because someone doesn't understand how chassis dynos work? WTF? I think you're in denial because you see what is actually happening but you don't want to believe it. The info presented backs up my personal opinion of these expensive hairdrying paperweights. FWIW: I never said a turbo was a bad match for the Renesis. I said a centrifugal supercharger is but that's only because it's true.
If you want low end power change the rear end ratio? Are you serious??? How about just using a form of forced induction that works everywhere rather than only up high? That makes far more sense. Now you want to bandaid performance back in due to deficiencies in other areas. Wow!
You tell me to read more and type less and I find that funny considering the source of that statement. I'm not the one that needs to do any homework here. You are. You are flat dead wrong on almost every account. Take your own advice. Spend some of money on homework material. If I could make alot of money selling a pile of dog crap just by convincing people that they needed it, I probably would too!
10-18-2007, 01:16 PM
#89
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RedDevil, my comparison of the 40psi is to show you the difference of using a Autorotor vs a Turbo on a rotary engine. To demonstrate that it is not a good match up at all. They are crap on a conventional rotary and yet you are under the impression that it will do something magic on a Renesis, WAKEUP will you. The laws of thermodynamics don't change because you wish it so.
If your so confident in your choice with the Autorotor why not do it, would love to see your results. Bet they will be the same as all other attempts. You will make some power down low and thats it, noting worth while in the mid range or top end. Wasted effort.
Before you jump back on me, i do own one of the procharger kits, I was the sixth or so to have it fitted when it come out. Love it. Have blown away guys with GReddy kits and other custom turbo kits in RX8's. So as far as the procahrger kit is concerned, I'm speaking from experience.
People allover the world are using this kit for rally cars, circuit cars street cars. But yet the people on this forum are oblivious to the fact.
I try and stay off these forums because they drive me nuts.
If your so confident in your choice with the Autorotor why not do it, would love to see your results. Bet they will be the same as all other attempts. You will make some power down low and thats it, noting worth while in the mid range or top end. Wasted effort.
Before you jump back on me, i do own one of the procharger kits, I was the sixth or so to have it fitted when it come out. Love it. Have blown away guys with GReddy kits and other custom turbo kits in RX8's. So as far as the procahrger kit is concerned, I'm speaking from experience.
People allover the world are using this kit for rally cars, circuit cars street cars. But yet the people on this forum are oblivious to the fact.
I try and stay off these forums because they drive me nuts.
So why don't I have it, because I decided I didn't want the complication of FI at this point. And I'm not really all that interested in an air to water IC. And if my results were in line with Pettit, I'd be perfectly happy with that. I've seen the compressor maps and done the engine calcs...I know what to expect and Pettit is in line perfectly with what those compressors can offer. You questioned if I've seen the maps and data from Lysholm and what size I'd pick. Yet it's clear you haven't.
And so it comes out...you have one of these kits. Good for you...clearly it is not an application many of us agree with. Also, if you'd look through my post history and I think even on THIS thread - you'll see that I said for a track car this kit would be perfect. For a daily driver, I don't agree with it at all.
10-18-2007, 02:10 PM
#90
Registered
No one would use a 6 psi pulley because the kit has no low end and driving it would absolutely suck. A turbo or a positive displacement blower on the other hand would be very fun at 6 psi.
10-18-2007, 03:03 PM
#91
The Don ,
thanks for coming on here and giving us your point of view .
Instead of trying to argue with these guys how about giving us a review of the supercharger as you are the first person to come on here who has one and is willing to talk about it . I would be interested to hear what your experience has been .
thanks for coming on here and giving us your point of view .
Instead of trying to argue with these guys how about giving us a review of the supercharger as you are the first person to come on here who has one and is willing to talk about it . I would be interested to hear what your experience has been .
10-18-2007, 03:11 PM
#92
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Don ,
thanks for coming on here and giving us your point of view .
Instead of trying to argue with these guys how about giving us a review of the supercharger as you are the first person to come on here who has one and is willing to talk about it . I would be interested to hear what your experience has been .
thanks for coming on here and giving us your point of view .
Instead of trying to argue with these guys how about giving us a review of the supercharger as you are the first person to come on here who has one and is willing to talk about it . I would be interested to hear what your experience has been .
10-22-2007, 10:23 AM
#94
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When i had the kit fitted first there was no 10 or 12 psi kit available. Only option was the 6psi. I already know that RG will kick up a stink, none the less, the procharger kit at 6psi was a huge improvement over standard. I live in a very hilly area, Wollongong for other Aussies. I had no longer to down shift to 3rd gear for one of the steepest and longest inclines in the region, the car was very happy cruizing in 4th and accelerating at a very slow rate. So at 6psi there is significant increase in torque and obviously power. 8k take off's, smoking rubber, its a rotor mate. Mid to top end it was so much fun when it was first fitted, it took me just over two months to get used to it. And then it felt standard, not slow like NA, but if felt like this is how that car come out of the factory. And they should. Which i found quite awesome, because it is exactly what the DNA guys told it would be, and it made so much sense to me. They never intended to alter the power delivery, just compliment it. Even at the 6 psi level i did have to upgrade the clutch, mainly due to the fun I was having, also installed a lightened flywheel. A month and a bit later later I changed my diff ratio, which was on order for over three months, i was hoping it to be my first big mod but things don't always work out. A new car again, fantastic. Awesome for the track, I did a few track (circuit) days with the car, what an amazing chassis when it has some go. I do own a series1 13B bride port club car, handles like a go kart. Have to admit the RX8 is a very tight package on the track, very happy. But it does need more brakes, thats next.
The 12 psi kit went on, also put the standard diff ratio back in, i had the other diff fitted with the new ratio so i can swap when ever i want. If you intend on a diff ratio swap best way to go, worth the extra cost. 25 min swap over when ever you want. At 12 psi it made 312 Hp at the treads with the standard ratio. If you intend on a procharger kit, go for this one it rocks. But a few people that went for a spin in the car would prefer a little less power, each too their own. With the new ratio it made 5 more Hp insignificant, could have been just the difference in ambient or engine temp. With the 12 psi and the 5.2 in the rear, now this how they should have come out of the factory, LOL. Power slides come standard, loving it. A bit hard to put into words, but will try. It is more like an exotic super car than a modified new car. Smooth power delivery, wide power band and 9k comes quickly.
I did no 1/4 runs to date, i did race a turbo R33 Skyline that has run low 11 sec pass apparently, with semi slick tires. By fourth gear i had half a car length on him, just a street drag, and held the slight lead to the end. TO be honest i don't belive that in street trim the Skyline would run anything better than a mid 12. If i had to guess I'd say mid 12, with 230Kw at the wheels. Maybe with semi slick rubber only. It's just a stab in the dark, could be better or worse. No plans to take it down the quarter, I couldn't care much as long as it goes round the track like a demon.
Maintenance is easy, i change oil every 3000km's in the blower and the engine. DNA recommends 5000km's, but I cane the *** off it so 3000km's I'm happy with since i don't drive it every day.
I didn't do the install, it was all done at DNA. But it does look quite simple.
The Powermod is brilliant, first and fore most it is so simple to tune. The guys at Powermod gave me the software after talking to them, usually only a tune shop will have the access. Very simple to tune, and so many options for a piggy back. People have tried all sorts of ECU's on the RX8 yet this little known unit is flawless. The Powermod is a very logical unit, i have the benefit of talking to the design engineer of the ECU. It controls the injectors and ignition independent of the standard ECU.
It uses the OEM ECU injector output for injector timing input for the Powermod, the same as for timing. It uses this info as a base map, BRILLIANT. Slap it in and everything is as standard, then tune away. Some so called piggy backs you cant alter the ignition in the negative direction (ie. retard). It has also a NOS option, both injectors and timing for a dry setup. Too many options to list, a great unit.
I see that Brettus also has a Powermod, what do you think? And have you tried any other units?
The guys at DNA and Powermod do all their engineering design, r&d and some fitting at the one unit. They do all their work on CAD all 3D modeled with some FEA (google it too lazy to explain to those that don't know), prior to CNC machining. They were kind enough to show me all this when I was there. They also do lots of engineering design for drag and circuit racing teams, some of the stuff they could show me was very impressive. A professionally designed and engineered kit, hmmm. Being a mechanical engineer my self, this was a no brainer for me.
I'm wrapped with my SC setup, i love how the car drives and responds. 10/10 from me. To this date haven't seen anything that comes close, or delivers what it promises.
I have been for a drive in a custom turbo RX8 build by a rotary shop, that was meant to be quick. Very average. Between 6000-7000k rpm you can feel the power roll off, and he shifts at 7500rpm, WTF. Beat him by three car lengths before he backed off, apparently it needed more tuning or something, but that info come out after I beat him. Before that is was the best thing ever, after he lost the excuses come out.
The 12 psi kit went on, also put the standard diff ratio back in, i had the other diff fitted with the new ratio so i can swap when ever i want. If you intend on a diff ratio swap best way to go, worth the extra cost. 25 min swap over when ever you want. At 12 psi it made 312 Hp at the treads with the standard ratio. If you intend on a procharger kit, go for this one it rocks. But a few people that went for a spin in the car would prefer a little less power, each too their own. With the new ratio it made 5 more Hp insignificant, could have been just the difference in ambient or engine temp. With the 12 psi and the 5.2 in the rear, now this how they should have come out of the factory, LOL. Power slides come standard, loving it. A bit hard to put into words, but will try. It is more like an exotic super car than a modified new car. Smooth power delivery, wide power band and 9k comes quickly.
I did no 1/4 runs to date, i did race a turbo R33 Skyline that has run low 11 sec pass apparently, with semi slick tires. By fourth gear i had half a car length on him, just a street drag, and held the slight lead to the end. TO be honest i don't belive that in street trim the Skyline would run anything better than a mid 12. If i had to guess I'd say mid 12, with 230Kw at the wheels. Maybe with semi slick rubber only. It's just a stab in the dark, could be better or worse. No plans to take it down the quarter, I couldn't care much as long as it goes round the track like a demon.
Maintenance is easy, i change oil every 3000km's in the blower and the engine. DNA recommends 5000km's, but I cane the *** off it so 3000km's I'm happy with since i don't drive it every day.
I didn't do the install, it was all done at DNA. But it does look quite simple.
The Powermod is brilliant, first and fore most it is so simple to tune. The guys at Powermod gave me the software after talking to them, usually only a tune shop will have the access. Very simple to tune, and so many options for a piggy back. People have tried all sorts of ECU's on the RX8 yet this little known unit is flawless. The Powermod is a very logical unit, i have the benefit of talking to the design engineer of the ECU. It controls the injectors and ignition independent of the standard ECU.
It uses the OEM ECU injector output for injector timing input for the Powermod, the same as for timing. It uses this info as a base map, BRILLIANT. Slap it in and everything is as standard, then tune away. Some so called piggy backs you cant alter the ignition in the negative direction (ie. retard). It has also a NOS option, both injectors and timing for a dry setup. Too many options to list, a great unit.
I see that Brettus also has a Powermod, what do you think? And have you tried any other units?
The guys at DNA and Powermod do all their engineering design, r&d and some fitting at the one unit. They do all their work on CAD all 3D modeled with some FEA (google it too lazy to explain to those that don't know), prior to CNC machining. They were kind enough to show me all this when I was there. They also do lots of engineering design for drag and circuit racing teams, some of the stuff they could show me was very impressive. A professionally designed and engineered kit, hmmm. Being a mechanical engineer my self, this was a no brainer for me.
I'm wrapped with my SC setup, i love how the car drives and responds. 10/10 from me. To this date haven't seen anything that comes close, or delivers what it promises.
I have been for a drive in a custom turbo RX8 build by a rotary shop, that was meant to be quick. Very average. Between 6000-7000k rpm you can feel the power roll off, and he shifts at 7500rpm, WTF. Beat him by three car lengths before he backed off, apparently it needed more tuning or something, but that info come out after I beat him. Before that is was the best thing ever, after he lost the excuses come out.
10-22-2007, 11:12 AM
#95
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice write-up. Sounds like it is a blast at the track where you keep the RPMs on a boil.
And a 5.2 in the rear...holy crap is that agressive!!!
And a 5.2 in the rear...holy crap is that agressive!!!
10-22-2007, 11:45 AM
#96
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
5.2 in the rear is awesome. Initialy it is a bit agressive. But with the legs the car has it's awesome being a hoon on street and track.
Even with the 4.44 don't need to keep it pegged at 9k.
Even with the 4.44 don't need to keep it pegged at 9k.
Last edited by The_Don; 10-22-2007 at 11:48 AM.
10-22-2007, 02:56 PM
#98
Re the Powermod - it's been brilliant on my N/A. About a year ago ,while everyone on here was busy trying to get their Interceptor x's to work I did a write up on how good the Powermod was that was largely ignored . I don't think the americans could believe that an aussie company could do it better .....
10-23-2007, 09:18 AM
#99
Registered
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Marietta,Ga
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is one American that believes very deeply that an Aussie company can and has done it better. I have been a MoTeC owner since 1994. Aussies rule when it comes to engine management.
10-23-2007, 11:02 AM
#100
Now that is a legit support from someone that I know --that knows what he is talking about (that is what i am putting in mine Chas, different name but same company).
Good write up Don, but a mid 12(?) 1/4 estimated of course, rx8? Damn. I would like to see that.
Personally I like the PD SC for the low end grunt. And personally,I dont need 9K--high revs add to temp probs on the track, more strain on driveline components etc
8k-to 8.5 is good for me.
Lower ration does make the car rock. I just put smaller wheel/tire combo on for the track (est 4.78 or so final drive ratio) and man--it does change her. Course i havent been to the track yet with the s.c kit so I am sure other changes will have to be made.
once the theory discussion was out of the way--really enjoyed the read.
olddragger
Good write up Don, but a mid 12(?) 1/4 estimated of course, rx8? Damn. I would like to see that.
Personally I like the PD SC for the low end grunt. And personally,I dont need 9K--high revs add to temp probs on the track, more strain on driveline components etc
8k-to 8.5 is good for me.
Lower ration does make the car rock. I just put smaller wheel/tire combo on for the track (est 4.78 or so final drive ratio) and man--it does change her. Course i havent been to the track yet with the s.c kit so I am sure other changes will have to be made.
once the theory discussion was out of the way--really enjoyed the read.
olddragger