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.
Ok ...I guess you are right in that we can't get on . You know I will always challenge things I don't agree with and you obviously don't like that.
Byyyeeeee
No, I have no issue with being challenged by you or anyone else. I was very clear when I explained this before, but let me try again. You're going to do it you're way and I'm going to do it mine. We aren't going to change each other's mind so in the end all we're doing is arguing the same points over and over again that we don't agree on and never will.
In other words, all we're doing is wasting our time arguing with each other and crapping out our threads like so many others in the past. I'm moving on with changes in my life and that kind of bs has no room in it. Nothing personal against you, no hate, no dislike, you're a fine guy as far as I'm concerned. This is exactly the same reason I left your thread; out of respect for you to do your thing without us crapping it out with the exact same arguments.
I didn't really appreciate that one hypocrite going on about my "reputation" after I let you know I woudn't be posting in your thread any more when he knew I'd have to break my word to not post there to defend myself. That yellow belly coward should worry about his own reputation instead of smearing someone else that he has no clue about. Oh yeah, he knows my "reputation". The outright stupidity and lack of self-awareness of some people amazes me sometimes.
We'll just let the results do the talking instead. Again, I wish you the best at achieving the results you're after with your turbo build. Peace and out.
Rough manifold sketches, though they’re close in actual scale. Note how I have all three flows pretty much turned and heading for the turbo inlet so they can merge together smoothly. I see a bunch of manifolds that have flow either coming in perpendicular to the turbo inlet flow or even worse two opposing flows hitting head on before finally turning into the inlet. I’m not going to call anyone out, you can look yourself if you want. Just pointing out that kind of poor flow management reduces/wastes exhaust energy and limits the turbo from operating up to it’s full potential.
Again, IWG and V-band inlet help simplify installation and fitment to be a lot easier. The lack of APV motor drive and operating assembly on the 4-port intake also provides more vertical space above the exhaust manifold area and allows for easier turbo fitment. Basically I can have a straight 3.5” OD MAF tube come directly from the front bumper opening area past the side of the radiator/IC directly to the turbo inlet and reduce to to the 2.5” turbo inlet size right there. Same thing out the back side except the turbine discharge is a 3” V-band. A 3” OD down pipe exhaust straight out to the HJS high flow cat/ mid-pipe. It may require a few minor bends to position it properly in the cat/midpipe area, but no big deal.
Racing Beat flange pics. You can see how they transition from rectangular to round.
Note the inside step in the pic below. This is sized for 1.75” OD tube/fittings to slip in and then get an easy lap weld to secure it in place. However the raised outer step is also exactly 2” OD x 16 Ga. thickness. So a 2” OD tube fitting can be butt-welded directly to the raised outer step. You just need to take a die grinder with a carbide cutting tool and grind back the inner 1.75” step smoothly to allow the full flow into the ID of the 2” tube. You’re grinding back approx. 1/16” of material around the full inner diameter. Hope that makes sense.
RB flange have taken care of immediate transitions at least. I understand what you mean with the pictures. Going to be interesting to see what effect it has to increase area from 1096mm² at port to 1781mm²(1.875") pipe, instead of matching it. Not sure how its sensible to measure it though. I assume its a bit difficult to measure residue pressure after exhaust port has closed...?
Thanks man, we’re going to find out, but I have some seriously experienced & knowledgeable people look at this and they all think it’s going to work. The engine holding together is my biggest concern, but it’ll have all the right parts and be built by the person I consider to be the the #1 Renesis expert in the world.
Thanks, I always wanted the MS body kit. It will only have the that and the MS strut bars when I take possession. I wasn’t interested in the other aftermarket parts and we worked out a deal for the owner to remove and sell those parts for a lower price on the car.
Picked a new set of Ohlins today for the suspension, but plan to install different springs for them though per my past post proposals in various threads on the forum regarding this. IMO many RX8 owners have too much rate difference between the front & rear springs. All my calculations indicate they should be much closer together with a stiffer front swaybar to achieve the final balance. The actual rate difference varies depending on the overall magnitude of the front rate, but for the usual street spring rates it’d be approx. within 50 - 100 lb/in (or 1 - 2 kg for metric springs). The difference would be greater for much higher rate race spring setups.
There are many other things planned for this project build to prove out various proposals I’ve made over the years on the forum. The turbo concept is just one of them.
RB flange have taken care of immediate transitions at least. I understand what you mean with the pictures. Going to be interesting to see what effect it has to increase area from 1096mm² at port to 1781mm²(1.875") pipe, instead of matching it. Not sure how its sensible to measure it though. I assume its a bit difficult to measure residue pressure after exhaust port has closed...?
I likely will measure EMAP. The Adaptronic ecu along with the Full Function exhaust line filtering canister makes it fairly easy to do.
.
Talking to Elliot @ Turblown I'd have to use the M2000 Adaptronic universal modular ECU in order to have th EMAP function. I was hoping to use the M1200 instead due to it costing $500 less since I had only intended to use it as a partial piggy back setup. I may have to evaluate this more because I want the car to pass OBD2 emission testing.
The other option maybe worth considering is to figure out to instead have the RX8 modular ecu for general use, but then also have the ability to swap the factory pcm back in with enough Cobb AP tuning to drive the car in gently for that purpose and otherwise have the Adaptronic in full time. Since the RX8 specific modular ecu costs the same as the M2000 Universal, but the Universal pcm requires the cost and hassle of having to wire in a loom for it.
Otherwise my intent is for the car to actually have good emissions using a cat converter and all the emissions equipment & sensors in place even though some agency might not consider anything other than OEM components or equivalent replacements kosher. I don't want to have a stinky exhaust or to be harming the environment excessively.
EMAP is Exhaust Manifold Absolute Pressure. Thr Adaptronic ecu uses MAP for tuning rather than MAF tuning that Mazda uses on the RX8. It has internal sensors for measuring both IMAP (intake MAP for tuning the engine) and also EMAP, which if you use both will provide the most accurate MAP tuning on the engine.
On my competition RX8 with NA Renesis engine I just use/assume atmospheric pressure for EMAP because the exhaust is so free-flowing and bought an external IMAP sensor rated at 1.2 Bar for IMAP because it will provide more accuracy on an NA engine than the internal 4 Bar IMAP sensor in the Adaptronic ecu. However I’m still not sure if 1.2Bar is going to be enough range for the resonant frequency effect that the intake will produce on a well built & tuned 6-port Renesis engine.
It’s for sure greater than 1Bar, but I’m not sure how much greater. I don’t think there’s anything else available between the 1.2 Bar sensor I have and 2 Bar. The new engine is not in running condition yet. I still have to complete the engine oil cooler hoses and engine fuel lines in the engine bay for adding a fuel filter and E85/gasoline flex fuel sensor.
Also am still waiting for Adaptronic to make a hardware change on the Rx8 modular ecu. It will integrate the O2 sensor input on the CAN communication data stream. Even though I had the or one of the first orders in I want this feature and am hikding off on receing the ecu until that change is nade. Might becwithin the next month or so.
I don’t think they have Renesis plates, but they’d probably make them if you were willing to pay for it.
But honestly this builder is world renowned and has tried almost any mod or part you can think of because these companies or his customers usually send him their stuff to try out. A lot of things you hear people on forums ooing and aawing about he says are bs like renitriding or plasma spraying coatings on iron housings because he knows what works and what doesn’t through direct experience. So I leave most of those decisions to him and just listen to what he tells me.
He only has the 4-port engine that was previously built and tested because Mazda sent it to him when they were considering a race series using the 4-port Renesis engine. He also was the original builder/tester for the 6-port Renesis engine used for the Star Mazda Formula race car series as well as the prior 13B engines that were used before the Renesis came out. He knows the Renesis inside out better than anyone imo.
That’s why I’m willing to pay what it costs for him to build these engines. They arrive at your door broken-in on the engine dyno and then power runs to determine TQ and BHP output to ensure it’s operating/built properly. There’s no hope and pray on your first start up or oops, we f’d up and the engine needs to go back because of poor compression or some other mistake like you get with a raw build & ship shop.
If something doesn’t seem right the engine gets torn down, assessed, and then rebuilt agaiin, then the same process occurs until it all checks out. He balances to micro gram level and all the other high level services that you’d expect from a pro builder. He’s been doing this about as long the rotary engine has been around and used for racing. He’s not a young guy anymore. Not sure what to do if he ever retires or passes on to the Lord.
I authorized the builder to do the engine. I have to get the rear manual trans iron imported/drop-shipped to him and fabricate the intake plenum in time for when it’s completed so that he can test it on the dyno for a baseline. I requested for him to break-n and do power runs used the factory UIM, then swap out the UIM for the plenum and make a few more power runs.
This will reveal how much difference the UIM resonance feature contributes to the NA engine, which we expect to be around 210 bhp, against the plenum results with out resonance, which will be the true baseline bhp non-turbo vs. turbo bhp when we finally tune and dial it in in the chassis dyno
I authorized the builder to do the engine. I have to get the rear manual trans iron imported/drop-shipped to him and fabricate the intake plenum in time for when it’s completed so that he can test it on the dyno for a baseline. I requested for him to break-n and do power runs used the factory UIM, then swap out the UIM for the plenum and make a few more power runs.
This will reveal how much difference the UIM resonance feature contributes to the NA engine, which we expect to be around 210 bhp, against the plenum results with out resonance, which will be the true baseline bhp non-turbo vs. turbo bhp when we finally tune and dial it in in the chassis dyno
I have a question regarding this build, does this motor have any advantage over a REW? You are limited to 7-7.5 RPMs as you stated, still dealing with the side seal issues and 10:1 compression. With the rotor machining, mix and matching internals, and having to buy a donor motor/rear iron, it sounds like your going to be spending about the same money as a REW swap would cost.
Why not just go with a REW and put the same hard spooling turbo and sleep better at night that the increased reliability? This is not meant to be a jab of any type because I do appreciate that this is something different that has been done before...
Best part is a friend with an 11,000 Sq Ft building and fabrication equipment is going to let me keep and build the car there. It’s about a 60 min drive to get out there, but he said if it wasn’t any problem if I want to bring a sleeping bag and crash there if I want to work on it through the weekend etc. This is a blessing for me. Can’t tell you how many companies/people I feel have let me down trying to get them to fab or build something for me that I would have otherwise done myself if I had the shop and equipment to pull it off on my own.
Frankly I don’t understand how some of them even stay in business. I’m literally begging some fab shops just to get a quote from them for the exhaust stuff I’m trying to do on my competition RX8. Big name motorsport companies too. It’s outright shameful and ridiculous. Well I have a friend in Nevada that can purge weld 20 Ga tubing by hand that would challenge an automated orbital machine weld in quality. So all I need to do is get the components, fit & tack them together, then just box it up and ship to him for professional quality work. Even with shipping and paying him fair compensation for his work still comes out cheaper than what those clowns charge.
No, it has a disadvantage to the REW. I have personal reasons for wanting to use a Renesis. REW would be easier, even more responsive due to the peri-port exhaust having higher exhaust energy, and likely longer life. I would generally recommend anyone else to use an REW. For the goal of this project though, I believe the 4-port Renesis is a better choice than the 6-port Renesis. So no jab taken because I understand exactly where you’re coming from. I just want to do this for my own reasons.
Originally Posted by strokercharged95gt
I have a question regarding this build, does this motor have any advantage over a REW? You are limited to 7-7.5 RPMs as you stated, still dealing with the side seal issues and 10:1 compression. With the rotor machining, mix and matching internals, and having to buy a donor motor/rear iron, it sounds like your going to be spending about the same money as a REW swap would cost.
Why not just go with a REW and put the same hard spooling turbo and sleep better at night that the increased reliability? This is not meant to be a jab of any type because I do appreciate that this is something different that has been done before...
i have a low mount efr7163 on a 6port renesis. the space down there is very limited. i had trouble placing the turbo at optimal position for equal length runner. I used 1.25OD short radius piping and its already super cramped. I am not sure 1.75OD piping will fit.
because you have a 6-port. which I already covered creates a more limited space due to the APV drive motor and rest of the manifold arrangement for it being right above where the turbo needs to go. If you go back and look at the 4-port intake manifold you can see that I'm going to have more vertical space available for fitting the turbo just as I sketched it up. In reality the turbo will likely be positioned a bit more up vertically than shown in the sketch.
This was clear to me when I went to look at the space on my other RX8 competition car with 6-port engine and with the exhaust manifold off it right now. I can clearly see how yours is cramped with the APV system right in the way directly above where the turbo needs to be positioned. I won't have that limitation. And I don't care about equal length, though on my manifold the outer end port piping is equal, the center port pipe length is shorter. IMO it's not necessary to add this limitation on to all the other ones you'll have because the siamese port already ruins any chance of that benefit if it were instead separated and fully flowing with 4 exhaust ports. Which is where Mazda screwed up IMO trying to use the same center iron width as past engines.
Otherwise I wasn't aware you have the EFR 7163 on your car. Please share more information with us if you will/can!
No, it has a disadvantage to the REW..... REW would be easier, even more responsive due to the peri-port exhaust having higher exhaust energy, and likely longer life. I would generally recommend anyone else to use an REW.
Well that might be true, but it has nothing to do with my reasons for wanting to build a Renesis instead of an REW. I’ve been a strong advocate for using the REW engine for many years on the forum and understand the risks I’m taking by using the Renesis engine design instead.
I don’t think I mentioned that we’ll be doweling this engine too to help it handle the the higher loads of running high boost pressures.
01-15-2018, 04:42 AM
