Clearly definitive reasons for power discrepancy?
08-23-2003, 01:46 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 215
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Clearly definitive reasons for power discrepancy?
I posted in this forum for a reason. Basically whether tongue in cheek or not, great that Mazda finally recognizes a "9hp" power loss at the crank, great for the $500 and free warranty period maintenance, great that the naysayers get their saying nay on...
That's all great.
So now I was still wondering what the reason behind the power loss is. As I see it, there is as explanations:
1) A/F rich after 3rd port pair opening. Presumably due to *temporary* ECU setting for soft break-in of some kind, suggested for warranty purpose (Mazda CYA action).
2) Emissions regulations purposes. I'm not sure where this came in. I have yet to see evidence of this, so would someone be kind enough as to post a link or something. I wouldn't even know what to search for.
3) Failure to establish resonance in the tertiary path. I barely know what this means nor what it would take to demonstrate this. I have even less to support this than (2), except that on one A/F map I saw ratios getting maximally rich well before 6250 port opening (or whenever it is).
If you have more options you can think of, please list. Feel free to address any point or link to something addressing a point. Definitely feel free (rotarynews.com guys wink wink) to post acceptably official reasons. But please leave the car bashing/defending in the main forum.
That's all great.
So now I was still wondering what the reason behind the power loss is. As I see it, there is as explanations:
1) A/F rich after 3rd port pair opening. Presumably due to *temporary* ECU setting for soft break-in of some kind, suggested for warranty purpose (Mazda CYA action).
2) Emissions regulations purposes. I'm not sure where this came in. I have yet to see evidence of this, so would someone be kind enough as to post a link or something. I wouldn't even know what to search for.
3) Failure to establish resonance in the tertiary path. I barely know what this means nor what it would take to demonstrate this. I have even less to support this than (2), except that on one A/F map I saw ratios getting maximally rich well before 6250 port opening (or whenever it is).
If you have more options you can think of, please list. Feel free to address any point or link to something addressing a point. Definitely feel free (rotarynews.com guys wink wink) to post acceptably official reasons. But please leave the car bashing/defending in the main forum.
08-23-2003, 01:58 AM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: N Ky
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
remember that is not only the three port hi-po engine that has ben downgraded but also the two port lo-po engine. therefore it cannot be due entirely to restrictions with the third port. perhaps not even inthe combustio/intake but maybe a reduced timing issue? It would have to be somethingthat nearly equally effects al vehicles(remapped ecu for emissions) because the output reduction 12hp is the same for the lo-po and hi-po engines even thoughthey have a different number of inatke ports.
P.S. i am a complete mechanical novice so be nice please if this sounds ludicrous.
P.S. i am a complete mechanical novice so be nice please if this sounds ludicrous.
Last edited by jbart1981; 08-23-2003 at 02:00 AM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Audio Concepts ATL
New Member Forum
21
09-26-2021 01:59 PM
