rx8 over the fd
01-04-2007, 03:31 PM
#52
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotarygod
I haven't seen any 13B do what Scott has made a Renesis do at the same boost levels. I'm not too sure why that's not impressive? Power numbers are still going up and will continue to do so. I guess we need to give it about 285 hp or so at 19 psi for it to be impressive. 
01-04-2007, 03:42 PM
#53
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 haven't seen any 13B do what Scott has made a Renesis do at the same boost levels. I'm not too sure why that's not impressive? Power numbers are still going up and will continue to do so. I guess we need to give it about 285 hp or so at 19 psi for it to be impressive.
You know as well as I do how silly the PSI argument is. The results achieved in the last 3+ years by tuners has been anything but impressive.
01-04-2007, 04:10 PM
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
If it came stock that way, sure You know as well as I do how silly the PSI argument is. The results achieved in the last 3+ years by tuners has been anything but impressive.
You know as well as I do how silly the PSI argument is. The results achieved in the last 3+ years by tuners has been anything but impressive.So if what's happening with the Renesis isn't impressive, what is? Is 335whp @12psi on Cali pump gas? I thought that was very good. Or should it have been closer to 400whp with the same conditions?
I think you should measure progress based on this car, and the historical progression of the rotary community and performance enhancements. In that context, the RX-8 is doing fine. If you're not measuring it against that, imo, it's pointless.
01-04-2007, 04:57 PM
#55
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Red Devil
Your argument was not the progression of this engine over the past 3 years. It was that the RX-8 doesn't respond well to forced induction. Pick one, and stick with it.
So if what's happening with the Renesis isn't impressive, what is? Is 335whp @12psi on Cali pump gas? I thought that was very good. Or should it have been closer to 400whp with the same conditions?
I think you should measure progress based on this car, and the historical progression of the rotary community and performance enhancements. In that context, the RX-8 is doing fine. If you're not measuring it against that, imo, it's pointless.
So if what's happening with the Renesis isn't impressive, what is? Is 335whp @12psi on Cali pump gas? I thought that was very good. Or should it have been closer to 400whp with the same conditions?
I think you should measure progress based on this car, and the historical progression of the rotary community and performance enhancements. In that context, the RX-8 is doing fine. If you're not measuring it against that, imo, it's pointless.
01-04-2007, 05:10 PM
#56
DGAF
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,953
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
In this day and age with turbo kits out there that can push 1000+ whp in 4 cylinder cars...
01-04-2007, 06:03 PM
#57
Blue By You
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Milwaukee
Posts: 8,717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Rootski
Yeah, with turbos the size of manhole covers and engine internals made of solid brawn, resulting in about the same daily driveability as the space shuttle. I'm impressed too.
01-04-2007, 06:15 PM
#58
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AdRoCK3217
That does not make it unreliable. That only means YOU sir were an unreliable owner. Don't spread false word.
01-04-2007, 06:18 PM
#59
Registered
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by rotarygod
I hate to say it but as gorgeous as the FD is, it's not a reliable car by anyone's standards. It is inherently flawed and very few of them have ever made 100,000 miles. Not even stock. The small twin turbos were very complex. With over 70 vacuum lines and numerous actuators to make them work properly, it didn't take much to cause that system to not transition smoothly. The vacuum lines are all rubber as most cars are and they get brittle and break, crack, etc... The engine bay of the 3rd gen is very hot and this happens fairly quickly. Let me quantify that by saying it may still take several years but they still get brittle before they would in other cars.
The small twins spin very fast. On prespool of the 2nd turbo, it can momentarily hit 150,000 rpm. The bearings on those go out fairly quicky. I've seen them gone in as little as 30,000 miles but mearly all with a very rare few ever making 50,000+ before needing to be rebuilt.
The engine coolant seals were changed from the 2nd gens. They proved to be unreliable. Mazda later added a small metal heat shield to their rebuilt engines and their over the counter seal sales. The seals would fail and water would leak. This was a huge problem with these cars as the miles go up and most of them will suffer this fate at some point usually well under 100,000 miles.
Those cars has inadequate cooling ability. They'd overheat in traffic in warmer climates. There is just no excuse for that! People that tracked them would really have issues unless this was worked out.
If you want a reliable FD, rebuild the engine with different coolant seals, dump the stock twin turbos and complete replace the coolant system with a better one. Until this is done, that is one of the least reliable cars you can own in the longterm.
The small twins spin very fast. On prespool of the 2nd turbo, it can momentarily hit 150,000 rpm. The bearings on those go out fairly quicky. I've seen them gone in as little as 30,000 miles but mearly all with a very rare few ever making 50,000+ before needing to be rebuilt.
The engine coolant seals were changed from the 2nd gens. They proved to be unreliable. Mazda later added a small metal heat shield to their rebuilt engines and their over the counter seal sales. The seals would fail and water would leak. This was a huge problem with these cars as the miles go up and most of them will suffer this fate at some point usually well under 100,000 miles.
Those cars has inadequate cooling ability. They'd overheat in traffic in warmer climates. There is just no excuse for that! People that tracked them would really have issues unless this was worked out.
If you want a reliable FD, rebuild the engine with different coolant seals, dump the stock twin turbos and complete replace the coolant system with a better one. Until this is done, that is one of the least reliable cars you can own in the longterm.
01-04-2007, 06:18 PM
#60
Rotary Superstar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wait. I saw a comment abut guitarjunkie and someone else making good gains from porting alone -- can I get some numbers??
I haven't seen anything over a 10-20whp gain from porting. That is laughable in comparison to the gains that porting can make on past 13B's -- however, this could also be taken as Mazda has done it's work on the ports already.
I haven't seen anything over a 10-20whp gain from porting. That is laughable in comparison to the gains that porting can make on past 13B's -- however, this could also be taken as Mazda has done it's work on the ports already.
01-04-2007, 06:19 PM
#61
Rotary Superstar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Romancer
don't kid yourself, the FD is NOT reliable. I love the FD to death but they are HIGH maintenance.
You should have read the rest of the thread. The comment the guy I was quoting made, made it sound like a few simple mods MADE his FD blow up - he clarified later on that he didn't mean that at all. You fail.
01-05-2007, 08:59 AM
#62
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Ike
Compare an FI RX-8 to turbo rotarys of the past then. Or maybe compare it to some of the other competition like the Z that has turbo kits pushing 650+ whp. In this day and age with turbo kits out there that can push 1000+ whp in 4 cylinder cars I fail to be impressed with the progression of the RX-8 with FI.
Compare it to previous rotary turbos...the previous engines had the benefit of lower compression for more boost, safely on pump gas. The only reason low compression was an option before was because of the FC turbo or FD. Do you see a factory forced induction RX-8 anywhere? How about aftermarket low compression rotors that are for sale?
But you wanted a comparison:
The Pettit Twin Screw SC is boosting to about 8psi. It also suffers from parasistic drive losses in the upper rpms of at least 35hp. (check the compressor maps from OpconAB on a Lysholm2300AX or Autorotor420). Despite, the Renesis is putting down 265whp, and they are only using a GReddy catback.
The FD, ran the sequential turbos in a 10-8-10psi boost pattern. It produced ~210-215whp. Could the Pettit SC be more efficient than the sequentials? Yes. But not that much more to account for such a difference in power given similar pressure ratios, and the exact same displacement.
Or here's another article:
http://www.rx7.com/techarticles_rx8power.html
The irony of this is that for years now I've read everywhere on this forum you telling people to accept the RX-8 for what it is. Yet here, you're setting standards that are higher than what it is. So which is it?
01-05-2007, 09:54 AM
#63
Originally Posted by Red Devil
Z owners have the luxury of being able to purchase stronger internals and lower compression pistons, etc...to get to that point. Out of the box, without a rebuild, it's not gaining more significant amounts of power than a Renesis gains at similar pressure ratios. Is the Z creating more power? Yes. But so what the Z has always historically been a more powerful car. Every Japanese competitor - Supra, Z, 3000GT, etc...has always created more power. If we're getting into rebuilding engines, and such, then we should just throw in a 20B and start all over again. But then I'd be using "ricer math" correct...I recall you using the same line in the past to shoot down others.
Compare it to previous rotary turbos...the previous engines had the benefit of lower compression for more boost, safely on pump gas. The only reason low compression was an option before was because of the FC turbo or FD. Do you see a factory forced induction RX-8 anywhere? How about aftermarket low compression rotors that are for sale?
But you wanted a comparison:
The Pettit Twin Screw SC is boosting to about 8psi. It also suffers from parasistic drive losses in the upper rpms of at least 35hp. (check the compressor maps from OpconAB on a Lysholm2300AX or Autorotor420). Despite, the Renesis is putting down 265whp, and they are only using a GReddy catback.
The FD, ran the sequential turbos in a 10-8-10psi boost pattern. It produced ~210-215whp. Could the Pettit SC be more efficient than the sequentials? Yes. But not that much more to account for such a difference in power given similar pressure ratios, and the exact same displacement.
Or here's another article:
http://www.rx7.com/techarticles_rx8power.html
The irony of this is that for years now I've read everywhere on this forum you telling people to accept the RX-8 for what it is. Yet here, you're setting standards that are higher than what it is. So which is it?
Compare it to previous rotary turbos...the previous engines had the benefit of lower compression for more boost, safely on pump gas. The only reason low compression was an option before was because of the FC turbo or FD. Do you see a factory forced induction RX-8 anywhere? How about aftermarket low compression rotors that are for sale?
But you wanted a comparison:
The Pettit Twin Screw SC is boosting to about 8psi. It also suffers from parasistic drive losses in the upper rpms of at least 35hp. (check the compressor maps from OpconAB on a Lysholm2300AX or Autorotor420). Despite, the Renesis is putting down 265whp, and they are only using a GReddy catback.
The FD, ran the sequential turbos in a 10-8-10psi boost pattern. It produced ~210-215whp. Could the Pettit SC be more efficient than the sequentials? Yes. But not that much more to account for such a difference in power given similar pressure ratios, and the exact same displacement.
Or here's another article:
http://www.rx7.com/techarticles_rx8power.html
The irony of this is that for years now I've read everywhere on this forum you telling people to accept the RX-8 for what it is. Yet here, you're setting standards that are higher than what it is. So which is it?
Originally Posted by Ike
Compare an FI RX-8 to turbo rotarys of the past then. Or maybe compare it to some of the other competition like the Z that has turbo kits pushing 650+ whp. In this day and age with turbo kits out there that can push 1000+ whp in 4 cylinder cars I fail to be impressed with the progression of the RX-8 with FI.
01-05-2007, 10:04 AM
#64
Rotary Superstar
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Red Devil
How about aftermarket low compression rotors that are for sale?
You can always swap in earlier-model RX7 rotors
Which is what I would do, if I had plans for a port, rebuild, and turbo. But turbo'ing the RX8 is so ill-logical...peripheral port is so much better for turbo cars..
Sure, if I had 10,000 laying around, I'd dive into a turbo system for my 8. But the more I think about it, if I REALLY had 10,000 lying around, I'd save up just a little more, and buy an FD instead.
01-05-2007, 10:12 AM
#65
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Misinformation Director - Evolv Chicago
Posts: 3,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by AdRoCK3217
You can always swap in earlier-model RX7 rotors
Which is what I would do, if I had plans for a port, rebuild, and turbo. But turbo'ing the RX8 is so ill-logical...peripheral port is so much better for turbo cars..
Sure, if I had 10,000 laying around, I'd dive into a turbo system for my 8. But the more I think about it, if I REALLY had 10,000 lying around, I'd save up just a little more, and buy an FD instead.
Which is what I would do, if I had plans for a port, rebuild, and turbo. But turbo'ing the RX8 is so ill-logical...peripheral port is so much better for turbo cars..
Sure, if I had 10,000 laying around, I'd dive into a turbo system for my 8. But the more I think about it, if I REALLY had 10,000 lying around, I'd save up just a little more, and buy an FD instead.
I think a few months back we had a member that was using FC turbo rotors - not sure what ones - that had been modified. But I haven't seen him post about how that's been going.
01-05-2007, 10:16 AM
#66
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
another diference to take in, its that the 350z engines that fail when pushe over 400 rwhp fail because the engine its not strong enough, none of the renesis that have fail are due to the engine not being strong enough but because of bad tuning and lean conditions.
the renesis will be capable of close to 500 rwhp with out internal work, just give it time
the renesis will be capable of close to 500 rwhp with out internal work, just give it time
01-05-2007, 10:38 AM
#67
Originally Posted by rotary crazy
another diference to take in, its that the 350z engines that fail when pushe over 400 rwhp fail because the engine its not strong enough, none of the renesis that have fail are due to the engine not being strong enough but because of bad tuning and lean conditions.
the renesis will be capable of close to 500 rwhp with out internal work, just give it time
the renesis will be capable of close to 500 rwhp with out internal work, just give it time
Everything I have seen says they need new internals well before the 400whp mark
01-05-2007, 11:05 AM
#68
Go Texas Longhorns!
The Renesis will be limited in its current form by its compression ratio, but that bar is high enough that most people will not be affected by it so who cares. if 400WHP isn't enough for you, we need to talk....seriously, short of full out drag racing how the hell are you going to use that in any fashion other than burning up tires.
If you want a dyno queen go buy another car. Supra's and EVO's can give you all the dyno sheet love you need....and about 500lb of extra weight.
if you buying cars based on there absolute top take no prisoners tuning potential only, your an idiot.
If you want a dyno queen go buy another car. Supra's and EVO's can give you all the dyno sheet love you need....and about 500lb of extra weight.
if you buying cars based on there absolute top take no prisoners tuning potential only, your an idiot.
01-05-2007, 11:09 AM
#69
Registered
Originally Posted by mac11
Everything I have seen says they need new internals well before the 400whp mark
01-05-2007, 11:21 AM
#70
Go Texas Longhorns!
Originally Posted by mac11
Everything I have seen says they need new internals well before the 400whp mark
what internals? even if it did, there aren't any save for ceramic apex seals, which are more for High RPM racing, they don't give you any real extra protection from detonation.
01-05-2007, 11:26 AM
#72
Registered
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santiago, Dominican Republic
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by brillo
what internals? even if it did, there aren't any save for ceramic apex seals, which are more for High RPM racing, they don't give you any real extra protection from detonation.
01-05-2007, 11:39 AM
#73
Go Texas Longhorns!
The VQ is a nice torquey engine, but it is fragile for sure. Just go to freshalloy.com and read the posts. Nismo makes some great parts for it though, so if your willing to go there you can build a monster with it.
Frankly, the 350Z would be better off with about a 300lb weight reduction than a turbo. I really hope the next version weighs less.
Frankly, the 350Z would be better off with about a 300lb weight reduction than a turbo. I really hope the next version weighs less.
01-05-2007, 11:40 AM
#74
Registered
Ah OK, I thought he was talking about a rotary too. It's pretty funny to say the Renesis can't get impressive power numbers but then to see an engine twice it's size like the Nissan needing to be strengthened to get over 400 hp. Who's pathetic now?