the case of the missing 22kW
#26
Senior Rotor Router
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pembroke Pines, FL
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BTW, I am a little concerned about the "auxilliary port" / "tertiary port" (there you go wakeech you have another half a supporter :D ) issue, but hopefully Mazda had enough time to take care of it BEFORE final production as opposed to starting out the debut of the RX-8 with a recall.
#28
Senior Rotor Router
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pembroke Pines, FL
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by evel333
We used the word "tertiary" all the time in my biochemistry classes back in high school. I always thought it was a widely used/accepted term.
We used the word "tertiary" all the time in my biochemistry classes back in high school. I always thought it was a widely used/accepted term.
![Wink](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/wink.gif)
#29
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Viva Las Vegas!
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, before your last post, only Wakeech insisted on calling that 3rd Intake port "tertiary port". Everyone else including Mazda called the 3rd Intake port "auxiliary port".
Consider this: those of us that had 2nd Gen N/A RX-7 FC3s's know them as 6-ports. I recommend if you want to better communicate with existing RX owners, esp. FC 6-port owners, everyone call the ports that open at high RPM's "The 6-ports."
rotarynews.com -> wouldnt it have felt pretty choked by redline then?
#30
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Brisvegas, Aust
Posts: 377
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by eccles
They may be electronically activated, but they're still mechanically operated. It's not a question of whether the ECU chose not to open them, it's that the mechanicals were unable to comply, due to being stuck or broken.
They may be electronically activated, but they're still mechanically operated. It's not a question of whether the ECU chose not to open them, it's that the mechanicals were unable to comply, due to being stuck or broken.
So can we say then that NOBODY has timed a properly working rx-8 yet then?
-pete
#31
Originally posted by rpm_pwr
Nah, the article said it was specifically a software bug. As an embedded programmer, that just strikes me as a very dumb mistake. All I can think of is that maybe they fitted the 'low power' motor ecu to the 'high power' cars. Because you can get 'low power' & manual somewhere in the world cant you?
So can we say then that NOBODY has timed a properly working rx-8 yet then?
-pete
Nah, the article said it was specifically a software bug. As an embedded programmer, that just strikes me as a very dumb mistake. All I can think of is that maybe they fitted the 'low power' motor ecu to the 'high power' cars. Because you can get 'low power' & manual somewhere in the world cant you?
So can we say then that NOBODY has timed a properly working rx-8 yet then?
-pete
![Smilie](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/smile.gif)
#32
tyranosaurus rex-8
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: los angeles
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Maximus
hehe...I am with you now.
I agree with Wakeech's philosophy of the possibility of having more ports in future :-)
hehe...I am with you now.
I agree with Wakeech's philosophy of the possibility of having more ports in future :-)
#33
Ok, so I read here in the US Sport Compact Car, which also has the car down some 40 horsepower. And reference was made that the other magazines that tested 0-60 times, which was done in 5.9 secs, did their testing with the horsepower deficit.
So it stands to reasons that with the additional power, 0-60 should be in the mid 5 second range.
Don't get me wrong, I am satisfied with the performance as it is currently reported. However, if I can get the extra performance from the missing 40 hp, I will never complain.
I think black with the red and black interior with every possible option. Yeah!!
So it stands to reasons that with the additional power, 0-60 should be in the mid 5 second range.
Don't get me wrong, I am satisfied with the performance as it is currently reported. However, if I can get the extra performance from the missing 40 hp, I will never complain.
I think black with the red and black interior with every possible option. Yeah!!
#34
Big Bad and Black.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Ohio
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it took Mazda this long then a little longer well not hurt after all I like to have a vehicle that is as free of glitches as possable. And I think Mazda well deliver:D
#35
mostly harmless
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Greater Vancouver Area, BC
Posts: 3,440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by lefuton
i honestly don't see how more ports would help... please elaborate. the way i see it, there is a finite area you carve out of the side housing before you cut into the compression stroke and/or start letting apex seals slide out. to me, more ports = more closed ports = less air
i honestly don't see how more ports would help... please elaborate. the way i see it, there is a finite area you carve out of the side housing before you cut into the compression stroke and/or start letting apex seals slide out. to me, more ports = more closed ports = less air
but this isn't exactly what i meant: more ports equals more variability... even if it was just a 4th (quarternary, yes i looked it up) port on the intermediate housing (above the secondary port) it'd make a huge difference to the dynamics of the engine, allowing it to take it hard up to ten grand... with a third (central) bearing (which would be really spiffy, and sort of go well in a beefier intermediate housing to make room for those quarternary ports) stock rpm limits of 10.5k rpm could be achieved (at costs of weight, complexity, money, etc)... it COULD be
![Wink](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/wink.gif)
#36
Originally posted by wakeech
but realize that there is more to cut than just the side housing, there is also the intermediate housing, and the (perhipheral) rotor housing as well... there's a lot more space (staying within the cycle timing restrictions) which could be opened up for even-higher rpm breathing....
but this isn't exactly what i meant: more ports equals more variability... even if it was just a 4th (quarternary, yes i looked it up) port on the intermediate housing (above the secondary port) it'd make a huge difference to the dynamics of the engine, allowing it to take it hard up to ten grand... with a third (central) bearing (which would be really spiffy, and sort of go well in a beefier intermediate housing to make room for those quarternary ports) stock rpm limits of 10.5k rpm could be achieved (at costs of weight, complexity, money, etc)... it COULD be
but realize that there is more to cut than just the side housing, there is also the intermediate housing, and the (perhipheral) rotor housing as well... there's a lot more space (staying within the cycle timing restrictions) which could be opened up for even-higher rpm breathing....
but this isn't exactly what i meant: more ports equals more variability... even if it was just a 4th (quarternary, yes i looked it up) port on the intermediate housing (above the secondary port) it'd make a huge difference to the dynamics of the engine, allowing it to take it hard up to ten grand... with a third (central) bearing (which would be really spiffy, and sort of go well in a beefier intermediate housing to make room for those quarternary ports) stock rpm limits of 10.5k rpm could be achieved (at costs of weight, complexity, money, etc)... it COULD be
![Wink](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/wink.gif)
![Wink](https://www.rx8club.com/images/smilies/wink.gif)
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Danield97
Series I Trouble Shooting
1
09-30-2015 05:59 PM
Touge
Canada Forum
0
09-23-2015 10:51 PM