Paul, why then would you have FI? The purpose of FI is to introduce more AF mixture into a combustion chamber than possible with NA. The power curves are different; FI motors produce equivalent power to NA motors at lower rpm settings and throttle openings. Potentially making them more susceptible to detonation, but also likely producing more power and torque at a given rpm and throttle position than FI. I'm missing the bone of contention between you and Brett. The balloon analogy is not exactly accurate; while you're right a bout similar pressures in FI and NA baloons producing similar power, the dwell time for the FI engine is much less, happens much more quickly(blows the balloon up faster), thereby increasing intake temps, and therfore detnonation susceptibility.

 

I was hoping to see those coating and these same seals together. The turbo set up is really nice but why did you choose that ECU? Did you do solid seals? Who did the tear down and rebuild?

 

Me too, but new rotor housings will just have to do for now. The motor also has MFR bearings, 4 extra dowels and a 10mm stud kit, many other goodies too. If by solid seals you mean Atkins solid corner seals, no. The ceramics are 1-piece though.

I was looking for a few things in an EMS, to list a few;
-MAP based tuning
-plug and play harness
-great tech support

I did most of the work on the motor, tear down, porting, assemble, etc., a friend of mine who I've been building motors with since high school (my rotary mentor) set up the rotors and clearanced everything.

More progress:

 

I see where you are viewing this from, and i think its a similar position as Brettus has/had.

for clarity lets discuss JUST the Renesis motor for a moment. The average Greddy powered Renny makes the same power as the recently devulged RE-A motor which it NA and tuned with the OEM PCM.

Now, the Greddy powered motor will certainly have a vastly different power/tq curve than the NA motor. and such a curve would undoubtedly have a much larger range in which detonation is a serious concern. Thus far, this all falls directly in line with your positions... now back to the 4 rotor R26B

The difference is this: the NA motor in question using 2 piece seals was dismissed as irrelevant to our discussions simply because it was NA and thus the different curves and ranges of detonation susceptibility. The problem with this argument is as follows:

The R26B is a race engine. Its entire life expectancy in which no one can deny its history, is intended and did operate at the very peaks of its hp/tq curves just like any race motor. Therefore for its entire intended life and use, those 2 piece seals are subjected to the same ranges of airflow and thus chamber pressure and detonation susceptibility as any FI Renesis would expect to see.

An FI motor has a much larger load/rpm range in question, but under any conditions whether daily driver or track use, it does not see more total run time in that "bad juju" range than the race purpose motor.

You see what I am saying? The conditions are only the same in that small region of the dyno plots, and the danger region in question for the FI motor is much larger... BUT the NA race motor lives its entire life under those very conditions which you are saying makes the FI motor more detonation susceptible....

this concept is not that complicated, so i pray dear god i hope i have explained this well enough for all to understand cause i cant make it any simpler.

Now there could be plenty of other reasons Brettus's argument that the use of 2 piece seals in that motor dont apply to our use, but NA/FI is certainly not one of them

 

Like I said in my post on the other page - the Renesis was a bad example .
In the rpm range in question the turbo is just overcoming all the poor flow paths evident in a production engine to get the same power as the 26b .
But
internal combustion pressures would still be a bit higher due to it having to overcome less efficient exhaust ports
And charge temps would be higher

So even with a bad example that would never happen in real life - it's still more prone to detonation than an NA engine .

With a proper turbo race engine it would make the same power with less rotors and therefore have higher combustion pressures therefore more chance of detonation .....

 

well, its been shown here on this very forum that a well thought out FI system can produce ambient or damn near ambient charge temps. So I would consider anything else substandard and halfassed, certainly not worthy of a build involving anything like new seals.

and exhaust ports argument is not valid either, when do you have peak chamber pressure? when do the exhaust ports open? (this one made me spit mountain dew all over the work keyboard - thanks )

but since you say so, okie dokie then. cause your obviously gonna bury your head in the sand on this, I havent changed my position or approach to this, but at every turn your grasping for new ground in which to back your position. first it was differences in chamber pressures, then it was the range in which you see those presssures, now this stuff...

well, I tell ya what, I concede. You win. Debate over. I quit. Have fun.

 

This is making me laugh.... I love you guys.

Makes you wonder why I named my company the way I did huh?

 

OK i'll concede it is possible to get charge temps under control - that was not my main point in the argument anyway . Just thought I was worth a mention.

So by your logic you could have 1mm diameter exhaust ports and it makes no difference at all to how much power an engine makes . Yes ,you need higher chamber pressures to make the same power if one engine has better flowing exhaust ports than the other . Can't you see that ?

It was always about chamber pressures - I just tried to present the same information in different ways in the hope you might be able to grasp the concept in some shape or form . I knew you were wrong the whole time but I admit some of my arguments were not that good - probably just through getting pissed at you .

 

Last time I thought about this...I thought that the main determiner of cylinder pressure was timing

Why don't you guys argue about that for a while

 

and teh winner of teh bench racing Dyno war is .....

 

Bag Head!

Yea for the winnner!

 

Kane - could care less why you named anything the way you did, you have a very unique perspective and knowledge on some things but rarely offer anything useful to debates like this one so why would i?

Brett - your right, an exhaust port opening up doesnt begin instant pressure relief of the combustion chamber...

Dan - timing is very key, it not only affects max chamber pressure, but at what point ATDC this peak pressure occurs... very important. so does a myriad of other things like the flame speed of the fuel you are using, any other additives like water or alcohols etc etc ... your comment was probably the first intelligent thing said in pages, by anyone. but you have to walk before you can run...

Team - another useless comment from the peanut gallery

 

Hey Dan , don't try and get us started on another subject . Jeeze , I'm already bald enough - don't need any more reasons to tear my hair out .

 

Capacity/Volume/Pressure...check, check and check.

 

Well you got the peanut gallery part right, but as noted by Dan any attempt to provide notable commentary only gets countered with ridicule and argument. I'll take the ridicule sans the argument. The incessant annoyance of futile arguing is what wears me thin. You made your point several pages back. Just accept what you believe and let it go already ....

 

I'm a little late to this but, you are absolutely right, however the only difference between the 2 (NA vs FI) will be pre combustion temps and torque made at specific rpms. That's another debate. In terms of PEAK HP, with all things being equal between two engines, if NA engine "A" needs 3000psi combustion pressure to make 300hp at 7,000 rpm's, FI engine "B" will make the same power at 7,000rpm's if the combustion pressures are exactly the same. That's just pure physics and nothing more! This is exactly why NA intake manifolds are so difficult to engineer. If you can't design the intake to allow the engine to draw as much air into the combustion chamber at all rpms, then you've handicapped the engines ability to make maximum torque (which is force against the e-shaft) at all rpms. Making torque is all about creating a larger explosion of the fuel/air mixture with-in the combustion chamber at any given rpm. If you don't have hi combustion pressures, then you wont have a big enough explosion to push the rotor against the e-shaft.

 

So Richie, Get her running yet?

 

He lives!

 

haha^^

 

And your point? I see after all this time, you still have no class! Thx for bring that back up as the pic was completely unnecessary!

 

LOL.
Just missed your input these several years.

 

Nah, massive fuel leak from the OBX fuel rails. Things are really tight in there, especially with everything being -8, I didn't get a flush seal.
The weather is a lot cooler here now in SoCal, better conditions to work on it more now.

 

I've just been very busy with my project see sig!

 

What did you use to seal the connectors to the fuel rails?

 

Interesting that Mazdatrix is going with deeper ceramic 13B apex seal setup on their recent turbo drift car project. Still waiting for the h8rs to start dissing that decision ....