stick it in the hole already :suspect:

F**k !!! Why did Mazda change the damn bolt pattern on the bellhousing in 2006?

To test your commitment. Don't let them win!

????:scratchhe. You’re joking, right?

Nope : The gearbox still bolts up but it misses the starter motor top bolt and adds another where that sheetmetal cover goes . Had to make a cover up so the flywheel wasn't open where the starter motor bolts on plus now I'm a bolt down on stock .... hope I don't make too much torque !:icon_no2:


Just checked on google images ............ old engine must have been a 6 port auto ! GRRRRR !

Weird. I was wondering wtf was going on.

Yeah, auto trans engine would be my only guess since it obviously has the APV port

Ok .... We are up and running again . Have 150kms on the engine and all is well so far .

Did a startup video , but it turned into a bit of a disaster so don't think i'll be posting that ....

Don’t be using the d word ... :uhh:

Spillage
 

Nothing a sponge and a 2.5 l container couldnt deal with . Fastest I've moved in years to turn the ignition off !

Been there, done that.

So I have a bit of an idea on what this setup is going to be like now :
Spoolup : looks pretty much identical to what I'm used to seeing . This is with the hi flow turbine that the sellers touted as having better spoolup than the stock wheel ! I suspect this is just not the case as other engine mods i did should have improved spoolup if anything. Perhaps it improves spoolup on the larger gtx3582 wheels ....but not the 76mm wheel i have .
Power : haven't run at high boost yet but tried a couple of logs at 12psi and these are showing similar numbers from my first rebuilt engine a couple of years back . Of note is that power around the 4000rpm mark is definitely improved . Same power as an NA rx8 does at 8500 but at only 4000 .
Backpressure: haven't logged but EBC settings are quite a bit lower duty cycle to get the same boost so it's looking good.
Fuel economy : some encouraging early indications . Need to do some accurate testing now .


Did some logs this morning at 12psi just to 6000 :


https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.rx8...e1e6cd7e5f.jpg

Shame you didn't see spool up improvements. With the multiple changes made with the new setup it's hard to tell whether each change had a positive or negative impact.

Will be interesting to see how much gain is seen at higher rpm and boost with the increased exhaust gas volume. Hoping for some good results.

It would be interesting to compare the old vs new results for exhaust to boost pressure ratio and dyno to better understand the relationship between EBPR and power.

Yes it is a shame ... but overall, the engine feels very responsive with the hi flo turbine and it should offer top end improvement so ............... I'm ok with it .
And yes ,I'll be able to compare backpressure logs before and after . Looking forward to that. Wont be for a while though as I'm concentrating on the fuel consumption testing now and to do that I've gone back to no ethanol . Hoping for 10km/l (25mpg) at cruise.

Well you deserve kudos for your efforts, but it seems like you’ve pretty much exhausted virtually every avenue with that basic setup. I’d expect a BW EFR 8374 high mount to beat that hands down and do even better at lower rpm

I would have agreed with you if it weren't for the fact that turblowns efforts to date (albeit with a larger compressor) , are not even close to matching what mine is doing spoolwise . The smaller compressor will bring it closer but I really don't think it will get down to fully spooled by 4000.
I suspect my setup will make more peak power as well ... we will see i guess.

That other turbo is HYUGE, not even close to a reasonable comparison :squint::squint:

What u talkin' bout ?

It's a 9174 with not a particularly large turbine housing - probably a 0.92 seeing as it's internally gated . So the turbine side is about on par with what I have - 1.01 hi flo 68mm , the compressor is a lot bigger but how much difference is going from a 91 down to an 83 really going to make spool wise ? Even if it's 1500rpm it's still not as good as what I have .

What u talkin about?

They threw it together in under three weeks on the original used engine and it only had a bare minimum remote base tune done on a wired in universal modular ecu on an S2 for the first time just so it could be at SEMA in time. It’s not like they been tinkering away at it for 10 years on an S1 with multiple ideas, turbos, new engines etc. or anything like that.

A 91 compressor with that turbine on any Renesis, let alone a well used street engine is a big negative. It can’t get wound up at low rpm and it can’t flow enough exhaust on the high end to make up for it. With a fresh engine and some time I’m sure it will do better, but it still will always be riding the ragged edge of boom imo since it relies solely on top end for performance.

I wouldn’t expect a Renesis to match the REW 8374 with full 20 psi boost at 3200, but it’s just a matter of time before somebody shows you otherwise.


.


.

I think you just paid me the ultimate backhanded compliment ...thanks team ;)

Can't argue with that.


It might happen , and I'm sure you'll be the first one to ram it down my throat if it does. But my feeling is ............. those that have tried uncorking the Renesis , have not really understood what the issue is and how to combat it.

So ..... although 'boost threashhold ' is about the same as previous setups , respose/lag has definitely been reduced . This setup is now excellent for a street car . Anything above 4000rpm and lag seems non existent as boost builds very quickly and linearly . Pickup in 2nd gear from a low speed corner is much better .
I really think this turbine needs more flow to get it working efficiently , but once it has that flow it's much more responsive than the stock turbine.

Congrats, and I’m not out to ram anything down your throat. Technology is what it is. Please don’t take my support for it as something personal against you or your efforts.

When you say this do you mean more exhaust flow from the engine (ie. porting/polishing) or more flow through the turbine exit out the exhaust (ie. less back pressure)? I know they are hand in had in increasing overall flow through the turbine but I'm clarifying if you are specifically referring to porting mods or exhaust mods that you did (ie manifold design/larger exhaust diameter)?

No .............just referring to the higher flow you get as rpms increase. It seems about the same as the stock wheel at low rpm flow but works better than stock once rpms approach 4000.