smrx8

iTrader: (1)

[QUOTE=Jason]So you tuned the motor until it detonated and then pulled timing out and thats how you figured out the max efficency of the engine? Who says there was no more in the engine?




Haa i like that jason , you must know something

TooBIG

http://www.speedforceracing.com/index.php

The SFR site is up now and there is a small turbo video.
Not much else new.. still the original prices and no dyno numbers.

Hope today brings more info !
-B

rotarygod

Actually for what it's worth, the engine makes max power long before it hits a timing advance level that causes it to detonate. Max timing before detonation is not the max power spot. Just thought I'd throw that in there.

LiL BenNy

lol this threads kinda funny lol... say if it does produce 29X like it claims... how are your greddy owners gonna feel lol....

Iwannarex8

RX8-Turbo system - $6250
TSI engine management system option - $1495
Ball-bearing turbo option - $600
304SS Cat deletion pipe - $399

if those are the prices.......Ill be waiting a tad longer :p

Ajax

those were the original prices..
SSR said they'd be changing.

Anyway, that video was neat and all but totally worthless..

Dyno graphs would be nice as well as the real prices.

SSR Engineering

The prices will definitely be alot better then that, i don't know how many times i've said it.

SSR Engineering

Here is what SFR has to say about the RX-8 turbo kit. The car indeed made 292 horsepower at the wheels at 6 psi. Now this was the upper end of 6 psi and it is very close to 7 psi. I have a SAE corrected dyno chart which will be posted on here tonight showing a preliminary run of 281 horsepower at the wheels, which was done on the stock cat. The mixtures were a bit leaner then what we wanted becasue our injectors are running at 100% duty cycle. We are in the process of installing larger injectors to support the horspower we are looking for. We also incorporated a boost control seloniod which gradually brings on the boost because we were experiencing detonation when the boost came on hard, early in the rpms.

As far as horsepower per psi of boost, we have used this same T4 turbo (and the specs will remain a secret-sorry guys) on other applications. For example, the Nissan Altima used this turbo and made an additional 105 horsepower at the wheels at 5.5psi! Now I know some of you guys are going to say well thats a 3.5L motor and the Renesis is 1.3L. but the fact is that all rotaries put out alot more exhaust gas energy then their displacement ratings would lead you to beleive is possible. This is why making 100 horsepower at the wheel at such a low boost is possible. Not only is it possible but it is a reality! So our testing is not done yet. We are trying to get 300 at the wheels out of this set-up with the cat. We might also throw in a testpipe to free up the exhaust even further which should allow even further horsepower gains without sacrifing reliability and without raising the boost any further.

Fanman

I'll feel fine. Honestly I was waiting for this kit to come out, but even if it was $6000 w/ engine management that is still 2X more expensive than the Greddy kit. The Greddy unit with some fuel system mods should be good for 300 whp, and that is all I am looking for. The turbo is said to be good for up to 350 whp. If I get to 300 whp I will be more than happy. I spent $2900 on my kit. I'm sure there are people that are looking for 500 hp & are willing to spend $6K, but I just wasn't one of them. I think these kits are aimed at 2 different markets.

ranger4277

SSR, will you also post the baseline dyno if you have it? Thanks.

And the raw data too! :D I'm just kidding.... but I really do want to see the baseline.

XDEEDUBBX

dam i bet it would sound sick!

dmp

Please list the correction value used, or the 'measured' hp - that'd be great

rotarygod

You don't use corrected horsepower numbers on exhaust driven turbocharged vehicles! It throws the results off. It is only to be used with naturally aspirated or mechanically supercharged engines. I really want to see the base horsepower numbers before the turbo.

Snoochie

You didn't adjust the whp after the turbo was on right? Because doesn't the turbo automatically adjust to air pressure and whatnot. Something along those lines, y'all get the point.

dmp

I see that www.flyinmiata.com - shows all their figures are Corrected; because they are over 5000 ft in elevation. If turbos compensated for the environmental differences, there's be no reason to show them as such...

Frankly, I never have Corrected values shown during my dyno days...I don't happen to care what my car would dyno 'in a perfect world' - I don't live there.

SpeedForceRacing

This is my first post here and I wanted to clarify a few things........From seeing some of the posts, it sounds like some of you guys do not understand how an SAE corrected dyno chart is the chart that you want to use to compare to other peoples dyno charts.This is the ONLY way to compare apples to apples.The SAE correction is an industry standard that all dynos follow by.It basically means that your car where ever it is tested at, will be corrected so your altitude is at 0 feet and your ambient temperature is at 70F. Let me explain.......You have an RX-8 in Saudia Arabia and they dyno it when it is 125F outside.It makes 155 horsepower at the wheels.Now you add the correction factor in and it brings the power output UP to 175 at the wheels.Now take this same car and go to Alaska when it is 30F outside.Dyno the car.This same car now makes 195 horsepower at the wheels.Add the correction factor in and it brings it Down to 175 at the wheels.It is very simple on how this works and Dynojets,Dyno Dymanics,Mustang dyno and even the Dyno paks all have a correction factor that you use so that you can compare dyno charts whether you are at elvelvation, in the scorching sun or when it is snowing.


Someone said that you cannot use a correction factor on a turbocharged vehicle and that statement is not true.You can use a correction factor on any vehicle!!!!! A correction factor is just a way to even out the playing field so to speak.If their is any doubt about what I am saying here, I would encourage you to call Dynojet and sak some questions.You could also go onto the Supra,Nissan,Porsche,BMW,etc..... forums and you will quickly find out that alot of people will not even look at a chart for comparisons sake unless it is SAE corrected.The bottom line is that if you are looking at any dyno chart that is not corrected then you are not looking at the real deal.Take care.

P.S. If you guys have any more technical questions, fire away.



Tim
http://www.speedforceracing.com
619-328-4012

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

[QUOTE=SSR Engineering]H
but the fact is that all rotaries put out alot more exhaust gas energy then their displacement ratings would lead you to beleive is possible. This is why making 100 horsepower at the wheel at such a low boost is possible. Not only is it possible but it is a reality!

HUH?

rotarygod

Corrected figures for turbocharged engines will give you a higher reading than you actually have. While there should theoretically be SOME form of correction for turbos and altitude, the current correction factors don't work. Remember since a wastegate and boost controllers are calibrated to sea level pressure, the turbo will just spin faster to provide the same pressure at altitude. Yes there is a little loss to added heat from the turbo working harder but it doesn't lose near as much as a naturally aspirated engine or a mechanically driven supercharger in terms of percentage. This is why the corrections for it come out wrong and higher than actual. You are far more accurate with no correction than you are with the current ones. Correction factors do more than try to compensate for temperature. They try to establish a baseline at sea level at a certain pressure, humidity level, and a certain temperature. If it were only temperature, I'd believe them. Turbos do not follow the same rules as naturally aspirated engines at altitude and these are the engines that the correction was designed for. In reality the only thing that matters is how much power your car has where you are at and not somewhere else. I don't drive there. Claiming high, corrected horsepower numbers is good for one thing though and that is selling product.

SpeedForceRacing

Rotary god,


I will get the uncorrected chart and it says we made more HP then the corrected 180.8 horsepower chart that will be up on our website in about 15 minutes.How do you explain that?

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

He already explained it, you dyno'ed at less then 70 degrees


I take that back SFR explained it also.

rotarygod

[QUOTE=Richard Paul]I'll explain this a little better. First of all a rotary is NOT a 1.3 liter engine if we are comparing it's airflow to a piston engine. Why people think that is beyond me. All you have to do is study how one works and how Mazda rated displacement and you can easily see this. From a piston engine standpoint it is a 2.6 liter although the airflow through it for turbo sizing would suggest otherwise. Mazda sized the engine based on displacement over 1 full rotation of the eccentric shaft. A piston engine is sized based on total volume of all cylinders which takes place over 2 rotations of the crankshaft. Thus the rotary compares to a 2.6 piston engine. There's more confusion though.

A big problem with the rotary is it's fairly low efficiency in terms of combustion. There is alot of waste that doesn't get burned by the spark plugs at the combustion phase. Much more than the average piston engine. This leaves alot of unburned gasses in the form of hydrocarbons. Some of these hydrocarbons get ignited again in the exhaust stroke and add even more heat to the exhaust gasses. This causes the gasses to expand more since hotter air is less dense than colder air. The rotary exhaust is much hotter than the average piston engine and this alone adds volume to the amount of gas leaving the engine in terms of size but we obviously can't add to the amount of mols of gasses leaving. The same amount simply takes up more space. This is a source of confusion when sizing turbos for rotaries. You have to guess bigger than the expected numbers.

rotarygod

I'm not saying you didn't get that horsepower number. The fact that the math doesn't add up just has me asking questions. I'm just trying to make sense of it. I'm not trying to discredit you.

I do have 1 very important question though. If the SAE correction standard is so universally accepted, why aren't dynos calibrated to a certain standard? Why do Mustang dynos read less than others? A correction standard isn't a very accurate thing when the units that test the inital number aren't even calibrated to a standard. Who's to say which is right?

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

SFR, looked at your site. Can't bad mouth your workmanship, nice looking install.
Very good welder, who ever he is.

Richard Paul

iTrader: (5)

RG I hope you weren't explaining that to me. That was his quote, my contribution was only the "HUH"

I don't understand what he is saying. The extra exhaust we all know about. Just what the hell does it have to do with bending the laws of physics?

Rotoman

Hey rotarygod, SFR just posted their earlier dyno, I would have pasted it , but don't know how..