Turbocharger & Supercharger Info/Questions
#127
Guest
Posts: n/a
Either or. The rumormill says Mazda will FINALLY supercharge a rotary engine for the Mazdaspeed RX-8. I think supercharging's great as it enhances the rotary engine's power without adding throttle latency.
Turbocharging shouldn't be to big of a deal, but the exhaust manifold to drive the turbo will be tricky to fit as the engine's already in the transmission tunnel
Turbocharging shouldn't be to big of a deal, but the exhaust manifold to drive the turbo will be tricky to fit as the engine's already in the transmission tunnel
#128
okay...i have been researching most of the new import cars coming from japan and europe...first off everyone is trying to make cars built up as much as possible as an N/A...thats why the new M3 has such high compression and same with the 350z, rx-8 and other cars...unless it comes charged in some way its going to cost money to do such...the new greddy kit for the 350z is about 5k installed...for an extra 90hp....the problem is the high compression...now on the rx-8 the problem comes in as well it doesnt have a head gasket...cause if it did just get a thicker gasket for more boost...to boost the rx-8 to at least 1 bar well heck your better of buying an rx-7....i think we need to face the fact that there will never be super cars like the rx-7, supra, 300zx, or skyline again....thats why i might just settle for the new vw r32...awd, 6 speed and 300hp ...cant go wrong...cause after test driving the rx-8 i feel that new dodge sst or what ever might be faster
#129
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 2,045
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by vaughnc
Either or. The rumormill says Mazda will FINALLY supercharge a rotary engine for the Mazdaspeed RX-8...
Either or. The rumormill says Mazda will FINALLY supercharge a rotary engine for the Mazdaspeed RX-8...
---jps
#130
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Redmond, WA
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by crazydrifter
now on the rx-8 the problem comes in as well it doesnt have a head gasket...cause if it did just get a thicker gasket for more boost
now on the rx-8 the problem comes in as well it doesnt have a head gasket...cause if it did just get a thicker gasket for more boost
my opinion is that a high compression/low boost turbo option is quite attractive for this kind of car. While you won't end up with as high a peak horsepower figure, you will retain good power off-boost and give yourself strong, linear power on-boost. much more in-line with this car's character.
#132
Hyper Space RX-8 _,.-^'`
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Motor City
Posts: 529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
umors
According to all the rumors, if you listen to them, is a 1.6L rotary engine in the works, intented for the future RX-7, as well as a 3-rotor variant of the RENESIS, as well as super and/or turbo charging the existing engine. Most of the people linking to the technical experts say that it's not going to last well with more than 5psi of boost.
#143
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My guess is that turbos kill normal driving in these high rev high compression sports cars. Think about the Comptech S2000 that just won the Fourgasm C&D contest. The S2000 has no low end torque, wouldn't it benefit from a turbo instead of a supercharger?
The supercharger helps the engine where it isn't really needed, resulting in the spin or bog it characteristic all the magazines have claimed.
A turbo would make more sense, but that little engine doesn't create enough exhaust at low rpms to spin anything that could keep up with the engine when it kicks into it's atmospheric power band. A little turbo would now restrict the engine and it would actually lose HP.
They could put a big turbo on there but now you have some big fan blades slowing the car down at low rpms and the car is slow enough already down there.
The rotary is very similar, that's why the RX-7 (FD) had a sequential system. Small turbo for low RPMs and a big turbo for the upper band. However, this made the RX-7 very expensive and complicated.
A lot of people swap out their two turbos for one massive guy for serious top end power. But those cars lose their daily driving characteristics.
However, in the next couple of years we may see VATN ( I think that is right) turbos that can dynamically change their A/R ratio thus acting like a small turbo at low rpms, and a big one at high rpms. This would be a huge step for the automotive industry. It definitely isn't going to be here soon enough to wait on turboing your RX-8 though. Just properly size the turbo for your application. Compressor maps are beautiful thing.
The supercharger helps the engine where it isn't really needed, resulting in the spin or bog it characteristic all the magazines have claimed.
A turbo would make more sense, but that little engine doesn't create enough exhaust at low rpms to spin anything that could keep up with the engine when it kicks into it's atmospheric power band. A little turbo would now restrict the engine and it would actually lose HP.
They could put a big turbo on there but now you have some big fan blades slowing the car down at low rpms and the car is slow enough already down there.
The rotary is very similar, that's why the RX-7 (FD) had a sequential system. Small turbo for low RPMs and a big turbo for the upper band. However, this made the RX-7 very expensive and complicated.
A lot of people swap out their two turbos for one massive guy for serious top end power. But those cars lose their daily driving characteristics.
However, in the next couple of years we may see VATN ( I think that is right) turbos that can dynamically change their A/R ratio thus acting like a small turbo at low rpms, and a big one at high rpms. This would be a huge step for the automotive industry. It definitely isn't going to be here soon enough to wait on turboing your RX-8 though. Just properly size the turbo for your application. Compressor maps are beautiful thing.
#145
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Sydney/London
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turbo the 4 port or the 6 port RENESIS?
Hi all,
If you can get a turbo into the engine bay (I still haven't seen any hard evidence from anyone actaully doing one yet?) then would the 4 port or 6 port be better for doing so.
Also, does anyone know how much more different the throttle body is on the 4 port engine to the 6 port? (I understand that the plennum is different for sure).
Serious replies only please (last thing I want is another messy thread!).
If you can get a turbo into the engine bay (I still haven't seen any hard evidence from anyone actaully doing one yet?) then would the 4 port or 6 port be better for doing so.
Also, does anyone know how much more different the throttle body is on the 4 port engine to the 6 port? (I understand that the plennum is different for sure).
Serious replies only please (last thing I want is another messy thread!).
#146
RX-7 Guru
Here ya go -
https://www.rx8club.com/series-i-aftermarket-performance-modifications-23/turbo-kit-has-landed-9603/
Greddy's already got a kit coming. I think pics of the prototype are on the 2nd page.
Anyhow, it's really hard to say which would be better - the 4-port or 6-port motor. You would probably want to change the port operation so they're fully open under boost. Time will tell there.
Dale
https://www.rx8club.com/series-i-aftermarket-performance-modifications-23/turbo-kit-has-landed-9603/
Greddy's already got a kit coming. I think pics of the prototype are on the 2nd page.
Anyhow, it's really hard to say which would be better - the 4-port or 6-port motor. You would probably want to change the port operation so they're fully open under boost. Time will tell there.
Dale
#147
Registered
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Navarre, FL
Posts: 994
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SIDEBAR: Port the 4 port or the 6 port RENESIS
This is a sidebar regarding porting and the 4 and 6-port engines. In the past, most (if not all) folks recommended NOT porting the 6PI engines. That meant if you wanted bad-*** porting, you had to swap in a 4-port motor (or was it just the housings?). I would imagine we're in kind of the same boat with the RENESIS, unless someone got really smart about porting the tertiary ports (and modding the actuators). That could mean that the Standard Power RX-8 may have more N/A potential than the High Power. Would need upgraded fuel supply, I'm sure, as well as a tranny swap (or high(er)-stall torque converter) since all that new power will be at upper rpms.
Last edited by B-Nez; 09-08-2003 at 04:26 PM.
#149
Registered
The past 4 port engines have always flown more air than the 6 port engines on a flowbench. However the 6 port engines have still always been able to get very close to the power levels of the 4 port engines. First of all, the 6 port engines intake ports are open longer which allows more time for air to enter the engine. The small runners are poor for good flow though. Luckily there is a phenomenon that is a very good side effect of having several seperate ports. When the rotor turns and closes off the bottom port on the end housings, all of the remaining air is forced to flow into the engine through the small upper port and runner. This increased amount of air through the upper port causes it to speed up and charge more air into the chamber. It is all about velocity and not volume. Many RX-7 people make the huge mistake of combining these ports for added flow. The problem is that you kill the velocity that you get from them being seperate and power goes out the door even though it flows better. Go search the RX-7 forum for anything that says "monster port" or "siamesed ports", etc to see what not to do.
Either engine will respond very well to forced induction. I have turbocharged both types and gotten great results from both setups. On the RX-7's the 6 port actuators are in the way so it is easiest to just leave them open full time. Power falls off too hard below 4000 rpm and light loads. It isn't as nice for just driving around and gas mileage gets worse. Then again that could also be a side effect of staying on the gas more too. The plus side is that with all of the port area the turbo likes to spool faster. If I were to turbocharge a 6 port engine again, I would find a way to leave the port actuation alone. You really want to increase power across the board rather than at the expense of another area. The 4 port engines are still wonderful performers. All of the big high power RX-7's use 4 port engines although this is mostly due to the fact that it is this engine that came with turbos. The 4 port Renesis has a higher torque peak and it is lower in the rpm range. This means that power is slightly greater in this engine than in the 6 port up to about 7000 rpm or so. A turbo can overcome the top end deficiencies but it will boost the midrange much better. My choice for the street would be a turbocharged 4 port Renesis in a 6 speed car.
That's my .02
Either engine will respond very well to forced induction. I have turbocharged both types and gotten great results from both setups. On the RX-7's the 6 port actuators are in the way so it is easiest to just leave them open full time. Power falls off too hard below 4000 rpm and light loads. It isn't as nice for just driving around and gas mileage gets worse. Then again that could also be a side effect of staying on the gas more too. The plus side is that with all of the port area the turbo likes to spool faster. If I were to turbocharge a 6 port engine again, I would find a way to leave the port actuation alone. You really want to increase power across the board rather than at the expense of another area. The 4 port engines are still wonderful performers. All of the big high power RX-7's use 4 port engines although this is mostly due to the fact that it is this engine that came with turbos. The 4 port Renesis has a higher torque peak and it is lower in the rpm range. This means that power is slightly greater in this engine than in the 6 port up to about 7000 rpm or so. A turbo can overcome the top end deficiencies but it will boost the midrange much better. My choice for the street would be a turbocharged 4 port Renesis in a 6 speed car.
That's my .02
#150
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by jdwk
My guess is that turbos kill normal driving in these high rev high compression sports cars. Think about the Comptech S2000 that just won the Fourgasm C&D contest. The S2000 has no low end torque, wouldn't it benefit from a turbo instead of a supercharger?
The supercharger helps the engine where it isn't really needed, resulting in the spin or bog it characteristic all the magazines have claimed.
A turbo would make more sense, but that little engine doesn't create enough exhaust at low rpms to spin anything that could keep up with the engine when it kicks into it's atmospheric power band. A little turbo would now restrict the engine and it would actually lose HP.
They could put a big turbo on there but now you have some big fan blades slowing the car down at low rpms and the car is slow enough already down there.
The rotary is very similar, that's why the RX-7 (FD) had a sequential system. Small turbo for low RPMs and a big turbo for the upper band. However, this made the RX-7 very expensive and complicated.
A lot of people swap out their two turbos for one massive guy for serious top end power. But those cars lose their daily driving characteristics.
However, in the next couple of years we may see VATN ( I think that is right) turbos that can dynamically change their A/R ratio thus acting like a small turbo at low rpms, and a big one at high rpms. This would be a huge step for the automotive industry. It definitely isn't going to be here soon enough to wait on turboing your RX-8 though. Just properly size the turbo for your application. Compressor maps are beautiful thing.
My guess is that turbos kill normal driving in these high rev high compression sports cars. Think about the Comptech S2000 that just won the Fourgasm C&D contest. The S2000 has no low end torque, wouldn't it benefit from a turbo instead of a supercharger?
The supercharger helps the engine where it isn't really needed, resulting in the spin or bog it characteristic all the magazines have claimed.
A turbo would make more sense, but that little engine doesn't create enough exhaust at low rpms to spin anything that could keep up with the engine when it kicks into it's atmospheric power band. A little turbo would now restrict the engine and it would actually lose HP.
They could put a big turbo on there but now you have some big fan blades slowing the car down at low rpms and the car is slow enough already down there.
The rotary is very similar, that's why the RX-7 (FD) had a sequential system. Small turbo for low RPMs and a big turbo for the upper band. However, this made the RX-7 very expensive and complicated.
A lot of people swap out their two turbos for one massive guy for serious top end power. But those cars lose their daily driving characteristics.
However, in the next couple of years we may see VATN ( I think that is right) turbos that can dynamically change their A/R ratio thus acting like a small turbo at low rpms, and a big one at high rpms. This would be a huge step for the automotive industry. It definitely isn't going to be here soon enough to wait on turboing your RX-8 though. Just properly size the turbo for your application. Compressor maps are beautiful thing.
I think that for the RX8 a supercharger is the way to go. Since you're going to be limited on boost you might as well go with a low boost supercharger. It will be easier to maintain and easier to design. Forget the turbo because it's too many parts for too little of a gain.