Defined Autoworks 523whp 35r!!
 

Ok, where to start? I went to the dyno two weeks ago to tune my car for an autocross. I had no number's in mind for making power, I just wanted a tune. Logan at Defined Autoworks built and tuned this car, here is what happened. We did many pulls with these numbers and checked the dyno, its a dynapak as well. We also only had 93 in the car it has been running 93 since. I had a dirty k&N on the car, the whole time (4in). I also had 2 year old plugs in the car from my work bench. No nos, no tricks just whats here.

Here is the car, a rotary powered s14 beast

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x...7/IMG_3112.jpg

peak power ( you can see the spike to 16 pounds then it holds 14 pounds to redline)

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/h...hp13b-re-w.jpg

peak torque

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/h...tq13b-re-w.jpg


We were stunned, I don't think there has been a 2 rotor with just a half bridge and regular old 35r make this power. I will provide more detailed specs further down. The 35r is just a dual bb precision, NOT a billet wheel.

Here are the engine specs

13b-rew block and irons
13b-re port runners
D.A circuit port on the primaries
D.A half bridge on secondaries
D.A turbo exhaust port
Fd 9.0:1 rotors, balanced and clearanced.
3mm Apex seals
solid corner seals
New FC rotor housings
Coolant jacket modifications
race rotor bearings
high pressure oil reg
FC front cover
13b-re intake manifold

Turbo

1.00 divided turbine
p-trim wheel, standard wheel
.70 compressor housing

Electromotive Tec GT
Inductive coils
S4 Fc waterpump
Racing beat front pulley
Mazda comp waterpump pulley

Engine bay

Engine bay pics. The engine placement is excellent in the chassis. The front of the engine is even with the shock towers. The top of the block is about half way up on the towers. The intake is pretty tall so it looks like the engine sits high. The engine was initially designed to use a dry sump system, so the bottom of the block basically sits on the subframe. The subframe was modified and a custom oil pan was built by defined instead of using a dry sump. The placement of the engine did not have to move due to subframe modification. Everything was built by defined. The car was at Gordon's meet two years ago.

Im bad at taking pics, but you get the idea.

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x...7/IMG_3154.jpg

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x...7/IMG_3148.jpg

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x...7/IMG_3143.jpg

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x...7/IMG_3140.jpg

http://i184.photobucket.com/albums/x...7/IMG_3134.jpg

We are going to go back with race gas and play with the timing, the timing is conservative. I will update the thread with the new results.

Good numbers for a pump gas tune.

To my knowledge no one has ever made these numbers on a regular 35r, with a 2 rotor. I can't wait to see what it does on race gas with more aggressive timing, along with good plugs.

I heard of sr swaps into 7's but never rotary into s chassis cars. SO sick. Great numbers too.

What boost pressure?
can you please post the sheet that lists the TCF value :seeya:

Very nice set up, seen you post this on RX7club, pitty those idiots have no idea about rotaries or cars (rx72c = dumbarse of the decade!) :rofl:

I know a bloke who makes (are you sitting down!) 535rwhp through tires (not hubs) on a dyno dynamics (see my site where I talk about this and show details *not just internet BS comments*). This is on a regular GT35R :bigear: and a street port!

Not everyone posts their shit on the net :lol: so you or others dont know about it :)

The dynapack reads allot lower than a dyno dynamics, I went from one to the other on the same day and there was over 30rwkw or 40+rwhp loss, this is mostly due to the slip rate of the tire which you are not dealing with when you take them off and bolt directly to the hubs.

BTW your car is awesome, not a worlds first for a 35r on a 2 rotor but its something to be very proud of :drool5:

Indeed! I love how most people are looking for 400rwhp out of a 35R thinking it's the best you can do. Just like "350 is the highest you'll get out of twins @ 15psi"

It's amazing what these things can do when they're in the hands of someone who know's what they're doing :cough-you watching BDC, HC, rx7cwhatever your name is:

I think that's awesome. Im not some one who hates on some one else's success. I love the fact that some people are still able to innovate and rewrite the rules on regular convention. Im not done though, we still have allot more power to make by just messing with the timing, and playing with the waste gate. The 523 was just what the car made on our baseline. I had Logan smooth out the tune so I could auto cross it that weekend. I also want to make an exhaust manifold. The manifold on it is just a mass produced china mani. I have inconel that Im going to use. I will also get the sheet for the tcf values. The dyno we use is packed most of the time. When we get another session, I will update the thread.

I also rarely post anything about my cars on the net. I decided to post this to promote business for Defined Autoworks. As you can probably tell Im terrible at making big posts.

Here is a burn-out vid. We were bored, in the middle of hick town usa, and one car a day goes down this road if your lucky. It's not much of a burnout but you can hear the spark cut only rev limiter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHDX78z5V6s

GT35r's are very capable turbos, a few friends of mine use them. A totally different animal, but we made 601 awhp on a stock bottom end 4G63.(Dynojet)

Sounds about right. I know 4g63's can handle some power, is it an evo engine or older 4g. It would be nice if rotaries were as efficient at using there exhaust charge as a piston engine, nothing a bigger turbo can't fix tough:biggthumpup:

It's an older 6 bolt 4G63. He just ordered pistons & rods, to go with his new 67mm turbo. I have been trying to get him to do a RX7 when get the power he wants out of the Eclispe. :) What are your goals for the 240?

^ Really I was only going for around 400-460 power wise. Im going to use the 240 for time attack stuff, and run grass roots racing with it. There are a couple of scca classes my car will fit in, and emra has enduro's. EMRA also has sprint races. I am going to come up with a water injection system using the electramotive to control it. The enduro's are only 3 hour and 4 hour races. Trying to do an endurance race with a turbo rotary is fighting an up hill battle. I think with a bullet proof water injection system it can be done. I would love to travel out west and try some tarmac hill climbs. I have to work on the driver modd more than anything. Im no where near a good enough driver to do any of the above. I will be attending driving classes and learning the next coming year. I really plan to just get seat time and exposing myself to competition.

Impressive numbers! The 35R is what I'm strongly leaning towards for my power upgrades next year, looks like I'll be happy with that.

I can say the car is to fast to have fun on the street. I look at opening the taps like playing russian roulette(Im not talking about blowing the engine either).

Hell yeah man, this thing is so badass.

Sounds awesome! Bad ass build right there.

Is the 523 Hp Whp or corrected to flywheel Hp by a conversion ratio? [I saw the Torque (flywheel) on the bottom]

Do you have a dyno plot that shows the AFR? I am curious how lean you went.

It would appear from the power curve that you were lean of 12:1. If not, that is an impressive plot indeed.

Its wheel horse power. We made sure on the dynapak the everything was like it should be. We were not running lean at all. I am running two denso pumps in the tank. We had a wide band on the car, when we were tunning. The fuel was holding in there, and appears to have more. I am going to try to get it back on the dyno before winter.

Correct it is Wheel horsepower. Dyna packs read actual wheel torque, which in this case was 1,578 ft-lbs. But of course that isnt easily translated, so you select to view "flywheel torque". But its not actual flywheel torque of course.

ultimately ou cannot say anything until you see the sheet with the TCF listed as 1.00 (which is not on the screens provided).

I.E. Like this >

http://www.riceracing.com.au/donsickcunt.jpg

I can take his word but this sheet will silence any doubters :seeya:

p.s. lots of shops put in different TCF values (which are not shown on other screens) to guess flywheel HP or to correct for other types of dyno standards that return higher numbers.

We are going back to the dyno monday, so I will be sure to save the TCF values, and boost charts. But as a side note, if there is a TCF value entered in the "flywheel power" and "power" will not be the same number. The flywheel power will be higher the exact percentage the user entered.

Impressive. Time for me to upgrade my old T04B60-1 Turbo.

Stupid question. My car does not make that backfiring popping noise. Only did that when I changed it to ignition cut. Is that ignition cut? (Ok I am stupid should read instead of just clicking the video link)

I run fuel cut. I always thought that ignition cut was bad.

Either way always impressed to see big numbers. For some reason the majority of us only make around 400rwhp. I hit 409rwhp about 7 years ago on a dynojet. i had to up the boost to 18psi to make 400rwhp on a mustang dyno.

Have fun with that beast.....

Regardless awsome work Logan!!! As for the 35R cant say enough about them good for street set-ups & weekend warriors! Did a 13B-PP with twin 35r made 972RWH @35psi (methanol)

Thank you! Peter (co-owner) is also responsible for building this car. It was his personal car originally as well :) I am glad Fdwarrior took the time to take it back to the dyno and let me re-tune it. It surprised everyone involved!

Additional dyno charts
 

Alot of people were wanting charts such as boost pressure, corrections etc. So here is pretty much everything I could think of that documents the results. Its still the highest 35r non-billet turbo 13b dyno chart backed by verified proof that I've seen posted. These numbers will be re-broken again I am sure on monday once we get back to the dyno again. But until then, enjoy!

First off is the charts showing TCF. And it of course is 1.00
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/h...onsmatts14.jpg

Next up is the boost chart by itself
http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/h...ureMatts14.jpg

Then we have the boost chart and torque line to show relationships

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/h...queMatts14.jpg

again very good job, those graphs should silence any doubters :lurk5:

For what its worth that (if you average all the runs) around ~7% to 8% more power at same peak rpm than what my old nugget had on 18psi running street port, plumb back waste gate, and 3" quiet exhaust system in 2002 on H trim (~57mm) compressor old T04B... S5 T2 engine block.

I wish you would post AFR on the graph (or are you not logging it to the dyno?)

I am curious what more experienced Turbo engine tuners run, as a lot of people I talk to say nothing lean of 11:1 and I think that is leaving a lot of power on the table.

Peak power (for pump gas) is 13.3:1 (0.9 lambda). There is not much gain to be had lean of 13.0:1. As far as I know, this holds true for any chamber pressure - it is definately true for naturally aspirated applications.

Your VE must be relatively high if you are running 11:1 AFR.

I run about .82L (12:1) I must not be very experienced or know what the hell I'm talking about at all.... I mean when people are making 437 RWHP with Meth @ 22psi on a GT42R.... I mean, how can I compare right?!?!?!?!? :smilielol5::rofl::lol::rofl::smilielol5:

In all seriousness, this are the things that I like to see. Convinces me even more that I'll be able to break the HP/Torque that I want to make with a very similar turbo.

Nice numbers.... Love the setup....great job

Honestly I should let Logan respond, but I would say he is about as experienced as it gets. He currently has the highest horsepower from a 2 rotor n/a using a street port. He also just made 421, with allot more left from an n/a 3 rotor using a street port and semi-p port. Rally I would not let any one else touch my car. I would sell my car before having to go some where else if those were my only two options. Im just talking from my experience as a customer, along with what I have seen come out of there shop. I know for a fact there is no other n/a 3 rotor that even comes close to his. Logan's semi-p port is almost touching documented full p-port numbers. I would not be concerned with experience.

Thanks, and I agree with what you are saying. I really think the problem is that the U.S. rotary tunning market is very lack luster over-all. Most of the "experienced" and refined rotary tunners of the U.S. market don't have much to show. I see most people take rumor as fact, which takes credit away from shops that produce documented results. Im mainly talking about things I have seen on r-club since I have been on there. Mostly things in the 3 rotor realm, which is notorious for bench racing, and theorizing without proven results. As some one who spends hard earned money of things I don't want an engine built from rumor of what works. There is much more to be had over all in every aspect of the rotary engine. I guess the biggest difference between my engine and some others is mine is built to go race, not be a novelty to a group of enthusiast. I know there are people and shops out there pushing the limits, and making the necessary small detail research.

I don't think he's concerned with Logan's experience, I think he more interested in the experience he has and what it's lead him to believe.... if that makes sense... it does in my caffine hieghtened state :D

Basically there are a bunch of tools on the evil forum who won't run in the 11's under boost, add meth as a safety factor, retard the ignition as a safety factor and end up with blown engines becuase they don't know what the hell they're doing..... I mean really... 22psi out of a GT42R on a HBP and the most he could make was 437 something ponies.....

I agree, most of the people out there that are on the cutting edge aren't posting on the forums. I can understand it, this is their livelihood... they're not going to give away the secrets that they fought so hard to find. That's what gives them thier edge and keeps people coming to them. Its the enthusiasts or people that think they are that will constantly post up thier findings. The problem is there are a select few that actually know WTF they're doing when building a engine, tuning an engine, etc etc while the bulk of them are keyboard mechanics and theorists that can't see past thier mistakes. So, if each group posts an equal amount, there will be a tremendous amount of shit out there..... this is my view of 7club, BDC, HC etc etc etc.... While the membership here isn't nearly as great in numbers, I feel that the quality of people posting here is much higher...... Just my $.02

Yeah when tuning a turbo engine, I do not use the dyno wideband. The internal dampening is too slow for quick decisions if things get out of hand. AFR for a turbo rotary strictly depends on how much generated heat is entering the engine. For example, I see ALOT of people running a turbine housing that is 1 inch away from the intake manifold with no heat shield at all! Hmmmm blown engine anyone?? But typically a nice safe tune will be in the 11.1-11.2 range. In a controlled environment or on a very well insulated/ well cooled turbo rotary setup, 12.0- 12.5 can be done. But that tune is not safe in my opinion in the real world at the track.

Now with that said, do not get too hung up on a 13.3 afr number. Yes n/a two rotors seem to enjoy 12.8-13.4 in the testing I have done as well. But remember not each rotor is burning EXACTLY the same as the other. And we typically are using only one wideband. So if you ever get into n/a 3 rotors, trying to tune for 13.3 might actually hurt power. Simply the variance and heat difference from the front of the engine all the way to the rear can cause this. When I tune N/a piston engines like the Honda b16 and b18, they actually made the best power at 14.0 afr. So dont cling too hard on values, and always let the dyno do most of the talking.

So are you suggesting that actual real world testing trump rumors and little kids on the internet!!! Say it isn't so!!! :smilielol5:

I agree that 11:1 is safe... it's about as "SAFE" as I'm willing to go on a SP and I would actually go a little leaner on HBP just becuase of the overlap. I look for 11.7-12.0 on my personal setup but I have more faith in my injectors, ECU and coils than most of the others out on the mkt

I've got everything related to Exhaust or Intake ceramic coated and a good bit of airflow through the engine bay. Even after repeated dyno abuse most of the intake is cool to the touch. So I am a very big believer in what you're saying about heat. EGT's are also key to monitor as is EMAP..... I'd be VERY curious to what this turbo is generating for EMAP at given boost levels. You're not logging that by chance are you?

My hat is off to you, sir!

Very well written reply - I couldn't agree more that test data trumps theory anyday, rules of thumb will only get a baseline, the dyno is required for peak power.

I was told that rotaries liked 12:1 AFR for peak power when I decided to throw a Haltech ECU in my car, I tuned to 12:1 rather than following my experience on piston engines because I didn't expect it to port across. Instead, I found that I gave up 40 WHp by tuning to 12:1, relative to 13.3 (where I would have tuned it if left to my own devices).

I was also told that ignition timing should be 26 degrees, I found peak power (+20WHp at 38 degrees - which is a good baseline number for a <10:1 engine). Thus I found the piston engine knowledge that I had acquired has ported over very nicely to rotaries.

I completely agree that chamber swirl has great effects on fuel distribution and therefore desired AFR for peak power (hence the tumble head design on a DOHC 4-valve cylinder requiring a leaner AFR).

I was mostly curious for my own information, as I have little to no experience with gasoline-fuelled forced induction engines, but I have pretty good experience with normally aspirated gasoline engines. I work with turbocharged diesel and Natural gas engines every day, so I am always curious how the parallels carry across.

My experience has led me to conclude that a higher compression ratio tends to make better torque and require slightly leaner AFRs while accepting less timing advance. I am always trying to obtain information that can help me apply these trends to rotaries. I am relatively new to rotaries as compared to my piston engine experience.

Don't give out information that will hurt your livelihood, but you have earned the respect of one amature rotary builder with your above reply.

Speaking of fuel swirl and distribution....

Over the winter.... last winter that is I made 2 changes to the engine setup.

One were the coils. I went with a "different" inductive coil.
The second was the injectors. I went from some "Marren American Style" (basically propane injectors) sized 750/1000 to some Paul Yaw ID 725/2000. I intend to throw my old LS1 coils back on as well a a bunch of other's to test the ignition system and various coils. It will also be interesting to compare this years dyno's to last. The distribution will be much more even across the chamber with the new injectors. I'd be curious to see if it leads to more torque and the ability to run slightly leaner as well.

Eventually I'll get the thing together and on the dyno for these tests.

Went back to the dyno one more time on pump gas to see what slightly higher boost would effect. Still under 20psi. About 18.8psi peak going to 16 psi redline. Definitely stretching the fuel system to the upper limits. 535rwhp / 406rwtq. The methanol system is almost finished now, so that will be the next very soon!

http://i254.photobucket.com/albums/h...herboosthp.jpg

Not trying to start anything, but it is funny to read some of these reactions over dyno numbers. Take it to the track, 540 rwhp fd will trap in the 130s in the 1/4, if it does that then the numbers are believable. It is just hard for me to believe you are making 520+rwhp on 14-15psi when every other setup is making 425-450 on this exact setup. :dunno:

Ill make you the same offer I made TitaniumTT, take it to another dyno and I will pay for your pulls as long as you post the honest results.

Once again, not trying to start anything or discredit anyones work whatsoever. When you see hundreds of examples of a setup all within a 5% variance of power at X psi, you kinda have to question the 1 or 2 setups that come out with 20% more power :dunno:

Please dont take this as me downing anyone, I love to see improvements with the rotary but I am realistic. I have a customer trapping 127mph on the stock twins with 370rwhp and weight reduction, 540 at the wheels should easily hit 130mph in the 1/4. Ill pay for your dragstrip passes or for you to dyno on another dyno if you are willing to accept?

David
RotaryRebuildStore.com

Interesting offer. Are you asking him to try another dyno other than a dynapack or just a a different location to validate his times? 540hp in a 2900 lb car should run in the area of 10.2 at 133 mph. Assuming that your customers car only weighed 2400 lbs with 370 hp should show a 10.8 at 125 mph. I also am not trying to start anything, but you are here asking for proof right. Well you listed an unknown customer car, with no real info other than 370 hp & weight reduction with some trap speed. I hate to say it but you haven't really made a good argument & no hard info was provided on your customers car. Now I may be wrong this is just my opinion. BTW there are other factors involved other than Hp & weight when at the track, which I'm positive you already know.

Trap speeds are trap speeds unless you are making 1000hp and litterally spinning down the track.

Customer is on the other forum, Im not trying to take credit for his car or his accomplishments. All I did was rebuild his block. Car weighs 2560 without driver, made 368rwhp, FD, non-sequential, 3" exhaust, enough fuel, slicks, stock 5 speed trans, 4.10 gears, 20psi on stock twins. Not leaving on 2step just revving and going so would be similar to the above car. The car I am speaking of went 11.1 at 127 and has gone 11.0s at 126.

What do I have to prove? When someone comes on a forum claiming near 100+ rwhp more than the other 100 setups documented at a certain boost level I think it is up to them to prove the numbers or expect few to believe it.

I figured people would reacte the way you did, so let me clarify. I WANT TO BE PROVEN WRONG. Just highly doubt I will.

Ill pay for him to run on a dyno dynamics dyno run by a reputable shop or pay for him to run at the dragstrip. Even throw in an extra $50.00 to cover gas or whatever else. I would love to believe we can make 523rwhp with a responsive small turbo at 14-15psi on these cars but just dont see it happening. :dunno: