280rwhp@9lbs of boost, stock turbo,stock ecu - Page 3

Judge Ito · 10-11-2011, 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raksj04

wow, i am just curious what rpm are you hitting 280?

I gave the dyno shop a call, peak hp was @7400 rpm and peak torque was at 5800 rpm's..

Mazdabater · 10-11-2011, 06:47 PM

Wait this engine is in a first gen? If so that makes me even more doubtful it's got 280hp. Also I don't know of any cars that have a problem with a clutch that only affects certain gears.

Judge Ito · 10-11-2011, 06:52 PM

clutch should be fixed by tomorrow. and later in the evening out to Island dragway for some more practice runs..

Judge Ito · 10-11-2011, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mazdabater

Wait this engine is in a first gen? If so that makes me even more doubtful it's got 280hp. Also I don't know of any cars that have a problem with a clutch that only affects certain gears.

did u not see the youtube dyno link? it's a seies 5 turbo Rx7. what goopy means is, a set-up like this in a first gen rx7 would be a fun toy being a first gen is alot ligther..

RotorDad · 10-11-2011, 07:09 PM

Looking forward to see the progression of this car.

Judge Ito · 10-11-2011, 07:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mazdabater

Wait this engine is in a first gen? If so that makes me even more doubtful it's got 280hp. Also I don't know of any cars that have a problem with a clutch that only affects certain gears.

I'm not sure what your problem is, from the beggining your insinuating that a stock ecu cannot achieve these goals, then you go on and on. For your information, I have dynoed over 327rwhp with a stock ecu over 10 years ago. and ran 11.7 with that same stock ecu in a series 4 turbo II..

not only did I post a dyno sheet but also posted a dyno video pull. i'm not here to brag but to show the potential involved with a simple set-up like this. I could even tell you on a 10lbs of boost pull my kid's car made 291rwhp. I didnt post 291rwhp because the engine went lean and that is not a realistic goal/tune..

the car made back to back 280rwhp @ 9psi of boost with the proper A/F ratio, and that jack is the facts believe it or not..

here i'll post some pics her clutch with tons of heat spots from slippage.. I hope you know how to read a slipping clutch.. so sit back relax and enjoy the progress on this simple but effective build..

Judge Ito · 10-11-2011, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RotorDad

Looking forward to see the progression of this car.

by tomorrow morning the new clutch should be installed and change fluids and leave it ready for the evening. i'll try to have some video footage..

Mazdabater · 10-11-2011, 09:03 PM

It seems incredibly unlikely that that's the real hp. I'm hoping you prove me wrong and I'm not having a go but I have seen so many hp claims that don't back it up at the track, and thats what this looks like, not so much concerned with the ecu, but I am aware of how inefficent the stock turbo is. And as for the clutch slip it cannot be that bad to do a 1.8 sec 60ft. Back to my 13.5 @104 on 220hp was with a 2.0 60ft, on a better track/tyres my 60ft time would be improved thus my et and mph would have changed.

At the end of the day if I see it pulling mid 12's at 110+ mph I'll shut my mouth and give credit where credits due as this is quite an achievement.

Judge Ito · 10-12-2011, 04:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mazdabater

It seems incredibly unlikely that that's the real hp. I'm hoping you prove me wrong and I'm not having a go but I have seen so many hp claims that don't back it up at the track, and thats what this looks like, not so much concerned with the ecu, but I am aware of how inefficent the stock turbo is. And as for the clutch slip it cannot be that bad to do a 1.8 sec 60ft. Back to my 13.5 @104 on 220hp was with a 2.0 60ft, on a better track/tyres my 60ft time would be improved thus my et and mph would have changed.

At the end of the day if I see it pulling mid 12's at 110+ mph I'll shut my mouth and give credit where credits due as this is quite an achievement.

even if you improve to a 1.8 60 ft mark your car will NOT pick up half a second in the big end.. and your wrong again, when any car improves 60ft mark, the E.T. improves but the mph will not(basically the quarter mile is driven in a more efficient way) and if you think the clutch was not bad enough according to all the heat shown from slippage then you have very limited experience in the world of drag racing..

and your wrong again with saying it should trap 110mph, before you make any assessment, the weight/hp needs to be known. and in this case you DO NOT KNOW how much the car tips the scale with the driver.

according to the weight of the car and the 280rwhp the car should trap 106.22mph..

with 292rwhp it should trap 108mph

and with 311rwhp it should trap 110mph ofcourse any of this is assuming the car will have good traction and driven efficiently..

Mazdabater · 10-12-2011, 06:47 AM

I'm just assuming 60 more rwhp picking up more mph then my 220ho car. As for the weight my car is probably heavier then stock by a little bit and I weigh 106kg so I doubt your heavier. As for mine taking .2 off my 60ft would probably take .4 or so off my et putting me at around a 13.1 and I'm sure it could have hit 1mph extra with some extra traction. Also if your clutch is that fucked you should even gain some rwhp on the dyno with a new one. I'm still not able to see 280hp. And picking up an extra 11rwhp gain going to 10psi on the stock turbo seems incredible to me given how inefficient they are up high.

Mazdabater · 10-12-2011, 06:48 AM

And we are both flogging dead horses here I'll just shutup and wait for the results next time at the strip.

My5ABaby · 10-12-2011, 07:45 AM

There's a dyno and video posted... I'm not sure where the massive doubt is coming from.

RETed · 10-12-2011, 08:10 AM

"Most people" would have a hard time getting the stock turbo to push anything past 240 - 250hp at the wheels, even on a DynoJet.
What we're dealing with here is a lot of hush-hush stuff that the OP isn't willing to give all the nitty gritty details to at this point in time.
Even I have my doubts on how a "stock turbo" + "stock ECU" is going to push an honest 280 at the wheels myself...
I was going to leave this alone and hopefully some useful hints might get posted, but it's starting to go in the wrong direction.

We don't know what kind of fuel this set-up is using, but it might be some "exotic" race fuel...
We don't know what kind of ignition timing this set-up is using, although advancing the ignition timing doesn't usually gain that much power, but I have a feeling we're not dealing with stock ignition timing settings.
We're not talking about some ultra high RPM range (over 9,000+ RPM's), so that's not it.
DynoJet #'s can be fudged to read high; so far the reputation of the dyno owner hasn't been questioned yet (but I'm sure it will be now) - the pic does show the run being "UNCORRECTED".
There's not talk about some kind of supplemental injection; the only thing mentioned is a larger fuel pump + larger secondaries.
(Hell, 50-shot nitrous anyone?)
I don't there was mention of the stock top-mount intercooler or if there was a front-mount intercooler installed?
An FMIC would explain a 10 - 20hp gain over the stock top-mount intercooler set-up.
How about custom A2W intercooler? Ice?
CO2 / LN2 / N2O sprayer on the intercooler core?
We don't know the boost graph over the entire run.
Unless the system was running a closed-loop (electronic) boost controller, stock turbos tend to run higher peak boost right before peak torque and then taper of toward redline - so is the "9psi" the max it managed to hit, or was it closer to redline?
We don't know ambients - temperature or humidity.
Dry day with close to freezing temps will increase power (over a humid and hot day).
The OP also hinted about vehicle weight - we don't know the weight of the vehicle + driver.
Most "full interior" FC's are going to weigh around 3,000 lbs.
It's possible to get the FC down to 2,800 lbs. with driver or even down to 2,600 lbs. pretty easily.
What about what kind of rear tires?
Slicks would definitely aid traction.
Drag radials? Maybe.
Street tires? Possibly.
Too much variables...

In my experience, the stock turbo is only good for 240 - 250hp at the wheels.
An FMIC might give you another 10hp on top of that.
Someone on here claims they hit 270.
We do know the inducer and exducer measurements of the stock turbo.
When we average the #'s out, it slots in around a big T3 and under a small T04.
The "280" @ "9psi" is more what a T04B "V-trim" would do, and that's way up the chart.
http://fc3spro.com/TECH/TURBO/tmodels.html

The pics of the clutch shows it was clearly destroyed and / or abused.
For a "3-puck" clutch disc to look like that, I want to know what it went through to end up like that.
Unless it was some inferior quality product (high doubtful), it would take a lot more than 300 lb-ft of torque to kill it unless it was abused (highly doubtful too).
I also question why even bother post a time slip from a run that you knew the clutch was slipping?
Maybe we just don't have the cajones like you do, but once I feel the clutch slipping, I call it a night and pack it up; the time slips get all throw in the trash.
I know you have a ton of drag racing experience, but I wonder why cause all this hubbub with a slipping clutch?

-Ted

jacobcartmill · 10-12-2011, 09:31 AM

ITO, i'm not hating on you here, but all signs here point to "hybrid stock turbo."

looks like a BNR stage 1, or maybe a t04b v-trim fitted into the stock compressor housing.

N.RotaryTech · 10-12-2011, 01:50 PM

I kind of agree with RETed on this one. Good points.
His dyno video does show a top mount IC.

10-11-2011, 07:09 PM	#35
RotorDad Big Ugly Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Fredericksburg, Va Posts: 591 Rep Power: 17	Looking forward to see the progression of this car. __________________ *Boosted Big Body On 335's* PS3 ID: Rotordad 1986 Mazda RX7 GXL - Street ported 13BT, Haltech, 62mm, ect. 2006 MazdaSpeed 6 - Eagle, Wiseco, Cobb, ect.

10-12-2011, 07:45 AM	#42
My5ABaby Sigh..... Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Murfreesboro, TN Posts: 2,377 Rep Power: 20	There's a dyno and video posted... I'm not sure where the massive doubt is coming from. __________________ 1986 Sport: 132k miles, 5A (Sapphire Blue Metallic), Tokico Blues, Racing Beat Springs, Custom LED tailights (only S4 LED tails in the world), SSR Mark II, Racing Beat exhaust, S5 black interior, Rotary Resurrection rebuild at 120k miles Community Service Manual RotorWiki "Imagination costs nothing; we could build square locomotives or fly to Mars" - Felix Wankel Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift. That is why it is called the "present."

10-12-2011, 01:50 PM	#45
N.RotaryTech Home-brew Rotary Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: GooseCreek SC Posts: 552 Rep Power: 18	I kind of agree with RETed on this one. Good points. His dyno video does show a top mount IC. __________________ '89 RX7 GTU, half-Bridge-port S4/S5 NA, E6K, Full RB exhaust, weekend warrior. '83 RX7, The "this might take awhile" project. '87 RX7 GXL, Rest In Pieces. '98 Subaru Impreza Outback-sport, rx7 rescue vehicle, down for repair. '94 Ford Ranger, daily.

10-11-2011, 06:47 PM	#32
Mazdabater FC3S Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Townsville, QLD, AUS Posts: 326 Rep Power: 16	Wait this engine is in a first gen? If so that makes me even more doubtful it's got 280hp. Also I don't know of any cars that have a problem with a clutch that only affects certain gears.

10-11-2011, 06:52 PM	#33
Judge Ito Porting Master Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: North Jersey, USA Posts: 154 Rep Power: 17	clutch should be fixed by tomorrow. and later in the evening out to Island dragway for some more practice runs..

10-11-2011, 09:03 PM	#38
Mazdabater FC3S Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Townsville, QLD, AUS Posts: 326 Rep Power: 16	It seems incredibly unlikely that that's the real hp. I'm hoping you prove me wrong and I'm not having a go but I have seen so many hp claims that don't back it up at the track, and thats what this looks like, not so much concerned with the ecu, but I am aware of how inefficent the stock turbo is. And as for the clutch slip it cannot be that bad to do a 1.8 sec 60ft. Back to my 13.5 @104 on 220hp was with a 2.0 60ft, on a better track/tyres my 60ft time would be improved thus my et and mph would have changed. At the end of the day if I see it pulling mid 12's at 110+ mph I'll shut my mouth and give credit where credits due as this is quite an achievement.

10-12-2011, 06:47 AM	#40
Mazdabater FC3S Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Townsville, QLD, AUS Posts: 326 Rep Power: 16	I'm just assuming 60 more rwhp picking up more mph then my 220ho car. As for the weight my car is probably heavier then stock by a little bit and I weigh 106kg so I doubt your heavier. As for mine taking .2 off my 60ft would probably take .4 or so off my et putting me at around a 13.1 and I'm sure it could have hit 1mph extra with some extra traction. Also if your clutch is that fucked you should even gain some rwhp on the dyno with a new one. I'm still not able to see 280hp. And picking up an extra 11rwhp gain going to 10psi on the stock turbo seems incredible to me given how inefficient they are up high.

10-12-2011, 06:48 AM	#41
Mazdabater FC3S Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Townsville, QLD, AUS Posts: 326 Rep Power: 16	And we are both flogging dead horses here I'll just shutup and wait for the results next time at the strip.

10-12-2011, 09:31 AM	#44
jacobcartmill Rotary Fan in Training Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 50 Rep Power: 0	ITO, i'm not hating on you here, but all signs here point to "hybrid stock turbo." looks like a BNR stage 1, or maybe a t04b v-trim fitted into the stock compressor housing.