Go Back   EcoModder Forum > Introductions
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 08-24-2011, 09:00 PM   #51 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Enki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 140
Thanks: 32
Thanked 28 Times in 20 Posts
Of course I can, but I would rather not go that route due to simplicity.
I'm well aware I can run auxiliary injectors, but at the boost/airflow levels I'm looking at only one small one would be needed, and it likely wouldn't evenly disperse due to the design of the stock manifold; aftermarket intakes also do not yet exist.

This build is already getting complex as it is; I would rather shy away from a tertiary fueling system that, if it ever went down, would cause my motor to pop.

Besides, direct injection is significantly more efficient than port injection, and I already plan on running WMI injection (but not tuning for it; it will just be another safety net for just in case, and will not be required to run the car safely).

__________________
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 01-10-2012, 06:19 AM   #52 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
JasonG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Charlotte NC / York SC
Posts: 726

05 DMax - '05 Chevrolet 2500HD
Thanks: 103
Thanked 53 Times in 49 Posts
Sorry, I've been out for a bit.

Using a diesel pump for direct injection won't work. Gas doesn't have enough lubricity and will shred the IP in short order.

So......... gonna sell that beat up, worthless, tiny K04? Or just, scrap it ?
__________________




I can't understand why my MPG's are so low..........
21,000lb, 41' Toy Haulers are rough on FE!
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JasonG For This Useful Post:
Enki (01-11-2012)
Old 01-10-2012, 11:09 AM   #53 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Enki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 140
Thanks: 32
Thanked 28 Times in 20 Posts
I'm kind of surprised that there isn't some way to make it work with either coatings or oil or something; my high pressure pump internals (positive displacement type pump) has a diamond like coating which pretty much prevents anything from even wearing it a few microns thinner. Technology has come a long way, and I'd really like to believe there's an answer other than "no, you can't do that," even if it isn't monetarily feasible.

Oh, and the k04 is far from worthless, just can't hang on the topend is all. I was blowing the tires off with 20 psi on pure e85, but oil seepage was locking up the high pressure pump internals so I can only run 50/50 mix of e85 and 91 now (well, I COULD run pure e85, but I'd be rebuilding the high pressure pump every 20 miles or so).

Ethanol is a hell of a fuel, and I want to go back to using it, maybe even build a high-compression motor to leverage it better (for more power and mileage). The Mazda community I frequent will likely find that answer; just a matter of time.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2012, 06:25 AM   #54 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
JasonG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Charlotte NC / York SC
Posts: 726

05 DMax - '05 Chevrolet 2500HD
Thanks: 103
Thanked 53 Times in 49 Posts
If your IP can handle the volume (probable) are your injectors built like diesel injectors ?
Just wondering if the nozzles can be removed from the bodies and the holes enlarged, not with a drill but properly.
You will need to use the Gas bodies.
Hmmmm, got one that can be sent to a diesel injector shop for experimenting ?
__________________




I can't understand why my MPG's are so low..........
21,000lb, 41' Toy Haulers are rough on FE!
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2012, 10:52 AM   #55 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Enki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 140
Thanks: 32
Thanked 28 Times in 20 Posts
Unfortunately, they are direct injection injectors, and the MFG saw fit to have them laser welded, which makes easy modification impossible. Only one set of enlarged injectors exists in the world, and the company that enlarged them said they wouldn't do another set ever again (due to cost). Everyone else on the platform (including myself) is stuck with stock injectors (which surprisingly are good for nearly double the stock power/output).

Other companies are looking towards releasing products which will allow us to increase the stock injector output and hopefully gain more flow, but that is all up in the air right now as we really don't even have a good way to log the relationship between injection window and injector action (other than wiring up an oscilloscope to the car, which has been done and will be done again).

Thanks for the thought though!
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2012, 10:57 AM   #56 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,349

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 24.35 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
90 day: 40.56 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,202
Thanked 1,345 Times in 854 Posts
What are the typical points of failure in the 2.3 MZR?

I broke 170 in my Del Sol but melted a bearing, and couldn't save the block. Even with an adequately sized radiator and a higher flow oil pump, the stock internals weren't able to transfer heat away fast enough. I wonder if I had a longer tranny (and thus wasn't running 9,000rpm for an extended period under mild boost) if it would've been ok, since friction and thus heat go up with the square of the rpm.

Steering was also scary as hell, I wouldn't try it again without some serious work there.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2012, 11:06 AM   #57 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Enki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 140
Thanks: 32
Thanked 28 Times in 20 Posts
Not sure about the 2.3 MZR but in the 2.3 DISI MZR the rods will bend somewhere near 30 psi of boost, assuming fueling is good. A lot of un/improperly tuned cars will vent the block (stock tune with heavy modifications like intake and downpipe).

As for output:


I later added 6 degrees of timing to this tune (as my targets were not hit) and managed another half pound of boost or so up top. Rated stock flywheel output is 260hp / 280tq; I've also since added a real downpipe to the car (which frees up a LOT of exhaust flow) and will be adding an intake manifold (which will correct the flow imbalance between inner/outer cylinders) along side an air/water intercooler (which will drastically improve flow and gain 2 psi or so efficiency from the turbo). That should put me somewhere near 320 hp / 400 tq, all said and done, with no modifications to the stock longblock.
__________________
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2012, 03:50 PM   #58 (permalink)
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 76
Thanks: 14
Thanked 11 Times in 9 Posts
These are VERY cool cars. If I had some change to spend on a good all around (fun and practicality) daily driver I'd be looking hard at one. I'll be watching this eagerly.


If you want some perhaps more accurate estimates of top speed, try Drag Race Analyzer. You can buy it online or download a free trial that gives you a week or two, just google it. The default simulation is of a 1/4 mile but there's a 1 mile, 1.33 mile, and 5-6 mile (bonneville?) setting too. You can input pretty complex stuff, like clutch specs, front and rear wheel weight and width, car height and width for aero purposes, etc.


I personally found that over a 2 mile flatout run, my mildly modified 85 Crown Victoria hit within 1mph of the speed the simulator suggested.
__________________
2001 Prius - 170,000 KM - just got it (no consistent FE numbers yet)
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to johnunit For This Useful Post:
Enki (01-11-2012)
Old 01-11-2012, 03:57 PM   #59 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Enki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 140
Thanks: 32
Thanked 28 Times in 20 Posts
I'll give it a shot, thanks!

Edit: The demo seems pretty useless unless you own a Shelby Mustang. I just can't see spending $80 on something I'll use for 10 minutes and shelve.
__________________

Last edited by Enki; 01-11-2012 at 04:13 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2013, 09:11 PM   #60 (permalink)
EcoModding Apprentice
 
Enki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: N/A
Posts: 140
Thanks: 32
Thanked 28 Times in 20 Posts
NECRO THREAD!

I've given up on doing 200 in the Mazda. There are too many limitations with the powerplant/drivetrain that have given me too many issues as it sits currently; though I have not given up on my desire to reach 200. I'll be posting a thread after a while discussing aero mods to the new project car, which is a 1965 2 door Ford Falcon Wagon.

That said, I do have some economy/performance updates regarding economy in the Mazda:

1. My 60-100 MPH time as the car sits is 5.48 seconds (stock is listed as 8.6 seconds); this is a hair faster than such gems as the Ford Shelby Mustang GT 500, the Porsche 911 Turbo 996, and the Ferarri 360 Modena F1 (all turning in respectable 5.5 second times; reference http://www.torquestats.com/index.php?pid=mph60_100)

2. At freeway speeds (70-80 MPH) I can sustain between 25 and 30 MPG, and have averaged 26.8 MPG on one tank (no foot stomping)

3. There is room for more in the tune, as direct injection cars (like mine) can be tuned WAY lean and still run properly; several other Mazdaspeed 3 owners tune for as high as 17:1 AFR at cruise, whereas I'm only targeting 15:1.

Per my posting on the Mazda forums I'm a member of:

Quote:
Made 284.5 miles on 10.611 gallons of fuel (~E42); about 30% of that in the city. On the highway, made ~93.5 miles to the quarter tank.
It's worth noting I set my cruise control to around 80-83 MPH.
Quote:
Just did some testing (got my new bluetooth odb2 adapter in):

Gear = 6
Fuel = 50/50 (~E42)
60 MPH = ~30-35 MPG
70 MPH = ~26-28 MPG
80 MPH = ~23-25 MPG

These were obtained with no cars in front of or behind me, so are kind of worst case for flat ground. With a car in front, mileage goes up a fair bit.
To put this into perspective, this is what another member experienced after changing some tables in his tune (that I specified):

Quote:
Aight Peeps! As I posted before I was hitting around 190 on 1/4 Tank left and fill up at 10.65 gallons which was about 17.84 Average tank MPGs

Now dialed in on Enki; tables I hit 278.8 and filled up 12.9 Gallons which was 21.61 MPGs fill up!!! Thanks a lot for posting up your tables bro! I know you hit around 26.81 MPGs which is what I would roughly get on just pump gas. I now need to fine tune her for the way I drive!

I have not changed my VVT tables as I am not comfortable changing those numbers because I have not fully learned about it. I may zero the lower loads on VVT below 1.25 load. Any input would be great!

I self tune and have been tuning my low loads for MPGs and keeping my upper range for powah! I have not seen any affect by tuning like this and the car drives smoother than it has ever before!
And here's a video of the tune in action:


Obviously, if I were running this tune on pump gas my economy would be a fair bit higher; however, I'll settle for better than listed factory mileage with 42% ethanol content.

__________________
  Reply With Quote
Reply  Post New Thread


Tags
200 mph, mazda, shaved, speed

Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com