DrunkenBowler

Can this car have 600hp with the modifications listed. I don't think so, but tell me what you guys think.

Check it out.

Snook

iTrader: (12)

yeah theres no way
once you get over 500 you need to start having multiple pumps or some different out of tank setup perhaps all new fuel lines to from the back to the motor and if he has 850s in the primaries to go along with the 1200s he could have 603 flywheel. I bet the car doesnt even have 400rwhp.

BS where do these morons get ***** to lie like that?

busy13b

iTrader: (5)

Kinda looks like Jim Swantko's old FD...


I doubt a T78 could efficiently blow enough air to sustain 600hp without some heavy nitrous breathing..

And with 1200cc secondaries, it doesn't sound like a proper fuel system is in place to get near that...

The ad is probably trying to say that if you purchase the car, you'd be well on your way to 600hp but the seller isn't doing a very good job of portraying that..

Hyperite

Also..."perfect condition"? The antenna doesn't even go all the way down!

GoodfellaFD3S

iTrader: (213)

That dude must not have done very well on his verbal SATs.

FormerPorscheGuy

If it sounds too good to be true then it probably is.

fd3s_rx7

iTrader: (13)

I can almost bet that guy is lying...
A friend of mine bought his off from ebay and the owner say it makes an honest 320 hp. When the car was dynoed with the PFC, it produces only 250 hp.

SBi_Owner

I would say it is possable, but not with just what is listed.

I would say you need to back up a 600hp claim with a dyno sheet or something. I would Email him for a full product list including, most importantly, the engine porting.

Just my 2 cents, more than likely.........

Peter Farrell Supercars

Correct..The ex Swantko car.
I have personally dynoed this car at 530rwhp on C16 @ 26psi.
Thats over 600 fwhp.
That car has been one of the most reliable and pleasant Single Turbo car's we have done. 5 years on the same engine BTW.

FormerPorscheGuy

DrunkenBowler

Thought so. Where do these guys get these stats.

Peter Farrell Supercars

You know.
This is the first time in maybe 5 years I decided to assist you folk with some meaningful background.

I hope you understand why you never see me or other venders bother posting here.

Same old immature ****.

busy13b

iTrader: (5)

Do you remember how his fuel system was set up at the time?

Pump?
FPR?
injector sizes?
fuel filter?

Peter Farrell Supercars

I know what you are getting at.
I think Cosmo pump, 1200cc sec, 550cc prim, Stock FPR.

I said C16 and THAT is the key.

More dense, more timing, leaner mixture and much lower chance of detonation.
That setup would support mid 400's on pump gas.

FormerPorscheGuy

Peter,

Let’s make sure everyone is on the same page here.

C16 is race fuel. 26 PSI is possible on C16, but not pump gas.

This car is running 1200cc secondaries, which are probably maxed out at that PSI.

Having a car like this with the same engine for five years is entirely possible if it is parked in a garage and never driven.

I am still calling BS on the HP numbers.

widebody2

according to max cooper's fuel calculator 470 to the wheels will have the injectors at 100%. I agree with formerporscheguy on this one

Snook

iTrader: (12)

peter im very sorry if I contributed to the immature stuff you mentioned. I have just been trying to get my fuel system in order and this sounds way too easy to work. Why do you think this engine has upheld. Does it have low miles on it in 5 years or does he drive it with low hp and boost everywhere? Im looking for a motor at the moment if you can build me one that wont wear down fast at big hp numbers like that then my business is yours. All of the other rx7 engine builders 8 or 9 all over the US ive talked to have been honest with me and told me at that power level the motor simply is not going to last.

Kevin T. Wyum

I'm thinking a lot of people don't know enough about C16. It's a race fuel made by VP that's well in excess of 120 octane research and goes for over $8 a gallon when you buy it in 55 gallon drums. It's the reason I set up a switching fuel system in my car, so I didn't have to drive around on good gas all the time. It does allow you a much larger margin for error in AF and to run leaner before detonation. I'm by no means a buddy of Peter but he did try to point it out , in caps even, that the numbers were on C16. Good gas is the reason I went through 5 years of extreme abuse without ever blowing a motor. I'm sure I would have blown plenty if I'd had this poor mans compulsion to do everything on pump gas.

Kevin T. Wyum

Peter Farrell Supercars

Thanks for your apology. I have not read any disrespect from you. However, I have decided not to get involved in any further high output RX7 projects.

It’s not about stress. It’s all about tuning, detonation, cooling and quality workmanship. Expertise is also a big bonus. As is racegas.

Paul Winter is a great guy to ask about long-term durability at high outputs.

Few rotaries wear out, most break from incorrect setup!
My last season of IMSA Supercar (1995) including Pikes Peak Hillclimb, Long Beach Grand Prix and my first two season's of NIRA drag racing was done on the same engine and stock 5 speed transmission.

FormerPorscheGuy

I would like to point out that race fuel (C16) is not at all practicle for a street car. C16 is not the majic bullet to reliability in an FD either.

Kevin T. Wyum

Why not? I used it for years in a street driven car. If you're going out to race for the night you dump in 10 gallons. If you're driving it to work you just don't act like an idiot and try running 20+psi at every stoplight.

It actually is about as close as you're going to get to a magic bullet in saving an FD. It protects against a lot of the mistakes people make, which in turn lead to detonation, which is of course the largest cause of engine failure. Unlike standard pump gas it also has a much better vaporization curve meaning the portions of fuel vaporize at much more even temperature gradients, as opposed to pump gas which is very spiky. It has large components of the fuel vaporize in very small temperature bands, usually at very low temps actually, which makes starting etc. easier for standard cars.

rescueranger

iTrader: (15)

sorry noob question

what are the mistakes you are referring to?

Jim Swantko

I agree with Kevin here - octane is the key to keeping motors alive. My Supra drinks ONLY Sunoco 112 or C16 - good gas is much cheaper than a new motor.

As for my old car - it did make 425 rwhp on pump gas... I was there when it did it. I will say that my datalogging on the TEC2 showed 12.4 - ish A/Fs which is typically thought of as being too lean... but I'm not sure how much faith I put in that number since it didn't have a wideband... I'm guessing the TEC got it from the narrowband O2 sensor. Regardless - it never popped. I'd imagine that conservative timing was used to keep the thing in one piece. I'm not sure and don't care to be perfectly honest.

The car was very fast... although there was that one time where in the middle of a test drive the damn thing shut off as we were going down the road. That was lots of fun with a prospective buyer in the car. The car sat for about 10 minutes then fired up and drove fine (very confidence inspiring).

One time I was getting on it pretty hard in 3rd gear and I heard a big bang - I immediately got out of it... the motor died. I thought "there goes the motor"... after flatbedding it home and calling Peter - he suggested that I change plugs. I did and it started right up.

I was disappointed with a couple of things. For example I was told that the car was ready... I drove up from NC to Manassa and got dropped off at the shop. I sat there all day as they tuned the car. I can tell you that after all I spent at PFS I expected it to be perfect when I got there - not to start tuning when I got there.

The tuning also had some driveability issues - everytime I'd shift then go back to WOT the car would fall on it's face then start to pull again... I got Peter to adjust my map and then reloaded it. It was better but still not perfect. The cold start sucked - it would smoke like a Diesel until it warmed up... but seemed fine after that.

I also had problems with the IC pipes (I see the intake side is no longer the pretty polished one I had... I guess the new owner got tired of it popping off almost everytime he drove it too).

I also didn't like the fact that I asked for a Haltech to run it and was basically told - tough **** you're getting a TEC II - by Peter after the motor was out. I came pretty close to having everything sent to another shop because of it... but I decided to keep prodding through with the process since the ignition did seem pretty stout with the TEC. ALTHOUGH... I did NOT realize that I wouldn't have access to the maps that I paid for with the tuning. The TEC is an uploadable ECU only.. if you don't have the base maps then you are 100% dependant on the original tuner for all changes. That is not a good feeling my friends ... I'd assume that's why Gordon swapped to a Haltech.... who knows.

Peter also cursed me out once when I asked him about what A/F he would tune to. He basically told me - ignore those idiots on the forums - I know what's best and how dare YOU question ME. Again - not a real good customer interface on that one either. But to his credit the car never grenaded while I had it - so he's either lucky or he was right...

Maybe I wasn't a professional tuner... but I wasn't an idiot either... five minutes of explanation would have been all I needed - but attitude sucks - especially when you get to pay for it.

It wasn't all bad however - I was blown away by the quality of the roll cage that was fabricated by Mitch Piper. I did think the install was very well done (other than the loose connection with the ECU - I can't imagine what else would cause that).

After reading this you may think I hate Peter....I don't... I think he is a great driver... and can build some fast cars. But he sucks as a customer interface.... I'm sure he'll be the first to agree to that.

I turn my own wrenches whenever I can on the Supra - and I'll never go back to a "tuner" again.

That car is a steal at $15k - eventhough it looks like it's been totally mistreated by it's last owner. Oh well... that's my story.... and there is not a single thing that I said that isn't the truth.

SleepR1

Mustang enthusiasts think similarly about Kenny Brown here in Indy. I think that's why KB's wife, Carrie, does all the customer interfacing LOL

Peter Farrell Supercars

Hi Jim,
Nice to hear from you again. I read your report with interest and regret to hear that aspects of our relationship upset you. Funny we enjoyed a pleasant and cordial relationship for several years until Gordon Monsen called you and tried to get you to pull your car from my shop. We wanted to use the engine management system that we had the best chance of sorting out to your satisfaction. If you were in fact unhappy then why did you write this letter that I publish on my website even today?

QUOTE FROM JIM in year 2000:

Peter Farrell Supercars
9141 Centreville Rd
Manassas, VA 30110

Dear Peter,

I would like to tell you how pleased I am with the results of the single turbo conversion that your team did to my car. Not only does the car make tremendous power, but it also idles smoothly and is completely docile in traffic.

All of the work under the hood looks better than it would had it come directly from Mazda. All of the small details that your team put into my project really came out nicely, and add more to the entire package than merely more power.

I have received many complements on the way the boost controller was installed in the storage bin, and also the way the heat-shielding for the turbo was engineered. The roll-cage is simply a work of art.

As for driving the car… "breath-taking" only begins to describe it. I can only thank all your hard work on the dyno, and the street, for making it so powerful, yet drive-able.

Thanks again to you and your team for making my project such a success, I am very pleased!

Sincerely,
Jim Swantko



That car was fast and still is. Every time I drive it I think of you and wonder why you lost faith so quickly and offered to sell the car to me. The cutoff problem was a loose wire and was found and fixed soon after we got the car back to our shop.

Our customer relation's experience was great for quite some time. You bought the RX7 from me and were pleased, you them modified it with bolt on’s and was pleased and about a year later asked us to do the single turbo upgrade. That went well until Gordon found you via John Duff and poisoned you. That’s what I think anyway and maybe I am wrong.

That RX7 we built for you back in 2000 was fast, looked great, was pleasant to drive and has proven reliable once the initial gremlins were sorted.

The TEC2 data log of A/F ratio was not valid in those days. In fact it is only in the past year that the TEC3 has been setup to monitor and log A/F ratio dependable.

Jim, there is no such thing as a perfect Stand-alone RX7.If you had to wait all day it was because I wanted to give you the best possible car after all the bad mouthing Monsen had done and poison he planted in your mind while we were building your car. I still have all those Emails you know.

A good way to put my back up is to start playing the forum gossip upon me and questioning what we have learned from our own experience. I do admit that I can come off at little abrasive under those circumstances.

You did not pay for the map Jim. I had hundreds of hours tuning and popped several motors to get it as good as it was. I did not want to be deprived of that effort and have it circulating on the Internet for my competitors benefit. You paid for a couple of hours or so to dial it into your car.

Bottom-line Jim. You were a great and appreciative customer until you met Gordon Monsen. From that point forward our dealings became more stressed. I regret that, because I found you to be a very nice guy and I felt you trusted me, which motivated me to do my very best for you.

Regards,

Peter Farrell