mannykiller

iTrader: (93)

This is what I was taught

RGHTBrainDesign

Nicely put, Ian. I definitely disregarded the functionality of where these parts would be used. They would also run full inconel exhausts, which is what I was saying would be the problem (going back to SS for us creates the imbalance of expansion rates). Going Inconel to Inconel is perfect!

I'm interested to hear what resulted in regards to engine response of initially fattening up the AFRs.

The way I would go about it is a safe, standard tune, and slowly adding fuel in lower boost conditions (before full boost is met) and modifying timing to reach EGT targets, to spool the turbo up sooner.

If you talk to Turblown, they've done a lot of anti-lag type tunes like this. They're able to reach full boost with a 9180 well before 3500RPM, and for me, drivability is more important than overall WOT performance. This might make the car unpredictable and hard to control if approached aggressively, but there is a fine line where you can get it to be responsive and drivable. No one likes a lazy turbo setup for any performance oriented driving.

mannykiller

iTrader: (93)

Your impression is correct. So truthfully... Balancing is best. And chances are, the engine you saw knock a chunk out of the iron at 450 probably had other issues going on.

The logic is that the rotors are all stamped with weight "Class" letters. The further apart the letters are... the greater difference in weight they are. So the opposite is correct as well... the closer they are in "weight class" the less difference there is between weight. So if you have a few rotors to select from.... all in good condition.. and say you had 3 B weighted rotors... (2) of those rotors are going to be closer in overall weight than the third. So instead of balancing... we simply got the (2) Closest in weight rotors we could find...and used them. In a way...it's a way to get as close to a balanced set up as possible... without balancing. So to get this straight because there are a ton of trolls lately. This method is not balancing. But it's a good method to keep things as close in weight as possible without balancing the set up

You want the best? Balance it.

You want to get damn close? Find two rotors as close in weight as possible, and make sure all your other components are solid and up to the task

Skeese

iTrader: (11)

That's what I had known as "stamp balancing". Are there stamps on front and rear counterweights? I've come across a handful of these when buying and parting out motors and have never seen a stamp on any of them however the holes drilled into the outer portion of the counterweight aren't always the same. I had always assumed that mazda used specifically weighted front and rear counterweights based on the rotor weight combination in any given motor to balance the rotor weight offset.

I'm possibly wrong, but it makes sense to me and I've been looking for a stamped counterweight for a while just to know.

Skeese

BLUE TII

iTrader: (9)

SirLaughsALot

I'm interested to hear what resulted in regards to engine response of initially fattening up the AFRs.

I PMed you so as not to clutter the thread more with in depth replies.

RGHTBrainDesign

It was an excellent read. I'll sift through it more thoroughly later. Thank you.


As for the stamp "balancing", that's not balancing at all, you're just rotor matching and you'd be a FOOL to rev that out more than 8k RPM. Correction, you'd be a complete ******* idiot. Drilling rotors out in certain areas after spinning them on a rotating jig at high RPM to estimate balance in certain areas (like how wheels are balanced) is a dynamic balance and that's really what you're after for high RPM smoothness. Both rotors need this.

Here is dynamic balancing of a rotor. You also should to the eccentric shaft, then combine them, and do the entire rotating assembly.

Howard Coleman

iTrader: (6)

short of a real dynamic balance service i do recommend that you take static balance a step further and use a gram scale.

i weigh every rotor going into my motors and seldom even look at the stamp as i have found rotors as much as 60 grams apart that have the same stamp.

Howard

mannykiller

iTrader: (93)

Just out of Curiosity, how many running rotaries have you put together? I'm genuinely interested.

RGHTBrainDesign

Zero. I pay a specialist to do it for me. I'm a suspension specialist and I'm designing turbo kits and various other aftermarket bolt-on parts to fund my build.

What are you a specialist in?

How you failed to balance your drift motor is amazing. You have some amazing people around you that I'm SURE suggested it over and over again. This is why the 8374 is the better choice for you. Drop your redline down to 8k or less, and bring boost on harder at lower RPM with the undersized Gleaseman manifold. You'll still have a HUGE powerband and it'll be safer. Also less likely to crunch the transmission at lower RPM shifting.

I find it funny how the engineering that I've laid out in it's most simplistic form on Page 2 of this thread was completely glazed over. It's for the "community" to understand that there are different schools of thought in how engines can be tuned, and how DRIVABILITY in ALL conditions is most important.

For some of us who aren't sponsored and given everything for free, we actually have to develop our own parts and understand what the **** is actually going on instead of just building Lego Cars.

WANKfactor

iTrader: (1)

Self important poser^

RGHTBrainDesign

Poser, huh? Stay tuned.

WANKfactor

iTrader: (1)

You have been doing some very cool stuff and i like your outside the box thinking. Your not Jesus though.

RGHTBrainDesign

****, I don't know what the heck you're trying to go on about, but let's get one thing straight. This is a TECHNICAL SECTION and there was misinformation being spewed everywhere.

This is NOT a BUILD THREAD, we have sections for that. This is EFR 9174 Technical Evaluation in a Single Turbo Forum.

I'm not attacking Aaron or you, or any other bonehead who lets their mouth walk faster than their mind can handle. I'm sticking to factual information. Try it sometime.

WANKfactor

iTrader: (1)

Ok ok, you are Jesus and everything you say is the facts. Everyone else is wrong unless you say otherwise. Ok Im off to pull a couple duckfaces in the mirror.

RGHTBrainDesign

You'll be better at that than writing something helpful to aid discussion.

How about someone brings up EFR Wastegate Preload settings, trial and errors? Or how about the effects of setting it up with a 4 port MAC solenoid on the Turbosmart Dual Port IWG75 with one spring removed (for 7psi base pressure)?

As far as specifics to this turbo are concerned, there really isn't much left to cover except for the fact that some aftermarket rotary companies go directly against the recommended oil feed size since it's internally restricted.

My EFR 9174 (****, I didn't know you had one?!?) Is all converted to AN for water and oil feeds and return.

Oh, and I'm also developing a Turbo II bolt on kit for it for under $3k....Including the Turbo.

WANKfactor

iTrader: (1)

That's great. You are amazing and don't let anyone tell you otherwise.

RGHTBrainDesign

It's Okay, the Millennials make trophies for everyone.

mannykiller

iTrader: (93)

Ok, so if you're not a specialist. Why are you giving people advice on what they should be doing? And since you don't have the experience, why should anyone believe any of the numbers or other rants you go off on? Carl Sagan stated that "Extraordinary claims require Extraordinary Evidence."

Also Ryan, ...You don't know me. At all in fact. So for you to state who and or what I do...is all just a bunch of whatever you decide to read and interpret. This is my life, day and and day out. My engine runs absolutely excellent, why? Because Abel designed it and Built it with me every step of the way...and I let him do it his way. Because his way works. So if you'd like.. I'll let him know what you think of him since he didn't balance my rotating assembly And guess what? if I build another engine.... It won't be balanced because it doesn't need to be. And after what this engine has been through.....un-balanced...spinning to 9600 currently.. It's pretty safe to say it's a proven set up.

Why you bring Gleasemans Excellent Manifold into this conversation is beyond me. But how do you know it's undersized? It's proven to be pretty damn formidable on more than a few cars, as well as mine. It makes for a great Power Band. Is it undersized because you've used it on the dyno on your car? or is it undersized because you read that somewhere and decided to believe it? and now your regurgitating that info as fact?

Your statement about being "Less likely to crunch the Trans at lower RPM"....That's so wrong. I'm not going to explain it to you, because obviously you know drifting much better than I do. But I will say that you're wrong.

Since i'm fed up with this reply...and it's seriously a waste of time, I'll skip to your last statement about me..and say this:


Nothing in life is free Ryan. I don't expect that you'll be FB messaging me anymore because I blocked you. But that doesn't mean we can't be civil here on the club. I do hope that you realize that real people see through the glaze, and that there is much more self satisfaction in challenging yourself than looking to impress others.

RGHTBrainDesign

First off, I'm not KNOCKING John Gleaseman. I ******* love that guy, he's hilarious and does incredible work. I'm only stating that his manifold design has SMALLER runners. I said "Undersized" in reference to an OEM application, because that's what it is. Smaller runners = higher velocity = faster spool but sacrificing top end breathability. You treat it like a smaller A/R...it's that simple.

On any rotating assembly, you're working it harder at higher RPMs. That's a fact, so I'm not sure what you're going on about there with "drifting". Shifting is shifting, and a lot of transmissions won't even shift at the RPMs you're asking of this OEM box. Again, none of this is relevant because we're in a forum for SINGLE TURBO TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENT and not your build thread.

As for the rest of what you have to say:

Can we get back on topic now? What setups have been tried on the 9174 and what results have come of it?

Alpine

i'm curious on which lower intake manifold you are using this setup.

any picture of the semi-pport?