The red car
08-09-08, 02:18 PM
#3
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,805
Received 2,578 Likes
on
1,831 Posts
that looks like its a nice car
08-09-08, 03:04 PM
#6
It's a very nice car. I removed the nuts to pull the clutch master from the firewall and there wasn't a hint of rust. The interior is nearly spotless. A little over 100k miles.
The engine is a goner. Locked up probably due to rust. Both clutch cylinders are rusted solid. One of the brake calipers was sticking so I worked it in and out; feels fine now. The radiator was a single core so it's getting replaced by a dual core. The firewall heater core pipe will have its restrictor removed (for a cooler running beehive with eventual plans for an FMOC). A nice 12A (from the '84 auto with go fast mods) will go in with a light steel flywheel, HD disc and centerforce pressure plate (it was just kicking around so I'll use it). Gotta do some competition motor mounts too.
Yeah there's just surface rust. Nothing structural as far as I know. Only a minor hint of bin rust (similar to the S model, actually).
To make it pass emissions I'll hook up an air pump directly to the ACV blockoff plate. I'll also jet the carb down to a set of 91 primaries and instal DLIDFIS. I've never done DLIDFIS in a 1st gen before so this will be a learning experience for me. I also have a nice set of cats from the '84 that will replace the rusted stock ones. After it passes it will receive a full RB dual pipe 'streetport' system.
I'll shoot another picture after the engine bay is cleaned up completely. What you see above is after a light wiping.
Man carb cleaner works excellent as an engine bay paint cleaner. Thanks, PercentSevenC!
This car sat for ten years but I suspect it sat for longer because the tabs expired in '94. It's good to save these from the crusher.
The engine is a goner. Locked up probably due to rust. Both clutch cylinders are rusted solid. One of the brake calipers was sticking so I worked it in and out; feels fine now. The radiator was a single core so it's getting replaced by a dual core. The firewall heater core pipe will have its restrictor removed (for a cooler running beehive with eventual plans for an FMOC). A nice 12A (from the '84 auto with go fast mods) will go in with a light steel flywheel, HD disc and centerforce pressure plate (it was just kicking around so I'll use it). Gotta do some competition motor mounts too.
Yeah there's just surface rust. Nothing structural as far as I know. Only a minor hint of bin rust (similar to the S model, actually).
To make it pass emissions I'll hook up an air pump directly to the ACV blockoff plate. I'll also jet the carb down to a set of 91 primaries and instal DLIDFIS. I've never done DLIDFIS in a 1st gen before so this will be a learning experience for me. I also have a nice set of cats from the '84 that will replace the rusted stock ones. After it passes it will receive a full RB dual pipe 'streetport' system.
I'll shoot another picture after the engine bay is cleaned up completely. What you see above is after a light wiping.
Man carb cleaner works excellent as an engine bay paint cleaner. Thanks, PercentSevenC!This car sat for ten years but I suspect it sat for longer because the tabs expired in '94. It's good to save these from the crusher.
Trending Topics
03-21-15, 04:21 PM
#10
Thanks. Yeah I wouldn't take on another EFI project like this. All the time, effort, parts, resources, patience etc that went into it... It's not worth it in the end. Especially considering a hogged Nikki runs and drives better than factory EFI. It makes you wonder.
I gotta say if it didn't fire right up and run for us, other than only needing the TPS and the variable resistor adjusted a little, it would have been ripped back out by now and replaced with a carb.
I feel I'm richer for the experience, having gone through all the stages from concept to completion, but that's about it. No real love for EFI. At least the owner liked it and puts up with the occasional flooding and other problems without complaining.
Well, hopefully this thread will help somebody in the future.
Key words to search for: S4 NA EFI 6 port swap into FB 1st gen GSL.
I gotta say if it didn't fire right up and run for us, other than only needing the TPS and the variable resistor adjusted a little, it would have been ripped back out by now and replaced with a carb.
I feel I'm richer for the experience, having gone through all the stages from concept to completion, but that's about it. No real love for EFI. At least the owner liked it and puts up with the occasional flooding and other problems without complaining.
Well, hopefully this thread will help somebody in the future.
Key words to search for: S4 NA EFI 6 port swap into FB 1st gen GSL.
10-14-15, 01:22 AM
#11
Red car getting a Camden!
The EFI system pretty much killed the 6 port 
so I decided a Camden SC should go on the new engine!
Let that be a lesson to you guys. Stock EFI sucks. It's not worth swapping all the Rube Goldberg devices from an FC into a 1st gen. It's a lot of work for not a lot of performance, and then it carbons up the rotors and wears the spark plugs down in only a few thousand miles.
And it's not tuneable! And even if it was, it still sucks. If you must do EFI, get a tuneable ECU like a MegaSquirt or something. Or go carbed because carbs are better.
This is the second engine that got eaten by this stock EFI system; the first being the original engine in the FC it came from.
The new engine was built with the SC in mind. The car is getting a mallory, DLIDFIS, wideband, semi-locked dizzy for 12 degrees, and has a stock flywheel and a long primary to help the SC get loaded better and breath better. There are even plans for a cold air intake at some point but the classic foam thing will do for now.
My goal is to get to the bottom of why some SC installs I've done have been amazing while others have been pretty crappy.
so I decided a Camden SC should go on the new engine! Let that be a lesson to you guys. Stock EFI sucks. It's not worth swapping all the Rube Goldberg devices from an FC into a 1st gen. It's a lot of work for not a lot of performance, and then it carbons up the rotors and wears the spark plugs down in only a few thousand miles.
And it's not tuneable! And even if it was, it still sucks. If you must do EFI, get a tuneable ECU like a MegaSquirt or something. Or go carbed because carbs are better.
This is the second engine that got eaten by this stock EFI system; the first being the original engine in the FC it came from.
The new engine was built with the SC in mind. The car is getting a mallory, DLIDFIS, wideband, semi-locked dizzy for 12 degrees, and has a stock flywheel and a long primary to help the SC get loaded better and breath better. There are even plans for a cold air intake at some point but the classic foam thing will do for now.
My goal is to get to the bottom of why some SC installs I've done have been amazing while others have been pretty crappy.
10-15-15, 01:43 PM
#13
They all work. Some to a lesser degree than others.
I've thought a lot about the reasons. I'd say a proper SC engine needs to have this list of specs:
Mild ports or stock ports. For some engines, stock ports are 74 spec. These ports close at 50 degrees and are what all 74-75 REPUs and all T2 and FD secondaries had stock. However SCs also work fine on 40 degree intake port closing timing or rather 12A spec which is found on all nitrided 79-85 R5 and Y irons. Also the J-spec R5 irons from imported engines.
I would not expect an SC to do well on larger intake ports such as the classic RB streetport template which closes at 60 degrees (really late) and opens earlier than stock as well. It just pushes boost out through the port, across the rotor face, and into the exhaust port, thus wasted out the tailpipe. Even 84stock, who was our resident SC guru for a while tried a half or full BP with the SC and found it didn't increase power or give him the brap he wanted. The SC basically prevented it from happening. In other words he wasted a set of irons. After that he recommended exactly what I recommend with an SC; stock or mild ports only. And by stock or mild I mean 12A spec to 74 spec only.
Exhaust ports no larger than T2 spec if you have 86 and later FC rotor housings. If NA, it is ok to remove the diffusers. That's what I did for the current engine in the red car. If T2 housings, leave them alone.
If 85 and older, if they are GSL-SE spec, leave them alone as this is a somewhat late opening port which allows more time for the rotors to push the eccentric shaft which provides more low end torque. It closes at T2 spec so you gain nothing by porting up. Also the sleeves in all 85 and older housings are smaller than all 86 and later, so if you port them much larger than GSL-SE spec, you lose your anti-reversion lip. And this lip is something you want to keep. If earlier than GSL-SE spec, such as old school 70s housings that open at T2 spec but close way early, you can port up a few degrees or mm then recreate the bevel, but going as tall as T2 spec might hurt the anti-reversion lip because remember the early sleeves are smaller than FC sleeves and you can't swap them due to casting differences. If you didn't follow any of what I just said, don't worry about it. Just don't port the exhaust ports too large because NA rules apply here seeing as the SC bolts to the intake ports and not to the exhaust ports. you still need a header. It's not a turbo, in other words. Duh.
Speaking of which, the exhaust is important. Get yourself an RB long primary* exhaust system such as their classic "streetport" as they like to call it, or some other long primary. Don't do a short collected header because all 1st gen headers collected at only 2" which is too small. And I found collecting a 12A header to 2.5" added a weird bog on a Nikki setup in the cream colored car. It wasn't the carb because I swapped it for one of my hogged out ones and the bog remained. The bog wasn't there on my setup which had a long primary. Go figure.
*84stock set the highest HP record for an Atkins Camden SC using an RB long primary exhaust so we know they work and don't cause a restriction at the power levels of an SC.
One of the vehicles I tested an SC in had a short collected RB FC header which collects to 2.5". The header was modded to fit the engine bay in the GLC. This setup just didn't have the wow factor. However another much heavier vehicle (REPU) did have a long primary and it did have the wow factor. Same SC, by the way. One vehicle as very light while the other was very heavy. The light one sucked while the heavy one rocked. Why?
Load.
I've found that if you load the SC down hard enough, it responds like a turbo, even though it is RPM locked to the main drive pulley by a belt. When you drive it up a hill, it loves it. But I really couldn't tell you why. Could be the Edelbrock carb... Could be the donkey door in the carb... Could be the difference in flywheels. The GLC had a super light steel 8 pound GReddy which they don't make anymore. The REPU had a stock S4 NA 24 pound flywheel to match the rotating assembly and because it's a truck, so no light steels for me.
The red car has an S5 NA rotating assembly with stock 21 pound flywheel. This produces a nice 39 pound assembly. It has a long primary exhaust as well. Two requirements met.
It also needs adequate fuel, which with a Mallory 4309 and an MSD 2225, it should get. See, before now we've always relied on the unreliable Holley dead head style fpr which would vary in pressure depending on how much fuel is flowing into the carb, and engine bay temps. I never liked this setup. Also a Carter fuel pump which had an internal bypass which is necessary in a dead head setup, but might have been fighting the dead head style fpr. At least now with known good adequate fuel system parts, the fuel issues should be a thing of the past.
Direct fire ignition, of course. I prefer DLIDFIS. At this point there is no reason to keep the old stock cap-n-rotor ignition, other than for trailing. Which doesn't matter for power anyway. It's just there because it's there, and for the tach, too. All the vehicles I've ever tested the SC in, for the last ten years or so, have had direct fire. So it should be an apples to apples comparison.
The foam air filters are terrible. I'll run one here because that is what I've got, but the owner is interested in something better. However because the foam is what's been available for the majority of SC installs, it'll be a good apples to apples test comparison. I'll let the owner engineer something better.
cliff notes:
mild ports no larger than 74 spec
long primary exhaust
stock flywheel
adequate fuel system
direct fire
free flowing air filter
If you have all of the above, the SC should be a nice experience for you.
I've thought a lot about the reasons. I'd say a proper SC engine needs to have this list of specs:
Mild ports or stock ports. For some engines, stock ports are 74 spec. These ports close at 50 degrees and are what all 74-75 REPUs and all T2 and FD secondaries had stock. However SCs also work fine on 40 degree intake port closing timing or rather 12A spec which is found on all nitrided 79-85 R5 and Y irons. Also the J-spec R5 irons from imported engines.
I would not expect an SC to do well on larger intake ports such as the classic RB streetport template which closes at 60 degrees (really late) and opens earlier than stock as well. It just pushes boost out through the port, across the rotor face, and into the exhaust port, thus wasted out the tailpipe. Even 84stock, who was our resident SC guru for a while tried a half or full BP with the SC and found it didn't increase power or give him the brap he wanted. The SC basically prevented it from happening. In other words he wasted a set of irons. After that he recommended exactly what I recommend with an SC; stock or mild ports only. And by stock or mild I mean 12A spec to 74 spec only.
Exhaust ports no larger than T2 spec if you have 86 and later FC rotor housings. If NA, it is ok to remove the diffusers. That's what I did for the current engine in the red car.
If T2 housings, leave them alone.If 85 and older, if they are GSL-SE spec, leave them alone as this is a somewhat late opening port which allows more time for the rotors to push the eccentric shaft which provides more low end torque. It closes at T2 spec so you gain nothing by porting up. Also the sleeves in all 85 and older housings are smaller than all 86 and later, so if you port them much larger than GSL-SE spec, you lose your anti-reversion lip. And this lip is something you want to keep. If earlier than GSL-SE spec, such as old school 70s housings that open at T2 spec but close way early, you can port up a few degrees or mm then recreate the bevel, but going as tall as T2 spec might hurt the anti-reversion lip because remember the early sleeves are smaller than FC sleeves and you can't swap them due to casting differences. If you didn't follow any of what I just said, don't worry about it. Just don't port the exhaust ports too large because NA rules apply here seeing as the SC bolts to the intake ports and not to the exhaust ports. you still need a header. It's not a turbo, in other words. Duh.
Speaking of which, the exhaust is important. Get yourself an RB long primary* exhaust system such as their classic "streetport" as they like to call it, or some other long primary. Don't do a short collected header because all 1st gen headers collected at only 2" which is too small. And I found collecting a 12A header to 2.5" added a weird bog on a Nikki setup in the cream colored car. It wasn't the carb because I swapped it for one of my hogged out ones and the bog remained. The bog wasn't there on my setup which had a long primary. Go figure.
*84stock set the highest HP record for an Atkins Camden SC using an RB long primary exhaust so we know they work and don't cause a restriction at the power levels of an SC.
One of the vehicles I tested an SC in had a short collected RB FC header which collects to 2.5". The header was modded to fit the engine bay in the GLC. This setup just didn't have the wow factor. However another much heavier vehicle (REPU) did have a long primary and it did have the wow factor. Same SC, by the way. One vehicle as very light while the other was very heavy. The light one sucked while the heavy one rocked. Why?
Load.
I've found that if you load the SC down hard enough, it responds like a turbo, even though it is RPM locked to the main drive pulley by a belt. When you drive it up a hill, it loves it. But I really couldn't tell you why. Could be the Edelbrock carb... Could be the donkey door in the carb... Could be the difference in flywheels. The GLC had a super light steel 8 pound GReddy which they don't make anymore. The REPU had a stock S4 NA 24 pound flywheel to match the rotating assembly and because it's a truck, so no light steels for me.
The red car has an S5 NA rotating assembly with stock 21 pound flywheel. This produces a nice 39 pound assembly. It has a long primary exhaust as well. Two requirements met.
It also needs adequate fuel, which with a Mallory 4309 and an MSD 2225, it should get.
See, before now we've always relied on the unreliable Holley dead head style fpr which would vary in pressure depending on how much fuel is flowing into the carb, and engine bay temps. I never liked this setup. Also a Carter fuel pump which had an internal bypass which is necessary in a dead head setup, but might have been fighting the dead head style fpr. At least now with known good adequate fuel system parts, the fuel issues should be a thing of the past. Direct fire ignition, of course. I prefer DLIDFIS. At this point there is no reason to keep the old stock cap-n-rotor ignition, other than for trailing.
Which doesn't matter for power anyway. It's just there because it's there, and for the tach, too. All the vehicles I've ever tested the SC in, for the last ten years or so, have had direct fire. So it should be an apples to apples comparison.The foam air filters are terrible. I'll run one here because that is what I've got, but the owner is interested in something better. However because the foam is what's been available for the majority of SC installs, it'll be a good apples to apples test comparison. I'll let the owner engineer something better.
cliff notes:
mild ports no larger than 74 spec
long primary exhaust
stock flywheel
adequate fuel system
direct fire
free flowing air filter
If you have all of the above, the SC should be a nice experience for you.
10-15-15, 02:53 PM
#14
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,805
Received 2,578 Likes
on
1,831 Posts
remove the intake vacuum, and the exhaust will just stay in the exhaust, no brap.
for the power increase, the SC might be too small, i've never messed with a real supercharger, but in my engine simulator, its actually really easy to spec a supercharger that makes less hp than NA. combination of taking power to drive the thing with not enough airflow = no power. you'd need to measure a few things to make sure, but its likely to be the scenario.
10-16-15, 12:16 AM
#15
I need a new user title
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Yaizu, Japan
Posts: 2,646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The lack of power also has an easy explanation: Camden SCs are horribly inefficient 1950s tech that won't really perform well regardless of how well its sized. It'd be cool to have a more modern supercharger option for these cars, but sadly that's probably not going to happen in a bolt-on form at this point.
Another thing that would probably improve the performance of the Camdens is switching to Gilmer-style pulleys, or at the very least wider serpentine pulleys. That could be part of the reason they don't seem to do as well with lighter flywheels - if your engine revs too fast you'll end up just spinning the belt and not making any power. I know when I briefly ran one of the 7" blowers in my white FB I was getting some serious belt slippage. The only way I could quell the squealing was to simply tighten the crap out of it, which I'm sure wasn't doing my bearings any favors (at which point the clutch started slipping instead, but that's a separate issue). Those little 6-rib pulleys are terribly inadequate for the large amount of drag the Camdens produce.
Another thing that would probably improve the performance of the Camdens is switching to Gilmer-style pulleys, or at the very least wider serpentine pulleys. That could be part of the reason they don't seem to do as well with lighter flywheels - if your engine revs too fast you'll end up just spinning the belt and not making any power. I know when I briefly ran one of the 7" blowers in my white FB I was getting some serious belt slippage. The only way I could quell the squealing was to simply tighten the crap out of it, which I'm sure wasn't doing my bearings any favors (at which point the clutch started slipping instead, but that's a separate issue). Those little 6-rib pulleys are terribly inadequate for the large amount of drag the Camdens produce.
10-16-15, 12:36 AM
#16
The reason they stuck with the 6pk serpentine belts was for easy availability. Off the shelf is nice but they really are too narrow. A clutch fan adds so much drag that it squeals the waterpump pulley all the time at high RPM. The rest of the squeal is as Percent said from drag of the SC itself. The 7" were terrible for this. At least the one going in the red car is only a 5".
I think the main reason I took this project on was to just make it work. And if it doesn't, then I think we will all learn from the experience.
By the way, Percent, that 7" SC actually had some wow factor in the white car. Comparing that to the 5" in the blue car, it was like night and day. The blue car was pathetically gutless with the old -7 pulley. So I'm hoping this same 5", now with its recently swapped -9 pulley, will actually have a wow factor. One can only hope at this point, right?
I think the main reason I took this project on was to just make it work. And if it doesn't, then I think we will all learn from the experience.
By the way, Percent, that 7" SC actually had some wow factor in the white car. Comparing that to the 5" in the blue car, it was like night and day. The blue car was pathetically gutless with the old -7 pulley. So I'm hoping this same 5", now with its recently swapped -9 pulley, will actually have a wow factor. One can only hope at this point, right?
10-16-15, 12:54 AM
#17
Here is the video of the white car when it had the 7" SC in it.
And here is the orange car when it had the 5" SC in it. Not too shabby.
And I don't have the video of the blue car uploaded anywhere. Sorry about that. But trust me when I say it was pathetically gutless compared to these two. Let's hope the red car does better or at least as well as the white car.
And here is the orange car when it had the 5" SC in it. Not too shabby.
And I don't have the video of the blue car uploaded anywhere. Sorry about that. But trust me when I say it was pathetically gutless compared to these two. Let's hope the red car does better or at least as well as the white car.
10-16-15, 11:58 AM
#19
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,805
Received 2,578 Likes
on
1,831 Posts
there must be a chart somewhere of belt friction vs power required to turn whatever.
i notice when Mazda went from the 65a alternator to the 100a alternator, they also went from a V belt to a 6 pk, and then the 130a got a 7pk...
i remember one time we got to sevenstock early, and Atkins had their supercharged FC there, with a dyno sheet, and we compared dyno sheets with my friends street port FC, and the supercharger had more torque, but fell so flat that the ported car made more hp.
i notice when Mazda went from the 65a alternator to the 100a alternator, they also went from a V belt to a 6 pk, and then the 130a got a 7pk...
i remember one time we got to sevenstock early, and Atkins had their supercharged FC there, with a dyno sheet, and we compared dyno sheets with my friends street port FC, and the supercharger had more torque, but fell so flat that the ported car made more hp.
10-16-15, 05:33 PM
#20
I need a new user title
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Yaizu, Japan
Posts: 2,646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That doesn't surprise me one bit. Even in the video of the white car you can tell just by listening how hard it would fall off at the top. When I went to a blow-through turbo setup later, the low-end stayed more or less the same but past 4000 RPM there was no comparison. And that was with just a dinky little S5 turbo.
10-16-15, 11:06 PM
#21
Actually you bought it in late '12 because I built two engines in early '13, one FC 6 port and one R5 4 port, tested them both in the brown car, decided to keep the R5 and swapped the 6 port into the red car. But before it went in, we test ran the EFI stuff when it was still in the brown car. Then, once we determined it could work, it all went into the red car. And just this week it all came back out lol.
And what took its place runs great! The SC is doing pretty well. The owner said just after a quick test drive, that it has about the same power as the EFI did. Knowing how parasitic the SCs are at low RPM, and by contrast how much tip-in the EFI had at low RPM, that's saying something. But before you catalog that away in your rotary experience log book, I can tell you how it compares with the brown car's setup, still using the R5 built in '13. I drove them back to back just moving one out of the way of the other in the driveway etc. Man, the brown car's hogged out Nikki's got some serious grunt compared to the SC. Wow. I mean talk about wow factor, which the SC kinda lacks here. Don't get me wrong, it's no slouch to be sure, but it just kinda leaves you flat after driving the turbo, you know? And it's not just low RPM but everywhere. I'd venture to say it's even got more low end and high end than the white car after it got the boosted weber. Same or similar R5 13Bs, same or similar S5 turbos and same or similar full 3" exhaust so the difference has to be the carbs: Weber vs Nikki. The Nikki wins. The only setup that beats the Nikki is the full FD EFI TB and manifolding, but that is a complicated nightmare of crap that covers the top of the engine and makes life difficult. Plus it always seemed to have ignition problems and who knows when the injectors were serviced, if ever.
Hey percent, you should convince the owner of the white car to go with an R5 and a hogged out Nikki. He mentioned maybe the possibility. It just takes money and parts. He'd get money if he sold off all the FD stuff. Then it's just a hunt for parts but that can happen over the winter.
And what took its place runs great! The SC is doing pretty well. The owner said just after a quick test drive, that it has about the same power as the EFI did. Knowing how parasitic the SCs are at low RPM, and by contrast how much tip-in the EFI had at low RPM, that's saying something. But before you catalog that away in your rotary experience log book, I can tell you how it compares with the brown car's setup, still using the R5 built in '13. I drove them back to back just moving one out of the way of the other in the driveway etc. Man, the brown car's hogged out Nikki's got some serious grunt compared to the SC. Wow. I mean talk about wow factor, which the SC kinda lacks here. Don't get me wrong, it's no slouch to be sure, but it just kinda leaves you flat after driving the turbo, you know? And it's not just low RPM but everywhere. I'd venture to say it's even got more low end and high end than the white car after it got the boosted weber. Same or similar R5 13Bs, same or similar S5 turbos and same or similar full 3" exhaust so the difference has to be the carbs: Weber vs Nikki. The Nikki wins. The only setup that beats the Nikki is the full FD EFI TB and manifolding, but that is a complicated nightmare of crap that covers the top of the engine and makes life difficult. Plus it always seemed to have ignition problems and who knows when the injectors were serviced, if ever.
Hey percent, you should convince the owner of the white car to go with an R5 and a hogged out Nikki.
He mentioned maybe the possibility. It just takes money and parts. He'd get money if he sold off all the FD stuff. Then it's just a hunt for parts but that can happen over the winter.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post