looks good!

The only criticism I have (and it's a small one) is the Dynamic Effect Chamber atop the engine is square. On the 2nd gens they switched to a rounded-top DEI (Dynamic Effect Intake - they changed the name, too) to better manage the intake pressure waves between the two rotor chambers.

The boxy version used in the 13B in the GSL-SE was fine for N/A applications, but the turbocharger requires more careful intake tuning due to any problems with pulse wave interferance being magnified by boosted air.

 

Actually, the 2nd Gen N/A intake is designed to use the pressure waves to make positive displacement (up to to PSI of boost). It was Mazda's own little supercharger. They improved it better on the 89+ intakes.

In a Turbo, the air will get pushed wherever it needs to go, since it is being forced in, instead of sucked in. It's not as important as in N/A applications, becuse there really isn't the same type of pressure waves generated. Of course smooth, long runners, and a large volume intake are preferred, but not necessary.

 

intake pressure in the N/A, with the redesigned intake, was measured at 2psi an affectionately called "pulse-positive charging". However, they did intend it to augment the Turbo version as well (remember, turbos are only under boost part of the time, whereas this passive boost is an always-on pressure effect)

 

Yes, and when they realized that they were "overboosting" and couldn't properly monitor and control boost pressure, the kept it simpler on the Turbo versions.

I agree with you by the way, but I am also agreeing with 680, stating that in a Turbo application, the difference in power from a square (and easy to build/design) plenum as compared to a countoured one would not be worth the extra effort - unless you exhausted all other means od increasing power.

 

Different I like it.

 

directfreak quote;

In a Turbo, the air will get pushed wherever it needs to go, since it is being forced in, instead of sucked in. It's not as important as in N/A applications, becuse there really isn't the same type of pressure waves generated. Of course smooth, long runners, and a large volume intake are preferred, but not necessary.


I agree with you by the way, but I am also agreeing with 680, stating that in a Turbo application, the difference in power from a square (and easy to build/design) plenum as compared to a countoured one would not be worth the extra effort - unless you exhausted all other means od increasing power.

good points directfreak!!!
I also think the plenum shape not being as critical on carburated applications because as the possibly turbulent airflow goes through the carburator , venturies, aux. venturies fuel mixing with air etc... its sort of redirected...a fuel injected car has minimal restrictions in the intake thus not affecting the turbulent air flow ..thus needing a superior design to get optinum air flow chararcteristcs.. usally in EFI systems the injectors are close to the intake port so you want even air flow to each port (so one port is not leaner than another) so plenum/ intake systems are more critical on EFI cars......

 

wow

 

Hey, I am about to also put a turbo on to my 12a but wheres the best area to tap into for the oil lines that run to the turbo, also the coolent lines?
Thanks,
Jason

 

you guys have tricks up your sleeves for a dellorto/turbo setup?

 

the dellorto carbs dont respond well to turbocharging for several reasons ....no avail. emulsion tubes, very limited fuel jets and no air corrector jets are available!!also the needle valve is too small and no larger ones are avail.the best thing for you to do is to sell the dellorto and buy a weber. they are not too expensive and work much better!

 

nope. i'll keep it on the 13B and then possibley get the weber and turbo kit for the bridge i've got waiting to put together in the shop.