SPY PHOTOS! new carb kit that promises 40+mpg!!
01-26-09, 02:01 PM
#28
I need a new user title
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Yaizu, Japan
Posts: 2,646
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know people have already responded to the Fram comment, but... most people who bash Fram do so because of their Extra Guard filters, which have crappy anti-drainback valves and not a whole lot of surface area on the filtration medium. Their Tough Guard filters, like the one pictured, are a much better design, with an anti-drainback valve that actually works and more surface area. Still not my favorite filter, but it isn't that bad.
01-26-09, 03:43 PM
#29
Slide Or Die
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 1,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i believe rob sells kits like that already. his 12A turbo makes over 700 hp. but not everybody wants 700 hp, lots of people simply like driving thier mazda ,not fast simply getting from point A to point B, if they can double or triple thier fuel ecconomy on the car they love so much they are all for it. guys that have vipers dont daily drive them, they have other cars for daily commuting, that get good gas mileage.
01-26-09, 07:56 PM
#31
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Palmdale Ca
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
with this little secret weapon,now you can brag to your honda buddies you have a rotary that gets better gas mileage than thier honda in your collection
01-26-09, 08:15 PM
#33
Slide Or Die
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 1,076
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah it would be nice if you were going to daily drive one. but makes me think of my old geo metro .. had great gas mileage but took about 5 minutes to get to 60 mph/
01-26-09, 08:24 PM
#34
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Palmdale Ca
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well, teh seven looks alot better than a geo and its faster than a geo even with a one barrel carb. its not that slow.. remember the seven cant loose!!
01-26-09, 08:48 PM
#38
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Palmdale Ca
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it still wont get the mileage of a single barrel carb, not even close
1 small fuel jet, 1 small venturi , 1 small throttle plate cant be beat as far as ecconomy. and its a new carb, so it works good .its not some old rebuilt 20 times nikki.
1 small fuel jet, 1 small venturi , 1 small throttle plate cant be beat as far as ecconomy. and its a new carb, so it works good .its not some old rebuilt 20 times nikki.
01-26-09, 08:50 PM
#39
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Palmdale Ca
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ill ask him, testing abroad might be wise. hes got 5 of them running around local so he can closely monitor them..
01-27-09, 09:22 PM
#42
Okay let me ask it in another way. Will it accelerate enough to keep up with traffic?
When I rebuilt my carb I inadvertently installed the base gasket wrong. By doing so, I shut off the vacuum to the secondary diaphragm. Cruising along was fine but a standing start was a pretty good challenge to keep up with traffic.
When I rebuilt my carb I inadvertently installed the base gasket wrong. By doing so, I shut off the vacuum to the secondary diaphragm. Cruising along was fine but a standing start was a pretty good challenge to keep up with traffic.
01-28-09, 07:42 PM
#44
"When I rebuilt my carb I inadvertently installed the base gasket wrong. By doing so, I shut off the vacuum to the secondary diaphragm. Cruising along was fine but a standing start was a pretty good challenge to keep up with traffic."
So you are saying we can turn our Nikki's into two barrels just by putting the base gasket in backwards? Cool way to save gas. I did the same thing once and it wasn't that bad, 'course I don't have a heavy foot.
Would this be just as effective as the one barrel that Rob is developing? Save a few bucks.
So you are saying we can turn our Nikki's into two barrels just by putting the base gasket in backwards? Cool way to save gas. I did the same thing once and it wasn't that bad, 'course I don't have a heavy foot.
Would this be just as effective as the one barrel that Rob is developing? Save a few bucks.
01-28-09, 08:05 PM
#45
MMM Bacon to face!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Silver Spring MD
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just have my nikki setup for mechanical secondaries and I can physically feel in the pedal when I'm about to open them, needs quite a bit more leverage to do so. However the combination of having vacuum leaks, stuff missing off the of the manifold and having a slightly heavy foot I only manage about 22mpg.
"When I rebuilt my carb I inadvertently installed the base gasket wrong. By doing so, I shut off the vacuum to the secondary diaphragm. Cruising along was fine but a standing start was a pretty good challenge to keep up with traffic."
So you are saying we can turn our Nikki's into two barrels just by putting the base gasket in backwards? Cool way to save gas. I did the same thing once and it wasn't that bad, 'course I don't have a heavy foot.
Would this be just as effective as the one barrel that Rob is developing? Save a few bucks.
So you are saying we can turn our Nikki's into two barrels just by putting the base gasket in backwards? Cool way to save gas. I did the same thing once and it wasn't that bad, 'course I don't have a heavy foot.
Would this be just as effective as the one barrel that Rob is developing? Save a few bucks.
01-28-09, 09:09 PM
#46
Pipe Dreams
I never read so much B.S. in my life. I have owned a lot of rotary powered Mazdas since 1979, including 7 of the 1st gen RX7s. The only one I had that ever got over 20 mpg was my SE, which once got 23 on a carefully measured highway trip. The most knowledgeable rotary mechanics I know say that high 20s mileage is possible under test conditions, but not likely in normal daily driving.
The fundamental problem with the rotary has nothing to do with the carburetion - it is the inherent characteristics of the combustion cycle. Mazda spent a lot of time and money developing a very sophisticated laboratory engine, with lots of exotic light weight parts and extreme measures to reduce friction, and they got, by their own statements, combustion efficiency within 10% of comparable piston engines. But that was before the VTEC revolution raised the bar.
If this new carb setup or any other intake system is measured at anything over 30 mpg in the real world on a rotary powered RX-7, you need to find out what is wrong with your measurements.
As for Fram oil filters, I have used them since 1957, and never had a problem, although I have had problems when I tried other brands.
The fundamental problem with the rotary has nothing to do with the carburetion - it is the inherent characteristics of the combustion cycle. Mazda spent a lot of time and money developing a very sophisticated laboratory engine, with lots of exotic light weight parts and extreme measures to reduce friction, and they got, by their own statements, combustion efficiency within 10% of comparable piston engines. But that was before the VTEC revolution raised the bar.
If this new carb setup or any other intake system is measured at anything over 30 mpg in the real world on a rotary powered RX-7, you need to find out what is wrong with your measurements.
As for Fram oil filters, I have used them since 1957, and never had a problem, although I have had problems when I tried other brands.
Last edited by Rx-7Doctor; 01-29-09 at 03:20 AM.
01-28-09, 09:24 PM
#47
MMM Bacon to face!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Silver Spring MD
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know from my driving around pretty much whatever I do I get around 20-22 whether it be highway or city. However judging by the plugs and some other things I have a feeling I'm running quite lean.
01-28-09, 09:29 PM
#48
Fram is a dependable brand for street use. I would rather use a higher dollar filter for the track.
I get 18-21 MPG average on both of my 2nd gens. I average 17 MPG on my SA. My tops ever is 23 MPG on my GXL. It is modified is driven city and highway 50/50.
This carb (if it really does deliver 40 MPG with a fairly heavy foot time to time) would be great if it were to be installed in a second car. One for fun and power, and one for long trips.
I get 18-21 MPG average on both of my 2nd gens. I average 17 MPG on my SA. My tops ever is 23 MPG on my GXL. It is modified is driven city and highway 50/50.
This carb (if it really does deliver 40 MPG with a fairly heavy foot time to time) would be great if it were to be installed in a second car. One for fun and power, and one for long trips.
01-28-09, 10:20 PM
#49
Banned. I got OWNED!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Palmdale Ca
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never read so much B.S. in my life. I have owned a lot of rotary powered Mazdas since 1979, including 7 of the 1st gen RX7s. The only one I had that ever got over 20 mpg was my SE, which once got 23 on a carefully measured highway trip. The most knowledgeable rotary mechanics I know say that high 20s mileage is possible under test conditions, but not likely in normal daily driving.
The fundamental problem with the rotary has nothing to do with the carburetion - it is the inherent characteristics of the combustion cycle. Mazda spent a lot of time and money developing a very sophisticated laboratory engine, with lots of exotic light weight parts and extreme measures to reduce friction, and they got, by their own statements, combustion efficiency within 10% of comparable piston engines. But that was before the VTEC revolution raised the bar.
If this new carb setup or any other intake system is measured at anything over 30 mpg in the real world on a rotary powered RX-7, you need to find out what is wrong with your measurements.
As for Fram oil filters, I have used them since 1957, and never had a problem, although I have had problems when I tried other brands.
The fundamental problem with the rotary has nothing to do with the carburetion - it is the inherent characteristics of the combustion cycle. Mazda spent a lot of time and money developing a very sophisticated laboratory engine, with lots of exotic light weight parts and extreme measures to reduce friction, and they got, by their own statements, combustion efficiency within 10% of comparable piston engines. But that was before the VTEC revolution raised the bar.
If this new carb setup or any other intake system is measured at anything over 30 mpg in the real world on a rotary powered RX-7, you need to find out what is wrong with your measurements.
As for Fram oil filters, I have used them since 1957, and never had a problem, although I have had problems when I tried other brands.
Last edited by Rx-7Doctor; 01-28-09 at 10:48 PM. Reason: sent pm
01-29-09, 03:09 AM
#50
To avoid turning this into an unauthorized classified thread please keep the inquiries of the how much and where can I get limited to pm's to the thread starter please. :-)
All other members that want technical information please feel free to post.
All other members that want technical information please feel free to post.