KhanArtisT

iTrader: (2)

While I did misunderstand what you said, I still find it hilarious that you feel the need to call me names haha. Either way your point was not worth mentioning, the 5psi (?)loss of compression has little to do with whether he'll win the race or not. You have no idea whether or not hes on his original motor either or how many miles it has. Small modifications can easily outweigh the loss of power through 5psi of compression. Also to clear something up, my misunderstanding was that a 20 year old car couldn't outperform a brand new car in the same class, not an ecobox vs. a muscle car.

lol...jackasses like me huh you mean jackases that drag race 132hp neons every chance they get? or 17 second RX7s? . Just what we need on our public streets, kids who watch FNF and race any turd they see on the street and post on a forum about it

Richter12x2

iTrader: (1)

Yeah, I just picked a likely number and plugged it in - 191 * 0.85 = 161.something, and I rounded. It's not like I was way off.

I'm just saying that's probably a little optimistic. I have a streetported NA with 3" exhaust all the way back, a gutted cat (not intentionally, but it is now ), probably the same intake you do if you got the E-bay special, removed emissions, a tuned SAFC, and Functional 5th and 6th ports (which make more hp than removing the sleeves, search on it, it's true) and I doubt very much if I'm seeing those kind of numbers.

Richter12x2

iTrader: (1)

Why wait? Go get a compression tester and tell us what kind of compression you're getting.

I ran one of the fox-body highway patrol interceptors in my Neon 0-60 (from a redlight in a 55). He got the jump on me by a little bit because I didn't know he was there (SUV between us) and I launched kinda soft. When I saw him jump from the light like I did, I put the pedal down. When we got to 60, he had about 3/4 of a car on my stock Neon. I thought it was just some old fox-body 5.0 until he put the flashers on as a warning. When we pulled up at the next redlight he flashed his badge at me through the window. And THAT is why you don't go nuts in a redlight race.

But I'd've got him easy in the Rx7 - the stock Neon only puts down 132hp, and mine's modified for turning more than hp.

Richter12x2

iTrader: (1)

I wouldn't call it a need to insult you - more of a compulsion, really. Which I wouldn't have felt if you hadn't lead off your misinformed reply with "Ignorance at its best." If you really want to find it hilarious, I've got better names, too.

And you just keep putting your foot in your mouth - is it because your hat's too tight?

I already answered your 'rebuttal', before you even made it. Here -

How could I have known what you were going to say? That's okay, let's head on to your next words of wisdom.

Oops, but wait, there ARE no small modifications. This was covered in the verah first evar post of this thread, the one that started it all.

I understand it's hard to keep up - how could you have known? It's hard to read all those words in that one sentence.

Ah, I see - so when you made the comparison here -

You're saying that an Rx7 is in the same category as an Acura RSX and a Scion TC? That's funny, I've always thought of Rx7's as sports cars, not FWD fad "Sport Compacts" like the RSX and TC. You know they're FWD, right? And you must be talking about the base 3000GT, because the vr4's are sub 14's, even though iirc, they weigh almost 4000 lbs. :P

Congratulations, you've just alienated the only people on this forum that don't know enough to know you're full of it. There's nothing jackass about 'racing' a 132hp Neon as long as you're both having a good time. It's the occasional jackass like you who thinks that some cars aren't "Worthy" of racing. I enjoy driving, and I'll push whatever car I happen to be in, whether it's my RX7 or my daily driver Neon. FYI, my 132 hp Neon lost an NA Rx7 at this month's DFW meet when we caravanned over to get a few beers. So be careful exactly HOW bad you smacktalk my Neon, knowing there's at least one NA Rx7 slower than it is.

Richter12x2

iTrader: (1)

Hmm, not trying to be a total jerk about it, but doesn't that sound a lot like what I was saying? Maybe I know a LITTLE BIT what I'm talking about?

KhanArtisT

iTrader: (2)

good ******* god...you know I enjoy flamefests quite often. but when someone writes almost a page worth of their "madtytte races" in their 16 second cars, I give up. I'll award you the win, now go in your neon and race minivans LOL

wthdidusay82

iTrader: (15)

My intake is not an ebay intake, its the corksport 3.5" aluminum intake piping kit with exhaust heatwrap over it that i put on connected to a bonez maf adapter and kn airfilter. (seen in avatar)

I am using the lightweight steel racingbeat flywheel (17lbs w/counterweight compared to 23.9 lbs stock w/counterweight) which I would think may give me more power to the wheels since theres less rotating mass (less weight to lose power through).

I'm also using redline synthetic transmission fluid and redline synthetic diff fluid, which will probably give less than 1whp gain on dyno but still better than stock nonetheless.

Also 3" is too big for n/a youre sacraficing torque for power , even jrat on here has a turbo2 running 490whp with 2.5" piping so why would you need 3" on n/a thats overkill and just making your car sound more powerful than it really is and actually making it slower than it should be.

I could be wrong about 3" being too big but why would they make racing beat headers with a 2.5" collector if 3" was the size to go with.

-90gtu-

yea man. i know, i was just backing u up and putting my 2 cents in from my experience. jeeez..........

ericgrau

iTrader: (1)

pengarufoo: V6 mustangs are "slow" too. Automatics are slower than the s4 N/A manual.

wtfdidusay:
You have an upgraded exhaust too, right?? I mean, that's where the real power is.
Flywheel the inertia is similar to car inertia. You are essentially shaving weight by using the lighter flywheel. Much more than 6.9lbs. since it's spinning rather fast. The "weight" savings are greatest in 1st gear, and least in 5th gear.
The redline in the tranny mainly allows faster shifting. As for the diff, I dunno.
3" won't hurt, but it is totally unnecessary.
Torque x rpm = power. It is impossible to decrease torque and increase power at the same time. I don't know of any exhaust that drops your redline, hehe. For that matter, it only causes confusion to talk about torque as if it were a thing seperate from power (like now). If you look at horsepower only you'll be fine. If you look at torque only it involves some math and an understanding of physics (you can't just use the torque number as-is). So in general it's simpler to ignore torque and just look at power only (which works fine as-is).

wthdidusay82

iTrader: (15)

Yes I have racing beat streetable header, dual 2" to 2.5" collector , straight pipe in place of cat (2.5" in/out) , and borla dual catback exhaust 2.5" before the y pipe dual 2" after to 2 1/2 tips (or 2 1/4" not sure).

In all my system is consistant , why would you want 3" piping ? Thats just way too big , the only people that run that are turbo and thats usually only to make the turbo spool faster from less restriction and more flow, but the 2.5" isnt a restriction to an na that is only producing around 200 hp or less.

You could be right about the torque not decreasing if power is increased but i think the powerband will be shifted up into higher rpms and youll be having to rev higher to get all the power out of your car, where as with the smaller piping you may get less power but you get a better overall power throughout the entire powerband

3" will may get higher peak power it does not mean your car is faster it only means its more peak power at that given rpm, 2.5" having a higher average power through the powerband is more significant than having a higher peak power with lower average power.

I could be wrong but this is just what I think , anyone can correct me if am wrong and they have proof (dyno/track results)

bigdaddyp

what kinda stock neon was that, that was able to hang with a 5.0 to 60? I had a friend with a 96 neon sport, the 2.0 420A motor, had a full exhuast and a cold air. I made him look stupid in my old 5.0, from a stop, by 20mph I had about 5 cars on him, all I had was exhaust.

Richter12x2

iTrader: (1)

Ahh, I've just got the MAF adapter - I doubt it's bonez but it was $10 from Ebay - with a K&N Cone.

And faster torque falloff during shifts. But flywheels don't raise your overall horsepower, they theoretically let your engine rev faster - with the downside being in lower HP cars there's less centifugal action to keep the revs up when you disengage the clutch.

And I'm using Royal Purple synthetic transmission fluid, and diff fluid, AND a limited slip differential, which as you pointed out earlier, will give you a quicker 1/4 than an open diff.

1. Prove to me how you're sacrificing torque with some kind of dyno numbers, because I hear this fairytale about how exhausts require backpressure so that the valves close better or something - but the RX7 doesn't HAVE exhaust valves.

2. I did it because I didn't want to buy a whole new exhaust system when I added the turbo, and Dynomax's website recommended a 3" single for cars in the 250-300hp range. Additionally, a lack of backpressure in a turbo allows the turbo to spool faster - which isn't going to be a problem using the NA rotors anyway.

Says the guy with a 3.5" intake. That same air you're trying to put in there has to come out, so theoretically why wouldn't your exhaust be at least as big as your intake? Who knows? Maybe 2.5" is more than adequate. I doubt I'm going to be the only Turbo RX7 with a 3" downpipe. I did a quick search and know for a fact that it's not unusual.

Richter12x2

iTrader: (1)

2003 2.0 SXT - stock except for a cold air intake. Who knows, maybe he had some mechanical problems or something. I just know that he didn't get away. Since he was an old highway patrol interceptor car, I'd bet he's geared for top end more than low end, which was probably the only way my little 132hp (+2 maybe for CAI) could have kept up. From the places he was shifting and the acceleration between changes, I know he would have killed me if we'd kept going. He probably would have topped out around 160-180mph.

Richter12x2

iTrader: (1)

That's funny - most of my "almost a page" was in response to your quotes, and I don't think I mentioned a race once. But that's alright, quit while you're a behind.

Richter12x2

iTrader: (1)

I'm sorry, I didn't mean for that to seem like it was directed at you - it was directed at all the people out there who are letting their contempt for Mustangs and reverence for RX7s cloud their judgement.

Is the RX7 a better car? Oh hell yes. Is an S4 Rx7 faster than a 2001 v6 Mustang in the quarter? Probably not.

Richter12x2

iTrader: (1)

I'm with Ericgrau above - 3" is definitely overkill for an NA car, but I doubt if it's hurting anything other than the increased weight - for my application, I had to have a new exhaust to pass emissions, and 3" was basically the same price as 2 1/2". Since I had planned to do the turbo thing eventually, I didn't want to buy the same exhaust twice - so I used Dynomax's exhaust size calculator for the amount of power I planned to make off the turbo (250-300) and went with that. I'm a cheapskate, I don't like buying the same part twice, even if I have to grow into it. I had a SAFC II shortly after the exhaust - did it help much? Not a lot - but now I'm using it to control the bigger injectors for the turbo, so just like the exhaust, it's a modification I'm "growing in to".