Mazdaspeed7 is one of the N/A guys on here hta really knows his ****, I am pretty sure that he has seen both 6pi and TII Int. Housings.

 

whatever he knows doesnt make 6PI and TII ports on intermediate housings same, they are different

 

Enough of that... No Flaming on this board, your reply is more insulting than anything posted so far in this thread.

 

Read what he said. The CASTING is the same, not the porting. People say that TII's have more material (meaning you can port it MORE) surrounding the intermediate port.

When a high-poster states information, you might want to double-check yours before you throw their knowlage into question, you'll come out looking like an idiot... that or learn to read.

 

Mazdaspeed 7 had roses on his 'vert!

 

http://www.mazdatrix.com/faq/cutaways.htm

-This is a close-up example of the casting around the center intake ports for all 13B's 84-92. The top (intake closing) can NOT be ported much before you break into the water jacket (or EGR passages on the 86-88 non-turbos). -

 

Petex, I do know what Im talking about because I have ported both, and I have measured the casting on both numerous times. It didnt seem right to me at first, considering everything I have heard about the TII centers having mroe casting, so I measured it a few times to be sure. And here is a quote from the RB page someone else posted:
Center ports for ALL 13B's. That would mean that 4 port and 6 port motors have the same amount of casting around the port. Exactly what I said.

Liquid, thanks for pointing that out. The casting is the same, but the stock port is not. The 4 port motors have a larger port from the factory. But the casting is still the same.

Another thing, S5 6 port centers are identical to S4 and S5 4 port centers. Only the S4 n/a is different, and that is only where the EGR passage is(and the water jacket around the EGR.

Im not closed minded. Im right, and I can back up my claims. Simple as that.

Brian, I dont have a vert...

 

Yeah, M7 knows what he's talking about.
The only time I was nervous porting a motor was with a TII because there is crap for casting.
I'll take a picture of a big intermediate port I did on an NA motor. I copied the TII secondary port (really big!) to the NA primary port and never hit the water jacket.

 

I have street ported one of my S4 NA primary ports and did not reach the water jacket. It was not a small street port; it closed much later than the stock port. It also had a lot of the bowl reshaped to match the closing timing.

 

As for bridges not being streetable, soul assasin's car had a bp before he sold it, and he drove the thing everyday, 6-puck clutch, HKS transmission and all. The definition of streetable really depends on your own personal likes. If you can deal with a bouncy 2000rpm idle, then you can drive it on the street.

 

Streetability of a BP is determined by tuning. The port itself is not what will kill streetability(although it will never drive like a stock car).

 

if u get the ports bp then u wont have that lumpy idle rite? thats the whole point is to not have the lumpy idle, and so the bp comes into effect at 37-40 rpms. im getting this done within the next month, i jus pulled my engine out couple days ago, i plan on doing the custom intake as well, and having a friend tune it.(hes doing the port job too )i hope to get in the 200whp range, looking for a civic crusher lol

 

well the original question was weather or not is worthed to bridgeport 6 port engine. I think it's not. If I would decide to do it for some strange reason I said I would use TII intermediate and TII end housing for 2 reasons: 1: TII intermediate housing has bigger primary ports and less effort is needed to make the same sized ports as if NA housing would be ported. (so you do less work when using TII housing, smaller chance to break into water jacket) 2: I just can't imagine bridge port on 6PI end housing...

thats all, I dont mean to disrespect nobody, peace

 

Read carefully

 

BP = decrease in engine life

AuxPort = Must be done on the AuxPORTS... so no such thing as an AuxPort on TII end housings... that's a BP.

Oh yeah... I never said anything about how much power it added. I was more concerned with the sound, and RPM of the idle; I really don't want the *brap* associated with a traditional bridge on my N/A daily driver. We'll find out by the fall, at the latest...

 

As promised, my big *** port job:
http://www.zaxjax.com/extended_extended_port.htm

 

What EMS are you using? A stock ecu will not run it acceptably. And how much does your friend know about tuning intake manifolds? You need to know the port duration to tune the runner length. And the runners for the 4 main ports(non-bridge) are goign to be sonciderably different lengths than the runners for the bridged aux ports.

My point is you better know what you are getting into before you get into it. There is a whole lot that will need to be planned for, and if youre not fully prepared, its very likely that youll get in over your head. A word of warning, it will cost you at least as much to make this motor work right as it would be to build a PP motor.

Liquid, the whole point of doign it to the aux ports is to sidestep the drivability problems, and to have a normal idle and decent gas mileage.

 

What EMS are you using? A stock ecu will not run it acceptably. And how much does your friend know about tuning intake manifolds? You need to know the port duration to tune the runner length. And the runners for the 4 main ports(non-bridge) are goign to be sonciderably different lengths than the runners for the bridged aux ports.

My point is you better know what you are getting into before you get into it. There is a whole lot that will need to be planned for, and if youre not fully prepared, its very likely that youll get in over your head. A word of warning, it will cost you at least as much to make this motor work right as it would be to build a PP motor.

Liquid, the whole point of doign it to the aux ports is to sidestep the drivability problems, and to have a normal idle and decent gas mileage.

 

im not sure rite now about everything we're still deciding on everything, and yes he knows alot.

what do we have to do to prepare for a bp, besides bult ons and stuff. like do i need a stand alone? or can i jus use a s-afc and tune it that way. or do i need bigger injectures? give us a list of what we will need for a bp.

 

Starting from the inside out. Youre goign to need to build the motor for high rpm's. That means S5 internals, clearanced, hardened stat gears with windowed main bearings, deep groove rotor bearings, higher oil pressure, TII oil pump, etc. Then youre going to need a custom intake manifold tuned to the ports, as well as a custom header/exhaust. Then youll need a standalone, b/c the stock ecu, even with a s-afc will not run it right. Partly from the limitations of tuning, and partly from the afm and stuff being too much of a restriction. It will really hurt power on a high overlap motor. Youre also going to need a flywheel safe to 10K rpm, as well as clutch. UD pulleys will be a must so you dont overspin the accessories too much, and obviously the stock fan cant be used at that high rpm.

Like I said, it will cost as much to build a PP as it will be to build a good aux bridge motor.

 

Mazda has spent the big $$ doing this all this for us.
It's called "renesis"
2 rotors - 10 ports

 

Noone is here to discuss the renesis, not in this thread at least.

 

Using the stock ECU on doing a, what you call a half bridgeport or an AUX bridgeport, should work. the only thing is, is that you can only bridge those 5th and 6th ports because of how much overlap. TCrown420 on teamfc3s has his done that way and uses the stock ECU and from he says is that it makes power and drives correctly, since "Theoretically" the bridge doesnt come in effect until the ports open up and then its up to you to have enough fuel. 550s should do the trick and with an SAFC. But running the stock ECU probably isnt the best idea in the world. A haltech would probably suffice.
the car again "theoretically" should be driveable which to everyone would mean, still has some low end and is still comfortable to drive, im taking this from Tony 87GTR, we did his engine with a half bridge and being turbocharged(TO4E) it still ran like a champ and still had very good low end. Being that these cars are Nonturbo they too should have good low end. BDC and I are supposed to rebuild my engine this same way.and are using it as a guinea pig to see how the ECU responds to this mod. ill letcha know.

ERic.

 

I completely agree w/ the above post...

MS7 just has a tendancy to go overboard. You NEVER NEED clearanced stuff, with new bearings, and hardened stationarys for a non-racecar. It would make the most of the port-job, but stock will suffice.

We'll see what happens in a little while... hopefully I'll get a couple hundred $ from parting out my old 280ZX; then the engine shall be underway.

 

Overboard? No. I dont do half-*** motors that are likely to have problems at the revs that port job can attain easily. I never said you *couldnt* make it run for less than what I listed, but it wont last. If youre looking for cheap power, building a motor is the last place to go. Youre better off with nitrous, or slappping a turbo on your car. So when you dont do all that stuff, and your motor goes the way of Vons, Ill be sitting back laughing watching my odometer climd daily.