No, I never said to get a standalone. I was defending you about upgrading the injectors and fuel pump. I just meant that it was a good idea to do that along with the safc since you might need it anyway. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Also, I'm pretty sure that if you go standalone and want to keep the omp, you can use the s4 front cover along with the s4 omp if you also use the s4 TB. Since you're going standalone you can adapt it to whatever TPS you want, which as far as I know is the only reason you can't do that with the stock ECU.

 

Ah ok. that clears things up. Im pretty sure im going to run with the SAFC for the time being. Ill cross my fingers that the MS guys or Rtek figures out the S5 OMP as I have considered going to ITBs down the line, and I would rather the electric OMP instead of the throttled one.


BC

 

just get a mechanical omp. then you wont have to worry about ****.

 

As far as I know, there isn't really any advantage to the electrical omp. I mean there has to be otherwise mazda wouldnt have used it, but the mechanical one is just fine, plus its pretty much bulletproof, whereas the s5 one can break.

 

The only advantage I can find is not needing to rig up a setup to run the mechanical one with ITBs in the future. I have considered going to an S4 omp just for the reason that it is highly unlikely to fail on me.

Ill have to do some research into swapping one in, just for my own knowledge if nothing else.

BC

 

The electrical OMP (EOMP) is quite a bit more superior than the mechanical OMP (MOMP). The EOMP reduces oil consumption (up to 80%) and has far better control of oil injection over the whole rpm range.

The EOMP includes a stepping motor to better control oil discharge and, as opposed to a lever, a microprocessor to control the flow rate. A sensor inside the EOMP tells the microprocessor the angle of the stepping motor which allows for better oil flow. The MOMP increased oil flow due to throttle position whereas the EOMP considers RPM, air flow, and even water tempature.

The reduced amount of oil injected into the rotor also has the added affect of controlling the apex seal temperatures better. Not enough oil increases seal temperature which induces constant metal contact. Too much oil decreases seal temperature, but after a certain point (which the MOMP was passing), the only affect was to increase oil consumption. The EOMP was able to inject just enough oil to prevent metal-metal contact and to reduce oil consumption.

 

If you ever plan on going to ITB's in the future, you will need a standlone. The S-AFC (Stupid Air Fuel Computer) is a bandaid on any system but it isn't enough of one on an ITB system. A bandaid doen't work where surgery is needed. You'd need to ditch the stock ecu completely at that point since the air flow meter needs to go. It will not work properly if you don't, not matter what you try. That means no Rtek too unless they have a way to remove the afm.

 

Believe me, I know. In fact, when that time came, I was going to start PMing the hell out of you for info since you seem to the the intake guy. The way I look at it if I can pick up an SAFC used for $150-$200 and use it for 12-18 months then I am only going to be paying a few bucks a month for it. It will get me by while I get the car where I want it, and it will give the computer geniuses the time to figure out how to control the S5 OMP.


Rtek is saying that the 2.0 is being planned to run speed density and get rid of the AFM. Whether or not they do that the Rtek is my second choice. I would prefer to run a megasquirt so I can build it and know how to repair it if something goes wrong. I am just wanting for the MS guys to figure out the EOMP and then I will go that route.

So the SAFC is definitely just a band-aid. it will get me along for the time being and let me document the improvements on a "stock" ecu, but a standlone is definitely in the future. No choice with ITBs.


BC

 

I can deal with slightly increased oil consumption. What is it, a couple bucks a month extra? And I know that its getting the oil in since they don't break.

 

The increased oil amounts in the engine hurt performance/increases carbon buildup (not a lot, but I guess it's still an advantage).

Also, doesn't the EOMP throw a code and go into limp mode if it's not working? The MOMP doesn't tell you if it's not working (which, granted, is pretty rare).

 

i wouldn't say my 7 is the FASTEST n/a, not even close, but it is naturally aspirated and pretty quick

 

yeah but its also a v8 , i assume hes talking about rotary powered cars. v8s dont count in my opinion, and surely it may be fast in a straightaway, but a rotary powered rx7 will handle the way the car is meant to handle (much better)

 

That's a misconception, the LS1 isn't that much heavier than the 13B, and they can be made to handle just as well, it just takes a little bit different suspension tuning. Especially if you've got PS, and AC with the 13B and you ditch them with the LS1 and move the battery to the trunk, then the weight increase will be mush smaller, as will any change to the weight balance. You don't need a perfect 50/50 balance for the car to handle well anyway, besides, 50/50 isn't perfect anyway, RWD cars tend to handle best with a slight rear weight balance.

 

So if you wanted to circuit race an N/A what would you need to do,and what could you get reliably get out of it? What does an N/A engine weigh with all the ancillaries?

 

How fast do you want to spend? Fast, reliable, cheap, pick any two.

It depends a lot on class rules, how much you want to spend, how radical you want to go on the build.

Some good things for reliability on track are bigger aluminium radiator, bigger/more oil coolers, baffled oil pan and/or oil pan baffle plate, underdriven water pump and higher oil pressure. Also make sure all belts, hoses, filters, wires, sensors, etc are in good shape, track driving puts lots of stress on the car, make sure it's in tip top shape.

Performance options are many and varied, search and you'll come up with lots of ideas.