lastphaseofthis

iTrader: (8)

Just wanting to see the difficulty between removing them or finding other means of activation, thanks!

86GXL

Removing them isnt recomended... it skrews up the air flow. If your gonna go that far then buy the pineapple sleaves. Otherwise if you hate torque wire them open. Or do a search for electronic aux port activation.

emac

here's all the stuff i took out to get the sleeves out. I didn't do it for that reason, but you have to take off the lim to get the sleeves out.

lastphaseofthis

iTrader: (8)

thanks emac, and yes removing them is recommened, as long as you fill the holes, i am not sure what you mean by pineapple, but i will look it up, i am not concerned about low end torque, i need the high end more, and ppl have said that just removing them all togather has much better effect then "wiring them open".

emac

pineapple sleeves offer a smoother surface for the 5/6 port air to enter the engine resulting in greater velocity of air into the engine with less turbulance and restriction. There have been a few cases of them being sucked into the engine though so be careful if you use them.


http://www.pineappleracing.com

NZConvertible

So this is a race car?

rotarygod

iTrader: (1)

You guys shouldn't believe everything that manufacturers claim. On a flowbench you'd see that the Pineapple sleeves flow a whopping 1 cfm more at a 25" of water test pressure. The reason is because the actuator rods are in the airstream and disrupt the airflow so badly through here that it doesn't matter what the shape is anymore. Go ahead and waste your money. It's a placebo for your engine. I wonder if it's a coincedence that the same company marketing these sleeves also denounces actually flow testing products to prove results rather than flow guess and make claims based on these guesses? What appears to "logically" flow better doesn't always. You wouldn't know this if you didn't test it though. Do you want your engine builder flow testing or flow guessing? I'll leave that up to you.

Removing the sleeves will give you a couple of PEAK horsepower more at the expense of several horsepower less where you spend 99.9% of your time driving at lower rpm's. That's a lousy sacrifice. I can't believe there are still so many uneducated people that do this to street cars. It's sad really. I fully understand for race cars though as they tend to stay at these higher rpm's and run close ratio gearboxes. Too bad these are never street cars.

CompuBob

my butt dyno told me I had 0 difference in low end torque when I removed my siezed actuators and wired it open. people claiming to have to rev it to 3k just to get it going, or city driving will be a paint in the ***, ect. either
A) never did this before
or
B) just suck at life.

dident someone dyno a before and after and they only lost a whopping 4lb of low end torque? the thread is somewhere around here..
IMO 5th and 6th port actuators are almost up there with the brilliant idea of cold start assist, useless!.

emac

I think it's a retty good system actually. I'm leaving it stock because I do believe that mazda designed the system well. The pineapple sleeves do smooth out airflow and reduce turbulance, but intake air is supposed to be turbulent to properly mix with the fuel.

Icemark

I guess that is why the actuated aux ports (5th & 6th ports) are on the 238-250hp Rensis rotary engines as well.

I have yet to see anyone post numbers/dyno sheets there this is an increase in HP more than 1 or 2 peak HP by removing them.

In addition I am making probably around 200 FWHP with aux ports in place and working correctly on a semi street legal partial emission equipped FC. If I am making those numbers with them why should they ever be removed?

pengarufoo

The aux port actuation on the renesis is much better than the 6 port setup used in the s4/s5 NA's. I would tell people to keep the renesis setup, there are no large rods running accross the intake runner, it's pretty much flawless except the reports of the stepper motors getting stuck in some cases.

As for the stock setup of the NA FC's, my vote goes for eliminating it altogether, but also cleaning up the secondary runners to the point it's like the actuation never existed. When I'm trying to go fast, I'm in a rpm range where the aux ports being closed helps for a whole ~1 second, the rest of the time I'm above that range and appreciating the higher flowing aux and secondary ports.

There are some pics of my filled in aux runners here:
http://pengaru.com/~swivel/cars/rx-7/pics/02-19-2005/

the last few pics are after welding, before smoothing with the carbide bit, the finished result is a pristine smooth runner that you cannot detect ever had a bushing protruding out into it.

ddub

To be fair, even though this doesn't have much to do with the topic, those numbers given by Mazda are wrong


Mazda rated the Renesis as 250 at the flywheel at first, but later changed it in the US market to 238 saying they had "overestimated" it. Then later people started (on rx8club) dynoing completely stock rx8's with the newest PCM flashes and after required break-in, etc., and were only obtaining 180-190 at the wheels after SAE correction. This is weird because the rx8 has a carbon fiber driveshaft so you'd assume the normal 15% drivetrain loss would be less, or at least no more than 15%. Well 15% loss at 238 would yield 202.3

Oh well Mazda overestimating on **** again. That's my piece on the renesis

As for the renesis aux ports, they are lightyears ahead of the FC's, it's rather interesting. They have a motor in the manifold that opens them and are shaped with sort of a flank in them for better flow, it's pretty cool.

For daily driving and normal use, keep the aux ports, but there are some circumstances I can see removing them say for only high rpm use or things like that.

My .02

Icemark

actually closer in euro and Aus/NZ/Japan markets. They are lower HP here due to emissions. They couldn't get the 250 HP flash to pass US spec LEV standards.

And I normally figure 25% drive train loss on most cars out there, which if mazda's 238 figure is accurate, then 180 HP would show on most dynos.

SirCygnus

iTrader: (1)

plus they have better fuels.

staticguitar313

iTrader: (2)

we need a better way to activate these ports . . . back pressure just doesn't cut it, electronic activation like by an aftermarket ECU would be perfect, that way you could designate when you want to ports to open relative to your needs . . . . sounds good in theroy at least . .
just to get back on subject

lastphaseofthis

iTrader: (8)

right now one of them is down and non operational and one is stuck open, causing bad flow, removing them is what i am going to do, i am not sure if i will use pineapples or just find another way to seal them, but what i want is to have them as if it was 6 port always , i decided on doing this after reading what you did with tapping the holes and putting in a matching bolt . thanks!

ddub

Interestingly I've seen one stock rx8 (US) on rx8club that dyno'd 196.7 after SAE correction, bone stock with like 900 miles on it. Makes me wonder how he was able to obtain this when all other stock rx8's can't :|

I also heard that the non-US versions were rated at 250, but there was a thread on rx8club awhile ago about that and some were saying it wasn't very different but they were unsure. Basically I couldn't get a straight answer from searching or talking to them.

ddub

For mine, and my "special" porting I have done, I have no sleeves at all anymore so pineapple sleeves wouldnt even work unless I put the stock ones back in (with the installed pineapple sleeves).

Tapping the holes and putting in a matching bolts (with a little RTV for security) may look ugly but it sure worked out well

Icemark

I wonder what flash he was using...

and remember dynos can easy be off by 10-15 HP. On one dyno done in San Rafeal my 'vert tops out at 160 HP, on the other one in Rohnert Park, it consisently hits 170-173 peaks.

ddub

Yah that was the interesting thing about this dyno. It was for the NW section of rx8club and they dyno'd in my city. It was actually a dyno day with I think like 7 or 8 rx8's, and his was the only stock one hitting that number heh.

According to him he had the N flash, most recent (US) one. Luckily I have this as well, but I don't know what I'm putting down, honestly I don't care much as long as my 1/4 mile times are normal =)

Icemark

Yeah I have been thinking Icemark Rotary & Electronics needs another rotary powered company car like an '8.

ddub

They're fun little cars, and have back seats that are functional

9k redlines are nice too

NZConvertible

You've just described the S5 6PI system. The actuators use air pump pressure from ECU-switched solenoid valves. You do not need an aftermarket ECU to replicate this, just an rpm switch.

mcnannay

but on the downside of the s5 setup, if you want to remove your air pump, or emissions equip. you lose your port activation. So you need to go completely electronic, ie solenoids and rpm switch.

Ive seen a few people with that setup

NZConvertible

Any solenoids used would have to be expensive industrial-spec items able to live right next to the exhuast manifold and withstand those temps for long periods. If you just use cheap solenoids they won't last long. It's easier just to use the free air pump and actuators you already have, which will have the bonus of being far more reliable.