S5 n/a bridgeport
07-31-15, 08:31 PM
#1
S5 n/a bridgeport
Have a 1989 FC convertible. 6 port N/A 13b. The coolant seals failed finally at 200,000 miles. I'm rebuilding it and I wanted to Bridgeport it but I'm on a budget. Can you run a Bridgeport with stock ecu? At least until I can find a cheap power FC. I researched and couldn't find much on this
07-31-15, 10:55 PM
#2
I've done it with a 1/3 Bridge port (5th&6th ports bridged) and it ran pretty bad ***... You can manually advance the timing with the CAS, and probably use T2 secondarys. You might also thing about getting an adjustable FRP so you can crank up the fuel pressure if it's running lean.
You might even need t2 primaires to make it idle and cruse right... I didn't need them with my 1/3bp though.
Id at least get a wideband so you'll know whats going on.
You might even need t2 primaires to make it idle and cruse right... I didn't need them with my 1/3bp though.
Id at least get a wideband so you'll know whats going on.
08-01-15, 09:12 AM
#4
aint that the truth, and also if you gotta ask.... well this is also a situation where if you don't know then it's probably not a good idea.
if you've never built an engine before and doing a bridge as your first, well i will just say: don't. you also need to know how to tune an engine assuming you manage to build the engine properly.
if you've never built an engine before and doing a bridge as your first, well i will just say: don't. you also need to know how to tune an engine assuming you manage to build the engine properly.
08-01-15, 09:21 AM
#5
Yes I have built An engine before. I also know how to do a Bridgeport and tune it. I've just always seem it done with aftermarket ECUs and wondered if I could do it with a stock ecu
08-01-15, 10:27 AM
#6
S5 n/a bridgeport
Not gracefully, a bridgeport will need more fuel, especially in the higher RPMs and the stock ECU won't handle bigger injectors, it will fire them, but it won't be able to compensate for the extra fuel they are dumping
You would fight a losing battle of rich on the lo end, and lean on the high end, or vice versa, or a combination
Either way equals boom boom engine
You would fight a losing battle of rich on the lo end, and lean on the high end, or vice versa, or a combination
Either way equals boom boom engine
08-01-15, 10:31 AM
#7
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
Will it run with the stock ECU?
Yes.
Will it run well?
No.
Why would anyone want a Bridgeport on a 'Vert?
Honestly, unless the car is being built for the track or you have some other wild reason for wanting to Bridgeport it, just street port it and be happy.
Unless you upgrade EVERYTHING around the engine to support the Bridgeport, all the stock stuff is going to hold you back and what you'll end up with is an engine that only makes a bit more power than a street port in the high RPM range, but gets 8MPG and is difficult to tune.
Having been forced to do a large Bridgeport on a 6 port engine with the stock manifolds, I can only describe the result as "crappy", "waste of time", "ruining a set of irons" and "utterly pointless".
Yes.
Will it run well?
No.
Why would anyone want a Bridgeport on a 'Vert?
Honestly, unless the car is being built for the track or you have some other wild reason for wanting to Bridgeport it, just street port it and be happy.
Unless you upgrade EVERYTHING around the engine to support the Bridgeport, all the stock stuff is going to hold you back and what you'll end up with is an engine that only makes a bit more power than a street port in the high RPM range, but gets 8MPG and is difficult to tune.
Having been forced to do a large Bridgeport on a 6 port engine with the stock manifolds, I can only describe the result as "crappy", "waste of time", "ruining a set of irons" and "utterly pointless".
Trending Topics
08-01-15, 11:51 AM
#8
I find only noobs want bridgeports these days. If you want real power, go with forced induction and get rid of the 6 port concept all together. Get a T2 based setup and do all the work to swap it in to your vert.
A little history: Bridgeports are a compromise port. They were a result of peripheral ports being outlawed in racing classes back in the '70s. Noobs hear about bridgeports from their buddies and now these days they check out videos and fall in love with the noise, the brap. So they obviously want this in their car. Having never actually driven one, doesn't help.
Noobs get these ports done to their street vehicle and then change/sell/trade it later when they find out that their grocery getter is the car they drive more often. They suck on the street where low end torque is good to have. Harder to tune than a regular side port. Need a lot more supporting hardware that costs you money. Super free flowing exhaust that must be extremely loud (illegal) because bridgeport don't tolerate any restrictions. I could go on.
Now if you're racing where p-ports are banned but bridgeports aren't, they make sense. Otherwise, they don't.
I suppose you will do what you will do. Those of us who build engines have warned you. Good luck with your build.
A little history: Bridgeports are a compromise port. They were a result of peripheral ports being outlawed in racing classes back in the '70s. Noobs hear about bridgeports from their buddies and now these days they check out videos and fall in love with the noise, the brap. So they obviously want this in their car. Having never actually driven one, doesn't help.
Noobs get these ports done to their street vehicle and then change/sell/trade it later when they find out that their grocery getter is the car they drive more often. They suck on the street where low end torque is good to have. Harder to tune than a regular side port. Need a lot more supporting hardware that costs you money. Super free flowing exhaust that must be extremely loud (illegal) because bridgeport don't tolerate any restrictions. I could go on.
Now if you're racing where p-ports are banned but bridgeports aren't, they make sense. Otherwise, they don't.
I suppose you will do what you will do. Those of us who build engines have warned you. Good luck with your build.
Last edited by Jeff20B; 08-01-15 at 11:53 AM.
08-01-15, 01:26 PM
#9
it is about the noise but i have customers who have had me build up to 3 bridged engines for their cars(for a single person), and they are daily driven for the most part.
but of course for the 4th he built a PP motor and it was the most noticable change.
but of course for the 4th he built a PP motor and it was the most noticable change.
08-02-15, 10:18 AM
#10
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
Bridgeports these days are for the "fun" factor. In a roundabout way, a bit like the crazy hot rod people who turn a perfect 55 Chevy into a totally useless "gasser".
Well, maybe not that extreme. But bridgeporting an NA engine for street use is a little silly. The only way to take advantage of those ports is to make the engine fundamentally unstreetable.
Now that said I have thoroughly enjoyed my bridgeported 6 port (but big turbo of course) the entire time with the exception of the damn fuel consumption. Even sadly had the opportunity to change it twice as the engine had to come apart and elected to keep it the same. But I'd never recommend to someone to follow any sort of bridgepored 6 port path if they have to ask whether the stock ECU would work with it.
Maybe I'm growing up, but as fun as my FC is with a powerband above 3500-4000RPM, there's a reason I built my Cosmo engine with practically no porting, functional aux ports, and put a tiny turbo on it. Power in the low - mid range where 99.9% of driving takes place, and minimal overlap for fuel economy.
Well, maybe not that extreme. But bridgeporting an NA engine for street use is a little silly. The only way to take advantage of those ports is to make the engine fundamentally unstreetable.
Now that said I have thoroughly enjoyed my bridgeported 6 port (but big turbo of course) the entire time with the exception of the damn fuel consumption. Even sadly had the opportunity to change it twice as the engine had to come apart and elected to keep it the same. But I'd never recommend to someone to follow any sort of bridgepored 6 port path if they have to ask whether the stock ECU would work with it.
Maybe I'm growing up, but as fun as my FC is with a powerband above 3500-4000RPM, there's a reason I built my Cosmo engine with practically no porting, functional aux ports, and put a tiny turbo on it. Power in the low - mid range where 99.9% of driving takes place, and minimal overlap for fuel economy.
08-02-15, 01:25 PM
#11
i've never built a bridged engine for any of my cars, turbo included and i don't think i ever will.
for the sound, the mileage hit isn't worth it let alone the herky jerky.
a proper street port performs equally as well without the mpg hit or streetability issues.
for the sound, the mileage hit isn't worth it let alone the herky jerky.
a proper street port performs equally as well without the mpg hit or streetability issues.
08-02-15, 01:36 PM
#12
See, my thing is I want to make power without forced induction. It's not about the noise ( I honestly find the idle quite annoying after while ) I have drove a Bridgeported rx7. Low end sucks. That's true. This car is not my daily. But I do drive it around town regularly. I planned on doing a turbo swap but I can't find one. There are no rotary shops in Alabama. If a street port will make similar power then I'll go with that. On to my next question. What ecu do you guys run for a street port? I looked at power FCs and haltechs. I heard a few bad things about adaptronic though
08-02-15, 01:46 PM
#13
See, my thing is I want to make power without forced induction. It's not about the noise ( I honestly find the idle quite annoying after while ) I have drove a Bridgeported rx7. Low end sucks. That's true. This car is not my daily. But I do drive it around town regularly. I planned on doing a turbo swap but I can't find one. There are no rotary shops in Alabama. If a street port will make similar power then I'll go with that. On to my next question. What ecu do you guys run for a street port? I looked at power FCs and haltechs. I heard a few bad things about adaptronic though
you need to do more research or are listening to the wrong people.
removing the exhaust diffusers and porting the exhaust alone will technically maximize the n/a engine to the intake manifold's potential power limit. the non turbo auxiliary intake ports are already technically too large as it is, the primaries can be ported for a little more mid and and top end at the sacrifice of bottom end.
beyond that, bridged or not the intake is going to limit you to about 185whp. if you want to make more then you would be better served with a carbureted intake manifold, 4 port irons and bridging that.
but if you really want to make any decent power naturally aspirated you have 2 choices.
nitrous
peripheral port
if you think you will make anything near 300whp with a bridged 6 port, subtract give or take 100.
Last edited by RotaryEvolution; 08-02-15 at 01:49 PM.
08-02-15, 02:53 PM
#14
I have been driving a big turbo bridgeport 4ever and is bad but not that much.Is a little jerky..... that is truth,gas mileage is not the best,i smell like exhaust fumes and fuel everytime that i drive it and is loud as **** but thas about it.It starts right and it runs great.Low end torque sucks but the top end is stupid.Is like a bike it just keep pulling but again this is on a big turbo with supporting mods not NA.
Last edited by joeylyrech; 08-02-15 at 02:55 PM.
08-02-15, 03:02 PM
#15
In fact i got so used to the low end no torque situation and the not stop pulling at high rpms than when i get on my mazdaspeed protege with a big turbo i feel weird cause all the low end pulling and then i feel like it hits a wall at high rpms but is cause im used 2 the bridgeport.lol
08-03-15, 01:41 AM
#16
Information Regurgitator
removing the exhaust diffusers and porting the exhaust alone will technically maximize the n/a engine to the intake manifold's potential power limit. the non turbo auxiliary intake ports are already technically too large as it is, the primaries can be ported for a little more mid and and top end at the sacrifice of bottom end.
beyond that, bridged or not the intake is going to limit you to about 185whp. if you want to make more then you would be better served with a carbureted intake manifold, 4 port irons and bridging that.
beyond that, bridged or not the intake is going to limit you to about 185whp. if you want to make more then you would be better served with a carbureted intake manifold, 4 port irons and bridging that.
08-03-15, 09:12 AM
#17
See, my thing is I want to make power without forced induction. It's not about the noise ( I honestly find the idle quite annoying after while ) I have drove a Bridgeported rx7. Low end sucks. That's true. This car is not my daily. But I do drive it around town regularly. I planned on doing a turbo swap but I can't find one. There are no rotary shops in Alabama. If a street port will make similar power then I'll go with that. On to my next question. What ecu do you guys run for a street port? I looked at power FCs and haltechs. I heard a few bad things about adaptronic though
08-03-15, 09:22 AM
#18
personally i would give up on the idea of n/a power. it's going to cost you as much to make 250whp as it would cost you to make 500whp with a turbo.
it's your goals and your money, but i have the same difficulty trying to beat it into RX8 owner's brains that they can't make power with that pile of n/a ****. hell, if you want to make 200whp just drop a renesis in, but don't expect much more out of that engine either. the renny at least has a very broad power band for a non turbo engine compared to an early 13B, meaning it may not make much more power but it is a bit faster. the renny is however the least reliable rotary engine since the 6mm carbon seal engines back in the early 70's and late 60's, my turbo engine making twice the power outlasted most typical early 13B-MSP engines.
it's your goals and your money, but i have the same difficulty trying to beat it into RX8 owner's brains that they can't make power with that pile of n/a ****. hell, if you want to make 200whp just drop a renesis in, but don't expect much more out of that engine either. the renny at least has a very broad power band for a non turbo engine compared to an early 13B, meaning it may not make much more power but it is a bit faster. the renny is however the least reliable rotary engine since the 6mm carbon seal engines back in the early 70's and late 60's, my turbo engine making twice the power outlasted most typical early 13B-MSP engines.
Last edited by RotaryEvolution; 08-03-15 at 09:29 AM.
08-03-15, 10:03 AM
#19
Engine, Not Motor
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: London, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 29,789
Likes: 0
Received 108 Likes
on
91 Posts
Making NA power on the older 13B is just too full of compromises. With a street port and a good tune w/basic upgrades, 180HP or so as stated is about the limit. Which is over 200HP at the engine, so all things considered, not too bad. "Good tune" means a standalone.
13BT with a stock ECU/tune swapped into that chassis makes 180HP out of the box with a far better powerband. And it less work...a lot less work.
One "hears bad things" about every standalone out there. Primarily from someone who bought the thing without a damn clue how to use it.
Person buys standalone, poorly wires it in, and then spends months or years banging their head against the wall trying to tune the thing without the knowledge to do so. Then they declare "Haltech/Microtech/Adaptronic/Megasquirt/Link sucks!" on some forum. The worst part is at that point they may finally turn to a professional, who installs their favourite brand of ECU, tunes the car, and it runs well. Thus reinforcing the ".....some ECU sucks" mentality.
If you really want to make some NA power, then peripheral port is the way to do it. Better idle characteristics than the bridge, better fuel economy, and better powerband with more peak HP. Only thing there is the fabrication. Housings, manifold, header, standalone. And like a Bridgeport it takes some effort to keep it quiet.
My bridgeported FC is fairly quiet. In fact, it's far quieter than most NA FCs running around making 25% the power. Two resonators, two mufflers. Chosen over many years of experience to mellow and quiet the sound. Almost all of the herky-jerky (we call it "pig rooting" around these parts
) can be tuned away with almost any standalone (even a crappy old Microtech).
13BT with a stock ECU/tune swapped into that chassis makes 180HP out of the box with a far better powerband. And it less work...a lot less work.
One "hears bad things" about every standalone out there. Primarily from someone who bought the thing without a damn clue how to use it.
Person buys standalone, poorly wires it in, and then spends months or years banging their head against the wall trying to tune the thing without the knowledge to do so. Then they declare "Haltech/Microtech/Adaptronic/Megasquirt/Link sucks!" on some forum. The worst part is at that point they may finally turn to a professional, who installs their favourite brand of ECU, tunes the car, and it runs well. Thus reinforcing the ".....some ECU sucks" mentality.If you really want to make some NA power, then peripheral port is the way to do it. Better idle characteristics than the bridge, better fuel economy, and better powerband with more peak HP. Only thing there is the fabrication. Housings, manifold, header, standalone. And like a Bridgeport it takes some effort to keep it quiet.
My bridgeported FC is fairly quiet. In fact, it's far quieter than most NA FCs running around making 25% the power. Two resonators, two mufflers. Chosen over many years of experience to mellow and quiet the sound. Almost all of the herky-jerky (we call it "pig rooting" around these parts
) can be tuned away with almost any standalone (even a crappy old Microtech).
08-03-15, 03:55 PM
#20
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,832
Received 2,602 Likes
on
1,846 Posts
i find the "fun factor" is more in the shape of the power curve than the height of the power curve, although response is a big factor too.
examples: my last t2, was just an S4 with an S5 turbo, and Rb exhaust. over about 2500rpm, the throttle response was really linear, and it was really fun to drive even though it probably only made ~200rwhp.
example 2; same T2, i put a cat on it, and peak power was about the same, but the response was gone, and basically stopped driving it, and sold it, because it wasn't any fun anymore.
example 3, my current FC, is really only fun when the turbo is spooling, it his ~1psi by 2400, and 13psi at 3200, and its really fun. its like a wet noodle everywhere else
example 4; possibly the most relevant, is a P port 12A in a 1st gen. the car is light, so response is immediate, butt dyno says it out powers the car in #3 from idle up to redline, best car i've ever built. its like a labrador puppy, it just wants to run. streetable, but not sure it would be very happy stuck behind all the muggles in their toyotas
examples: my last t2, was just an S4 with an S5 turbo, and Rb exhaust. over about 2500rpm, the throttle response was really linear, and it was really fun to drive even though it probably only made ~200rwhp.
example 2; same T2, i put a cat on it, and peak power was about the same, but the response was gone, and basically stopped driving it, and sold it, because it wasn't any fun anymore.
example 3, my current FC, is really only fun when the turbo is spooling, it his ~1psi by 2400, and 13psi at 3200, and its really fun. its like a wet noodle everywhere else
example 4; possibly the most relevant, is a P port 12A in a 1st gen. the car is light, so response is immediate, butt dyno says it out powers the car in #3 from idle up to redline, best car i've ever built. its like a labrador puppy, it just wants to run. streetable, but not sure it would be very happy stuck behind all the muggles in their toyotas
Last edited by j9fd3s; 08-03-15 at 03:59 PM.
08-04-15, 09:52 AM
#21
Information Regurgitator
personally i would give up on the idea of n/a power. it's going to cost you as much to make 250whp as it would cost you to make 500whp with a turbo.
it's your goals and your money, but i have the same difficulty trying to beat it into RX8 owner's brains that they can't make power with that pile of n/a ****. hell, if you want to make 200whp just drop a renesis in, but don't expect much more out of that engine either. the renny at least has a very broad power band for a non turbo engine compared to an early 13B, meaning it may not make much more power but it is a bit faster. the renny is however the least reliable rotary engine since the 6mm carbon seal engines back in the early 70's and late 60's, my turbo engine making twice the power outlasted most typical early 13B-MSP engines.
it's your goals and your money, but i have the same difficulty trying to beat it into RX8 owner's brains that they can't make power with that pile of n/a ****. hell, if you want to make 200whp just drop a renesis in, but don't expect much more out of that engine either. the renny at least has a very broad power band for a non turbo engine compared to an early 13B, meaning it may not make much more power but it is a bit faster. the renny is however the least reliable rotary engine since the 6mm carbon seal engines back in the early 70's and late 60's, my turbo engine making twice the power outlasted most typical early 13B-MSP engines.
Making NA power on the older 13B is just too full of compromises. With a street port and a good tune w/basic upgrades, 180HP or so as stated is about the limit. Which is over 200HP at the engine, so all things considered, not too bad. "Good tune" means a standalone.
13BT with a stock ECU/tune swapped into that chassis makes 180HP out of the box with a far better powerband. And it less work...a lot less work.
13BT with a stock ECU/tune swapped into that chassis makes 180HP out of the box with a far better powerband. And it less work...a lot less work.
08-04-15, 10:07 AM
#22
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,832
Received 2,602 Likes
on
1,846 Posts
here is a fun one. i ran across this ad in a Japanese Rx7 magazine, posted it on facebook, and then the guy who built the car posted the dyno sheet.
full bridge 6 port (they had to import irons) with a T88 turbo kit....
full bridge 6 port (they had to import irons) with a T88 turbo kit....
08-04-15, 10:49 AM
#23
the ironic part is that it probably would have made the same power or even more on a 4 port.
but everyone has to try things for themself. i wouldn't bother with a turbo 6 port unless all my turbo parts were gone. if you have a 6 port engine and not a turbo one but you want to turbocharge the engine then i can see a compromise.
Last edited by RotaryEvolution; 08-04-15 at 10:51 AM.
08-04-15, 11:29 AM
#24
Information Regurgitator
I would have liked to have swapped to a 13b-re and did a n/a build like RedRx I think it was when I built this engine. He hit 230whp all motor(tuned by Defined Autoworks I believe). The money wasn't there to buy the jspec engine and rebuild it plus a standalone to run it and other misc. stuff to get it in the FC chassis so I'm stuck with the 6port.
Last edited by Dak; 08-04-15 at 11:37 AM.
08-04-15, 12:55 PM
#25
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,832
Received 2,602 Likes
on
1,846 Posts
the ironic part is that it probably would have made the same power or even more on a 4 port.
but everyone has to try things for themself. i wouldn't bother with a turbo 6 port unless all my turbo parts were gone. if you have a 6 port engine and not a turbo one but you want to turbocharge the engine then i can see a compromise.
but everyone has to try things for themself. i wouldn't bother with a turbo 6 port unless all my turbo parts were gone. if you have a 6 port engine and not a turbo one but you want to turbocharge the engine then i can see a compromise.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
LongDuck
1st Generation Specific (1979-1985)
12
10-07-15 08:12 PM