Stock boost pressure
02-05-07, 04:46 PM
#4
I'm a boost creep...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by Loki101
The stock boost should be around 5.5
Stock boost is 6.6psi for S4 and 8.3psi for S5. How much boost you get 20-odd years after the car left the factory depends on what's broken and what's been replaced.
02-05-07, 08:11 PM
#6
Originally Posted by Beto Dan
New to rx7s.... wats the stock boost pressure my 88 Turbo 2 should be runnin(stock)
I get 6psi on my s4 with a free flow 3inch and ported wastegate, which is *around* what the wastegate spring is rated at (or at least that is what I think it's rated at).
02-05-07, 10:11 PM
#7
I'm a boost creep...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by fossil_484
I get 6psi on my s4 with a free flow 3inch and ported wastegate, which is *around* what the wastegate spring is rated at (or at least that is what I think it's rated at).
Trending Topics
02-06-07, 08:46 AM
#9
Guess someone needs to talk to the TEAMFC3S people then:
What was NZC's source for the numbers?
Upgrading Steps
These aren't the absolutes but after many hours on the phone with "rotary experts", these are the rough guidelines I've found to be generally true.
Exhaust Intake Fuel System Intercooler Turbo
Often, people turn up their boost to net more power. This can give you slightly more power but there are points when you need to upgrade before you can get anymore power.
5.5psi Stock Boost for 1987-1988 Turbo II (6.2psi max peak)
7.5psi Stock Boost for 1989-1991 Turbo II (8.6psi max peak)
The stock ECU will cut off fuel above 8.6psi. Once that is taken care, there are some guidelines to follow when turning up the boost.
8-10psi -- ECU/Fuel System 12psi -- Intercooler/Turbo 15psi -- Engine
Remember, these numbers are not EXACT
These aren't the absolutes but after many hours on the phone with "rotary experts", these are the rough guidelines I've found to be generally true.
Exhaust Intake Fuel System Intercooler Turbo
Often, people turn up their boost to net more power. This can give you slightly more power but there are points when you need to upgrade before you can get anymore power.
5.5psi Stock Boost for 1987-1988 Turbo II (6.2psi max peak)
7.5psi Stock Boost for 1989-1991 Turbo II (8.6psi max peak)
The stock ECU will cut off fuel above 8.6psi. Once that is taken care, there are some guidelines to follow when turning up the boost.
8-10psi -- ECU/Fuel System 12psi -- Intercooler/Turbo 15psi -- Engine
Remember, these numbers are not EXACT
02-07-07, 02:15 AM
#12
I'm a boost creep...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by J-Rat
5.5psi Stock Boost for 1987-1988 Turbo II (6.2psi max peak)
7.5psi Stock Boost for 1989-1991 Turbo II (8.6psi max peak)
7.5psi Stock Boost for 1989-1991 Turbo II (8.6psi max peak)
What was NZC's source for the numbers?
89 FSM page F2-9: "Boost pressure 57.0kPa (8.25psi)"
(I rounded up.
)Not that these figures really mean much on a 20yo modified car. A big exhaust will make it go up, porting the wastegate will make it go down, a split wastegate hose will make it go up, a worn turbo or clogged cat will make it go down, etc, etc.
02-07-07, 05:10 AM
#14
I'm a boost creep...
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Posts: 15,608
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
Originally Posted by Karack
don't mind NZ, he has a lot of time on his hands...
02-07-07, 08:42 AM
#15
Originally Posted by NZConvertible
Not only are these numbers slightly wrong, they're also confusing. They should state that the lower figure is what boost dropped to by redline after achieving the "max" figure in the mid-range. When people ask what "stock boost" was, I assume they want to know how high it got, not what it was at redline.
88 FSM page 4B-9: "Boost pressure 45.2kPa (6.56psi)"
89 FSM page F2-9: "Boost pressure 57.0kPa (8.25psi)"
(I rounded up.)
Not that these figures really mean much on a 20yo modified car. A big exhaust will make it go up, porting the wastegate will make it go down, a split wastegate hose will make it go up, a worn turbo or clogged cat will make it go down, etc, etc.
88 FSM page 4B-9: "Boost pressure 45.2kPa (6.56psi)"
89 FSM page F2-9: "Boost pressure 57.0kPa (8.25psi)"
(I rounded up.
)Not that these figures really mean much on a 20yo modified car. A big exhaust will make it go up, porting the wastegate will make it go down, a split wastegate hose will make it go up, a worn turbo or clogged cat will make it go down, etc, etc.
Rat
02-07-07, 08:43 AM
#16
Originally Posted by Karack
don't mind NZ, he has a lot of time on his hands and likes making people feel small over the most petty of differences. then again i do sometimes too but only if the time seems appropriate.
Rat
02-07-07, 10:42 AM
#17
HAILERS
Join Date: May 2001
Location: FORT WORTH, TEXAS,USA
Posts: 20,563
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes
on
19 Posts
Originally Posted by J-Rat
he didnt make me feel small! He answered the questions I had! Those numbers I put up were from another site, not mine. Plus I wanted his source for the numbers so I dont just go around repeating what I heard.
Rat
Rat
02-07-07, 05:25 PM
#22
Post count aside, a technical forum needs to have the correct technical information. The by guess/by golly info doesn't really count, particularly when it involves info that can be critical to engine operation and long term preservation/maintinance.
Members should have more respect and gratitude for members like NZ that are willing to provide said correct info, instead of bagging on them. This is the biggest reason I spend most of my time in the 1st gen section and have earned a good deal of respect there for providing correct info.
Members should have more respect and gratitude for members like NZ that are willing to provide said correct info, instead of bagging on them. This is the biggest reason I spend most of my time in the 1st gen section and have earned a good deal of respect there for providing correct info.
02-07-07, 05:35 PM
#23
Originally Posted by trochoid
Post count aside, a technical forum needs to have the correct technical information. The by guess/by golly info doesn't really count, particularly when it involves info that can be critical to engine operation and long term preservation/maintinance.
Members should have more respect and gratitude for members like NZ that are willing to provide said correct info, instead of bagging on them. This is the biggest reason I spend most of my time in the 1st gen section and have earned a good deal of respect there for providing correct info.
Members should have more respect and gratitude for members like NZ that are willing to provide said correct info, instead of bagging on them. This is the biggest reason I spend most of my time in the 1st gen section and have earned a good deal of respect there for providing correct info.
He also asked this:
Why does this BS keep getting repeated again and again.
In this thread, I was in NO WAY stating his information was incorrect. I asked a source, and showed him where the misinformation may be coming from. He responded with his source.
I am happy now!
02-08-07, 07:19 AM
#24
Junior Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ha to think I started this..? I'm sorry for reading up and trying to help some one out. Thanks J-rat...At least there are people that understand that people can be wrong from reading WRONG information that was believed to be true. oh BTW..I got my info from Aaron Cakes website. http://aaroncake.net/RX-7/buy2.htm