weight stamps, teflon and a frankenstein motor .....
02-28-06, 01:03 AM
#1
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Alton, Godfrey, & Macomb IL
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
weight stamps, teflon and a frankenstein motor .....
Okay, to start off, the engine that I bought from a local guy from the boards to do my turbo swap ended up having no compression after I let the project sit for a few months. The motor supposedly had ~125psi on all faces when sold by Rotary Resurrection to said local guy. It was not built by Kevin, just ended up in his hands somehow. I figured that the lack of compression was just carbon lock. I was right... apex seals took me 30 min to remove and the side seals are still cemented in after washing the rotors twice already. This motor has definately been rebuild in its past.. the housings are immaculate and the tensioning bolts all have red-ish paint on them.
Now we get to the strange part. I had read somewhere that all turbo rotors, or at least most, have a teflon coating to help keep the heat down. Only one of these had that coating on it (feels like thin plastic lines going laterally down the rotor face). I then looked at the weight stamps. One was a "C" weight and the other was a "C" with an "E" over it, so it looks kind of like this: "€". Then I got to looking at the combustion chambers, I am officially stumped as to why someone would actually build a motor with these rotors.
One pic is to show off my housings... the other is to show you what I am dealing with here.
Also, this post is not complaining about Landers or RR... I know it is a good business.
What are these rotors from? They dont match at all. How long would this engine technically last with two completely different rotors?
Now we get to the strange part. I had read somewhere that all turbo rotors, or at least most, have a teflon coating to help keep the heat down. Only one of these had that coating on it (feels like thin plastic lines going laterally down the rotor face). I then looked at the weight stamps. One was a "C" weight and the other was a "C" with an "E" over it, so it looks kind of like this: "€". Then I got to looking at the combustion chambers, I am officially stumped as to why someone would actually build a motor with these rotors.
One pic is to show off my housings... the other is to show you what I am dealing with here.
Also, this post is not complaining about Landers or RR... I know it is a good business.
What are these rotors from? They dont match at all. How long would this engine technically last with two completely different rotors?
Last edited by BigMike85; 02-28-06 at 01:12 AM.
02-28-06, 01:08 AM
#3
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Alton, Godfrey, & Macomb IL
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nicest I have ever seen in person 
No chipping, no dents, not even any spots worn much at all.
No chipping, no dents, not even any spots worn much at all.
Last edited by BigMike85; 02-28-06 at 01:14 AM.
02-28-06, 01:14 AM
#5
Law Breaker
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: S.F. Bay Area, California 510
Posts: 3,333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
weight the rotors to see if they're the same, don't look like it and doesn't sound like it.
http://www.mazdatrix.com/r-rtrwgt.htm
http://www.mazdatrix.com/r-rtrwgt.htm
Trending Topics
02-28-06, 01:29 AM
#8
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: California, Bay Area
Posts: 1,165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
afaik no rotors had a teflon coating ever, you may be confused with the ptfe coating all FC housings got to aid break-in (FD's switched to a graphite coating)
The rotors are definatly s4 or later as they lack the CNC marks. The frist rotor may just be a poor cast or something, as the combustion depressions are suppost to be symetrical and that one appears not to be. Weigh the rotors.
The rotors are definatly s4 or later as they lack the CNC marks. The frist rotor may just be a poor cast or something, as the combustion depressions are suppost to be symetrical and that one appears not to be. Weigh the rotors.
02-28-06, 01:35 AM
#9
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Alton, Godfrey, & Macomb IL
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I weighed the rotors on a scale like you might find in a gym or doctors office. The one on the right was about 10.25, and the one on the left was about 10.50. I can try going to UPS tomorrow and using their digi scale.
Back to the teflon thing, I really dont know where I heard about it. I remember someone saying to be careful when cleaning turbo rotor faces as you can take off the coating... The one on the right definately isnt smooth metal, when you rub your fingernail across it you can hear it going over tiny ridges at regular intervals... you can feel them too.
Back to the teflon thing, I really dont know where I heard about it. I remember someone saying to be careful when cleaning turbo rotor faces as you can take off the coating... The one on the right definately isnt smooth metal, when you rub your fingernail across it you can hear it going over tiny ridges at regular intervals... you can feel them too.
02-28-06, 06:30 AM
#11
Lives on the Forum
Originally Posted by BigMike85
Now we get to the strange part. I had read somewhere that all turbo rotors, or at least most, have a teflon coating to help keep the heat down. Only one of these had that coating on it (feels like thin plastic lines going laterally down the rotor face). I then looked at the weight stamps. One was a "C" weight and the other was a "C" with an "E" over it, so it looks kind of like this: "€". Then I got to looking at the combustion chambers, I am officially stumped as to why someone would actually build a motor with these rotors.
I think you're looking at the Japanese katakana "YO", which looks like a backwards "E".
-Ted
02-28-06, 12:32 PM
#14
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Alton, Godfrey, & Macomb IL
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by RETed
Look again for a "B", "C", or "D" stamp somewhere else.
I think you're looking at the Japanese katakana "YO", which looks like a backwards "E".
-Ted
I think you're looking at the Japanese katakana "YO", which looks like a backwards "E".
-Ted
02-28-06, 02:06 PM
#15
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Alton, Godfrey, & Macomb IL
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, my digi cam cant take very good close ups, so I did a rubbing of the marks on my rotors and scanned them. Sorry for the crappy MS Paint work I did.
02-28-06, 06:07 PM
#16
Red Pill Dealer
iTrader: (10)
The rotors in my NA looked just like that. One smooth, and one rough. After I got the rotor gears out, I placed one on top of the other so the sides were flat against each other. No matter how I shifted the two, aligning with my fingers, it felt like the rough one was ever so slightly smaller. Maybe a few thousandths.
I wonder if Mazda may have used rotors rough machined to much to go thruogh the finish machining operation? After all, they're so close.
The teflon coating on factory rotors is on the side. Between the side seal and the edge of the rotor face. Possibly only S5? I'm not sure.
I wonder if Mazda may have used rotors rough machined to much to go thruogh the finish machining operation? After all, they're so close.
The teflon coating on factory rotors is on the side. Between the side seal and the edge of the rotor face. Possibly only S5? I'm not sure.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post