Hi Guys,

Anyone know what the difference is between these two thermal pellets?



Are the interchangeable without any modifications?

 

Yes. It's been awhile, but on the left appears to be the stock thermopellet. IIRC it reduces oil flow to eshaft squirters to aid warm up on cold start. It can fail in the closed position. The Atkins plug simply replaces and eliminates that small risk...and I think you'll see some increase in indicated pressure. But there are certain critical steps that need to be take when you do it so the thrust bearing and washer doesn't fall out of position and get damaged when you tighten down the front hub bolt.

 

Pretty straight forward:

https://www.atkinsrotary.com/store/8...let-ARE50.html

 

I'm not a fan of this mod and have posted a thread about it before https://www.rx7club.com/3rd-generati...tupid-1017656/ . Buy a new thermal pellet from Mazda when the engine is rebuilt. Potential failure point eliminated. There is no need to delete the oil squirter thermostat. These cars have bad enough fuel economy,HVAC comfort, and oil dilution. delaying warm up accomplishes nothing except save $50.

 

I'd agree. I've only ever used them on true race engines (e-prod, GT3).

 

Sorry arghx. I read everything you post closely but disagree with ya here. There is no downside installing the plug. It increases oil pressure and probably even allows it to reach max pressure slightly quicker on cold start. Both are good things. Don't know anyone who has measured it before and after, but it probably extends the time to full warm up only slightly. As I said in that thread linked above, I wouldn't recommend the OP or anyone else screw with it while the engine's in the car. But if it's out for other work, why not? The plug is $8. Sometimes free if you buy something else from them. And free with no downside vs. $50 or $60 for a new stock thermopellet is not stupid.

 

I installed this one not long ago

 

But there is a downside, as arghx stated:

 

Hey, not everyone is going to agree with me, it's all good.

I don't know the real world difference of warming from just deleting the thermal pellet. But i put it in the category of runnjng aftermarket oil coolers with no thermostats, and a low temperature coolant thermostat, and even manual fan switches. They're unnecessary impacts to the driveability of the car.

also, I don't agree that higher oil pressure than what Mazda designed is automatically better. More oil pressure means more friction, which means lower fuel efficiency and lower power in that condition. That's why new cars have for example have two mode oil pumps that only go into high oil pressure at heavy engine load.

 

Those downsides either don't exist IMO, or are insignificant when compared to the upsides.
Seems like the thermopellet was another one of those wonderful engineering gifts that would have never been put on the car if it wasn't for CARB concerns. It was designed to work with those other wonderful things...like a pre-cat and AWS.

And getting back to the OP, the thermopellet isn't something that I'd bother to mess with while the engine is in the car.

 

I'm currently rebuilding my engine. If the atkins thermal pellet does allow for oil to travel to the rotors during start up and also gets rid of the change of a stuck pellet then im all for it. My only grip now is that my OE mazda pellet is in really good condition and doesn't need to be swapped...

Is the install pretty much the same? Just the pellet and the spring right?

 

Yes.