non-sequential or sequential
 

non-sequential or sequential. i'am new to the world of FD i use to be a 5 year FC guy and i was just curious about this. should i go non-sequential? or stay sequential what are the ups and what are the downs?

Put your flame suit on..

In before "Search button is your friend".

Seriously though.
Sequential - better low end torque and an extra "kick" when the secondary comes on.
Non-Sequential - Significantly less complicated vacuum lines, less to go wrong, overall simpler set up.

lol


they're right, the search button is your bestest BFF!


on topic though, i like the sequential system because of it's complications, if you understand how it works thoroughly it is an incredible and ingenius system (for it's time) and it's not that difficult to repair as long as you know what you are doing

You have been on this board for four years. Did you not spot the Search button perhaps once in all that time?

Non sequential is like running a highly inefficient single because you're too lazy to learn and fix the sequential system when/if it malfunctions.

My vote (as it always is in these threads) is.....sequential.
And as Monkman points out....you just have to learn and understand the system to know how to fix it. Look at it this way: When I did my rebuild at around 94K miles, the sequential system was working perfectly. All I did was to (carefully!) take off all the old original hoses and replace them with Viton hoses. I checked out all the solenoids per one of the many well-documented procedures (they were all fine), put it all back on my new engine and it all STILL works like the factory intended. When it works correctly (and in my case at least that has been 100% of the time) it is an amazing system.

I've done the rich man's non-sequential, on a modded car I prefer it. I'm also planning on going single ASAP so non-seq is pretty much a band-aid for me. Less things to eliminate and less to go wrong/bake/break etc.

What's a rich man's non-seq? I think there is an easier way to go non-seq and then there is a more complicated way to do it, is that what you mean?

When you clean up the manifold, fill in the cracks, and port the wastegate. Done properly it can increase the response on nonsequential twins, with a proper exhaust you can almost match them.

Surfing car with rails
 

Same here, it was designed by Mazda engineers to maximise the potential of the rotary for racing around corners. My good friend just proved that point a few months ago, his was sequential and just pulled away from other FD's that were non-sequential or single turbo on winding roads.

The non-sequential FD could not spool up enough for taking the turns as a sequential nor could the single turbo that spin the tires from too much boost. My sequential FD was the only one keeping up with his 94 FD, doing over 50mph on sharp corners...was'nt sure of the exact speed, too busy looking ahead for the next turn...can't beat iit.

Honestly I've seen a thread with similar title at least 100 times now. Non-sequential works great with a ported manifold, full exhaust and light clutch. I would NEVER....in a million years...go back to the rat's nest and akward surging of sequential. It blows.

Well put.

^Sheer bullshit. More naysayers (who 9 times out of 10 have never driven a properly set-up non-sequential) need to take a ride in my car, I have full boost at 3400 and it's smooth as silk all the way to redline. I drove the car stock for five years so I'm quite familiar with the stock system and it's maze of solenoids. it sucks ass.

It's really Single or Sequential
NS has all the shorting comings of both and none the gains.

+1 for Sequential. More linear response and low end umph

Also incorrect. Non-sequential twins spin up a bit faster and generally produce a little more torque than a single at lower rpm, although a medium size single is also a great set-up.

The bottom line is: do you really want more stuff you have to fix/check/break on an FD? I like a clean engine bay, where I can actually see what I'm working on. All that sequential crap and all emissions stuff is GONE.

Sequential offers zero advantages over properly set-up non-seq...period....I'll be happy to race anyone on this forum with seq

footnote: the "search" function isn't working in the time slip and dyno section, but when it's back up, any doubters need to do a search for "spank dyno chart", that guy had 380 rwhp with about 320 ft-lbs on a non-sequential set-up, with a beautiful torque curve....don't try that with sequential, those dyno charts all look like shit!

Only in a parallel universe. (No pun intended.)

You really need to search. This is an absurd claim.

Don't take it personally, moconnor is right. All you need to do is compare the dyno charts of sequential and non-sequential motors. It's right there in black and white.

Learn to read, son, moconor is referring to single vs. non-sequential set-ups (and it's not an absurd claim). See my footnote in the previous post, no sequential motor can touch that. Heck, no sequential set-up can touch my car, either, both in terms of power delivery and peak power (I'm at 370).

I've been on and off this forum since 2000. I've heard this argument right, left, up, down, and sideways. I'm right....and my challenge stands.

Garfinkle welded and hogged out manifold which flows much better than stock. Mine is also ceramic coated. I also have a modded y-pipe and IC tubing with the BOV relocated. It's all in the set-up.

Exactly.

Once again, this debate stems from ignorance. Most noobs have never driven a properly set-up non-seq, so they are speculating based on hearsay. There is no "lag" in my car whatsoever. The boost is there immediately above 3k rpm.

^just because someone has not driven a "proper" non seq. set doesn't mean they are a noob at all.......

that aside, I say go sequential, because you can also simplify/delete a lot of things under the hood to help diagnose and make problem solving easier
e.g.

Go from this
http://www.turborx7.com/images/Techn...e_diagram2.jpg
to this
http://www.turborx7.com/images/turbo...simplified.jpg

plus I have driven both proper non sequential and seqential and I prefer the sequential because you get up and go instantly and once you understand the system its much easier to diagnose and fix problems

Nearly all of the difference between these two diagrams is explained by the removal of emissions solenoids and hoses, which have nothing to do with sequential or non sequential operation.

The simplification argument I have never understood because the difference in the number of components is not as dramatic as people think.

^hmm that came out wrong lemme edit it

thank everyone.. I guess I'm going to try none for a little then i'll go over to single