And I gave you two possible explanations for why that was the case. Hell, they could have both had 27 lb. wheels too for all I know. I still don't believe that your 2 examples are the "norm" and that my 4 personal and 3+ vicarious examples were "flukes".

True, but this isn't a feat of master-level tuning plus a "Wednesday" engine and "Wednesday" turbos we're talking about. I'll bet I could take any FD in the Seattle area and reproduce the results just by setting it up the same as my car was.

 

Will you two just get off your soapboxes. You are arguing a mute point and I personally think that it is useless. You aren't going to convince eachother to change views and you have already made your points to those of us who were considering it.
Getting back to the topic....
That's nice Chris, now actually do some work instead of making Audi pay you to sit in front of a computer and do nothing. You could be taping off my emblems or something.

 

Wow, I wish I saw full-boost by 3200-3500 rpms. I see 14 psi by 3800-3900. However, I did the Po' man's NS conversion.

 

I'm poor man's non seq. and hit full boost at 5300rpm in 3rd gear. Despite all the porting, IC's, having a cat or not, having a maze of charge piping... the condition of the motor comes into play also. My motor is practically blown and I know that if everything was at great compression, I would grab full boost a bit sooner.

Jeremy

 

Well, I wouldn't call "change to non-seq, change your FMIC for a SMIC, replace your ported housings for stock ones" properly converted.

However, it should be known that there are other factors at play when doing this mod as to the results one might see. I agree that porting size will play a fairly good factor in the turbo response people will see. As well as IC placement. So, simply saying properly converted non-seq car will see full boost before 3500 is an extremely misleading statement without specifing the configuration it was original done in.

Actually, my point is already proven (which is having full boost before 3500 rpms in NS is not always typical). It's Jim who has found little things here and there to poke at to keep the conversation going.


RTS3GEN did the "Po' Man's NS" at first to see if he like it. When he didn't, he figured it was because he didn't do the full conversion, so he did that next. For him, it didn't make any "noticeable difference" after the full conversion. Needless to say, he's putting a seq manifold back onto his car.

While he does have a FMIC, there isn't much lag with his setup. He has a 1/4 mile time of 11.77 on the stock fuel system (sans a fuel pump) on the Pettit ECU.

 

I'm sorry, I'll change my statement to "properly converted from stock without buying a bunch of ricey **** like a FMIC first." How's that?

A quality aftermarket SMIC, downpipe, midpipe, cat-back, and intake will get about the same results unless something else is broken or holding the car back. Short of having to keep one or both of the catalytic converters or having an automatic transmission, 3,800+ rpm is absolutely ridiculous. If that's the case, there's something wrong with the configuration. Period.

You do realize that lag wouldn't play a part in drag racing if you have tires capable of allowing a high rpm launch, right?

 

You're right. One of us has personally converted three FDs to full non-sequential and had identical results and the other is just regurgitating what other people have said about it.

I guess Kevin Wyum and Carlos Iglesias are no more credible than I am these days. What the hell do I know about FDs and rotary engines?

 

I have to agree with everything you said, but what I think is making the lag sooo bad would have to be shitty turbos.

Most people that do this converison have turbos with higher miles on them.

I had the same thing happened to me, full boost by a little before 4k.

I then got some lower mileage turbos (thanks Joe) and the spool up was much faster than before, I could see 10 psi (what I had it set to) by 3600 rpm.

 

That's certainly possible. My car had ~3,000 miles on it when I converted it. Brian Goble's car had about 17,000. The other R1 I worked on had about 64k, so none were particularly high mileage. All three had ASP ICs, downpipes, midpipes, cat-backs, and cold air intakes. All three had M2 modified ECUs. Two had electronic boost controllers, and mine was manual. *shrug*

 

I've got a brand new set of BNR's with a small leak in the manifold to turbo gaskets. Their just to dang expensive. Anyway I also have a pretty big custom SMIC and I do have a lot of lag. I would say about 4000 to get just 10psi. Full non seq of course. Anyone think a small leak could cause this much lag? Oh and its an auto (for now, give it a week) if that may matter.

 

I think we have our answer lol, I had all the mods that u just listed I had the M2 large though(it doesn't flow as well as the med)

I'm willing to be money i'd spool up just as fast as ur car did if it had alot lower mileage turbos on it. Or even faster because of my port. (1/2 bridge)

After the porting with the same 123k mile turbos on it, it seemed to spool faster, or maybe I'm crazy...

 

yes.....auto does matter A LOT. non seq must have a manual tranny.

 

Full non-seq.....awesome way better than the stock sequential setup. No comparison in my book.

 

I'm PFS SMIC, Cold Air Intake, 850 cc primary and secondary injectors, 2k reman motor, full conversion non-seq, with Power FC, Downpipe, resonate midpipe and apexi n1 exhaust...running 10-12 psi, I see full boost at about 3800 rpm...I like the feel of the non-seq through redline but don't like the lag...maybe mine isn't setup properly!?

 

3200-3800rpm, noticable in 1st, 2nd or 3rd gear? Boost isn't only dependent on RPM, it also helps to have load. The time it takes the turbos to spool up goes by pretty quickly in 1st, in 3rd gear it takes more time to climb up the tach, turbos have more time to spool. This might be the 500-600rpm discrepancy.

Bottom line is equally modded seq car will get full boost at least 1000rpm earlier, no big deal in some people's minds, huge deal in other people's. I get 7psi boost at 1700rpm, full boost by 2300-2500rpm with seq.

I personally don't like cruising around at 3200rpm +, some people could care less. I rode with a guy in a Type R Integra this weekend that was perfectly happy with cruising at 4K rpm+, I just wanted him to shift...

 

Original poster is a good exmple. Stock intake and IC, +full exhaust, and 99 spec quicy turbos set fully converted. stock IC has minimal dwel, time, no pressure drop till both boost and rpms are high!! Sounds like best nonseq I've heard in some time, regarding quick spool up. Next step and a/l IC to cintinue theme.

I had a 2L 81 924T, no intercooler, K26, tuned for no lag period. Result, no lag.

 

He has two sets of turbos. One is older, the others are extremely low mileage. That's not the problem. The problem is that not all setups will yield full boost at or below 3500 rpms, period.

The problem is that this forum is extremely misleading (and not only on this topic). Many people do the conversion thinking they will basically lose nothing and only gain, while that is not the case. Most people can expect full boost closer to 4000 rpms rather than 3500 rpms. Keep in mind, I'm not saying "you can't have full boost by 3500 rpms", I'm saying that with the trend of modification to FD's these days, that's not likely to happen (as most people are ported and running FMIC's as well as other components which can cause more lag when using non-seq).

When someone asks "when will I see full boost with non-seq", if you simply say "3500 rpms" then you are giving misleading information (notice the word "misleading", not "wrong"). Saying "full boost by 3500 rpms depending on a few factors is possible. but more likely you'll see full boost by 3800 or later" is more realistic answer and expectation.

Jim is argueing that you can achieve full boost by 3500 rpms. I never said you couldn't. I said that was as misleading as saying you can achieve 400rwhp on stock twins. It's just not going to happen for everyone and every configuration.

See my post above.

BTW, one of the cars was tuned by Steve Kan (i.e. tuned for "no lag").

 

I think it falls to what is everyones defenition of "lag."
This argument comes around very often and the consensus seems to be that non-seq, for the most part, inherently rears it ugly "lag" head. Everyone forgets the "lag" when they get that abrupt rush of power when "its on."

I like sequential because I can pass through traffic at low rpms without being obnoxious.

 

No, the problem seems to be that you don't want to admit that MANY do.

For any legitimately converted non-sequential car that didn't behave "correctly", there are a at least a dozen people who tried the poor-man's conversion or still had cats who are adding to the negative image of non-sequential by yacking about how slow the boost was. OF COURSE the boost response was slow with the wrong configuration.

I think you've read a few too many of those posts, or you just stopped looking for a reason why boost was slow on the ones that were converted "correctly", and decided that non-sequential ALWAYS equals slow boost. At least that's the way your posts read to me.

And I pointed out that it was a poor comparison.

400 RWHP on stock twins, even with all the right mods, might happen for 1 in 100 cars. I can convert a healthy 5-speed to non-sequential and reproduce the same results that I had. My record is 3 for 3. Not even in the same ballpark.

But it can happen. Frequently enough that it's not a fluke of configuration or parts.

Sorry, but you're starting to sound like Matty on his "120+ mph trap speed on stock twins doesn't happen" rants.

 

I think some people need to learn how to downshift, personally. Or swap in a V8...

That has more to do with the rotary shitting burning fuel into the exhaust than it has to do with being non-sequential. Non-sequential just makes that fringe benefit of rotary ownership much more noticeable.

 

The forum has numerous messages that state for the non-seq mod to be effective, the cats much be removed. Wastegate porting to my knowledge was never mentioned as a prerequisite, however the two people I know also had their wastegates ported. So, for all intent purposes, they had the "proper setup" for the non-seq modification to be effective.

Yet, that was not the case to do other factors (which are not really known). That is why I state that full boost in non-seq mode by 3500 rpms or less is not always achieveable in every car configuration. This is information that is never discussed and misleads a lot of people into thinking they are going to get something they might not.

Actually, it's the other way around. When people claim that everyone should see full boost by xxxx rpms, I state that's not aways the case. I never state that their claim is false. Apples and oranges.

I didn't say it was a fluke. However, I am saying that certain configurations will never yield high boost levels at 3500 rpms in non-seq mode. That's fact and I'm bringing it up people can make in informed decision about the modification before they do it; find out it's not like everyone said; and then have to go locate a new manifold. I could care less whether people who have done it like it or hate it. My goal is to help provide "complete" information, not to imply.

If porting will hurt the response, people should know and understand that. If using an FMIC verses a SMIC is going to hurt the response, people shoudl understand that as well. Saying that full boost by 3500 rpms is achieveable without saying how is misinformation.

Jim,

I am about your one sole moderator support on this forum. I see no need for attempts of insults on this discussion. If you have converted 3 cars that produce full boost at low rpms, type up their configuration so others can know what to expect verses their own configuration. The goal of this forum is information sharing, not petty insults.

 

oh it happens..just very very rare.

 

wow...being called matty is an insult now. damn mahjik...i feel insulted.
cant a guy have an opinion around here?

 

Like turbojeff stated: no one likes cruising around at 3200 rpm in traffic, just shift already. But the car is worthless underneath the stated rpm range. Swapping a V8, hmm, I wish.

I have no problem passing without down shifting through traffic without sounding riced out. That first turbo does wonders at low rpm, it accents Mazda's brilliance.
Down shifting for a race, thats a different story.

To have any success in traffic, which is everyones pass time (because no one drags everytime they pull their cars) sequential is the way to go. I always hear people say "...I had more fun when I was sequential...."

 

Personally, it doesn't matter to me. I don't take this forum that seriously. However, it was an obvious attempt which was unwarranted by the discussion.