3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002) 1993-2002 Discussion including performance modifications and Technical Support Sections.
Sponsored by:

Pro's and Con's about Turbo Simplification?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 20, 2003 | 12:10 AM
  #26  
fitzrx7's Avatar
Running Lean
Tenured Member 15 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
From: Hometown of Deland FL
God it's nice being military...my car will forever and always be registered in good ol' FL!

I did the simplification on my car and also on my buddy Jeffs, it lowers the level of complexity from Doctorate Rocket Science to BA College Graduate level, something I can understand. Still not elementary, but better.

And WTF is this about no turob spool noises?? I don't know about that.

Get the blockoff plates and trash all that EPA Carter-ization...I didnt say that.

Jon
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2003 | 02:43 AM
  #27  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
Alright if the general says to do it then I will =P
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2003 | 07:13 AM
  #28  
Zoomspeed's Avatar
Rotary Freak
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 1
From: Wichita, KS, USA
Originally posted by Fatman0203
Well Florida I doubt will EVER do emissions again and even if they did. ( doubt it again) I'll just slap on the stock cat and a whole bunch of other sh*t just for the test. So the Simplification + Damians Boost Control is actually a good idea? Alrighty then that settles it Im going for it =P wish me luck when the hoses come in.
Thats a bunhc of stuff to be slapping back on though.
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2003 | 07:43 AM
  #29  
Cihuuy's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
From: Myanmar
Originally posted by Scrub
Pro's
Less heat
Less backpressure
A more predictable linear power band.
Better midrange and top end

Con's
No turbo spool noises when accelerating slowly
ummm thats pretty much it.



Whaaat??
are you talking about non-seq? hehe
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2003 | 09:51 AM
  #30  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
Originally posted by Zoomspeed
Thats a bunhc of stuff to be slapping back on though.
If anything I would only do the cats. My friend has to put his entire exhaust back together on his WRX when he has to take it to the dealer =P so a cat and a muffler for me I dont mine =P.

That also means I have to buy the block off plates.
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2003 | 09:58 AM
  #31  
Mahjik's Avatar
Mr. Links
Tenured Member 20 Years
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 27,595
Likes: 43
From: Kansas City, MO
Originally posted by Fatman0203
If anything I would only do the cats. My friend has to put his entire exhaust back together on his WRX when he has to take it to the dealer =P so a cat and a muffler for me I dont mine =P.

That also means I have to buy the block off plates.
If they actually "test" emissions, just putting the cat pack on without the rest won't make you pass. If all they do is a visual test to see if the cat is on the car, then that would work.
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2003 | 10:02 AM
  #32  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
Either way they got rid of it 5 years ago and have never talked about bringing it back. The only thing their really strict about here are the rice mufflers, 98789459 subwoofers in the truck blasting, and rice races. (which is why we get problems sometime when we want to meet).


BTW I wouldnt even know of any other car. My dad has two v-8s running only flowmasters and he has yet to get sh*t about it =P.
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2003 | 01:39 PM
  #33  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
BTW Anyone got pics of their engine bay after this?? Id really appreciate it. Or any vacuum hose simplification.
Reply
Old Nov 20, 2003 | 05:29 PM
  #34  
Zoomspeed's Avatar
Rotary Freak
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 1
From: Wichita, KS, USA
Originally posted by Fatman0203
BTW Anyone got pics of their engine bay after this?? Id really appreciate it. Or any vacuum hose simplification.
alot of the hoses u get rid of are underneath the UIM, so you wont see much unless someone has a pic before and after with the UIM off.
Reply
Old Nov 21, 2003 | 11:20 AM
  #35  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
Ya but if you do Rob's Simplification there must be a hell of a difference. Anyone? Or am I the first Guinea Pig to try this?
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2003 | 03:32 AM
  #36  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
BTW Whats this about that he removed the fuel regulator? I obviously leave mine on then correct?
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2003 | 08:06 AM
  #37  
JhnRx7's Avatar
Golf Cart Hooligan
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 998
Likes: 30
From: Philadelphia, PA
(I dont know if this has been said or not....i only read the first page)

PRO: better gas mileage! (whenever the car sees boost, you dump loads of gas. If you are non-sequential u dont get on boost as much during everyday driving.

CON: Your car will be alot louder.
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2003 | 10:40 AM
  #38  
Zoomspeed's Avatar
Rotary Freak
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 1
From: Wichita, KS, USA
Originally posted by JhnRx7
(I dont know if this has been said or not....i only read the first page)

PRO: better gas mileage! (whenever the car sees boost, you dump loads of gas. If you are non-sequential u dont get on boost as much during everyday driving.

CON: Your car will be alot louder.
Hes asking aobut the seq. simplification.

BTW Whats this about that he removed the fuel regulator? I obviously leave mine on then correct?
yeah. If your keeping the stock FPR then leave that whole system alone.
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2003 | 01:07 PM
  #39  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
Alright how expensive is it to replace the stock fuel pressure regulator. I honestly dont want to put that rats nest back in the car. Just looking at the design of the simplification makes me want it more. BTW Where is the regulator?
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2003 | 03:40 PM
  #40  
Zoomspeed's Avatar
Rotary Freak
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 1
From: Wichita, KS, USA
Originally posted by Fatman0203
Alright how expensive is it to replace the stock fuel pressure regulator. I honestly dont want to put that rats nest back in the car. Just looking at the design of the simplification makes me want it more. BTW Where is the regulator?
If I remember right leaving the stock FPR only leaves in one solenoid and the lines for it, so its not like its a big mess. May want to double check with the diagram though.
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2003 | 03:50 PM
  #41  
JONSKI's Avatar
5yr member, joined 2001
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 908
Likes: 1
From: Marco Island, FL
Originally posted by Fatman0203
Alright how expensive is it to replace the stock fuel pressure regulator. I honestly dont want to put that rats nest back in the car. Just looking at the design of the simplification makes me want it more. BTW Where is the regulator?
It's on the firewall side of the secondary injector rail. If you want to eliminate another solenoid, you can bypass the FPR solenoid (the solenoid on the orange plug) and connect a vacuum line directly to the little diagonal nipple on the LIM. The FPR solenoid's only job is to run the car rich on a hot start to blow out any fuel vapor bubbles. A few people have bypassed the FPR solenoid and have not reported any problems. If you want, I can post a pic of the FPR and the diagonal nipple on the LIM.

[edit]I'd just stick with the stock FPR. I think it works just fine, especially on the stock ECU.[/edit]
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2003 | 04:02 PM
  #42  
SVT Squasher's Avatar
Love'n my 7
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
From: YOU DONT HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW
What most people have missed in going non seq. you will have a slower spool up since the exhust is split between the two turbs. When you are seq. the full cfm goes thru the primary only up to 4k rpm. The cfm is also split on the top end becuse its pushing gasses thru the primary when it is actualy usless. The only gain you will get is in the mid range, both turbs working together and no drop in boost during transition. I wouldnt do it. Its a simplification that is all. If it was a better way Mazda would have made it like that to begin with. Besides if your going to have two turbos on a FD learn how they work and understand the parts that make it work, with that knowlage you will be able to trobleshoot your turbos just fine. It just takes a little time to learn it.
Reply
Old Nov 26, 2003 | 09:54 PM
  #43  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
The reason that Mazda made it so freaking many its mainly cause of emmisions. PCV and other useless emmisions junk. I think simplifying it would make things easier to work with but I just dont want to lose any dependability. Also I heard the simplification gives you better response.
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2003 | 10:47 AM
  #44  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
BTW This is the SEQ SIMPLIFICATION!!!
(NOT NON SEQ)
Alright I just got the hoses in and Im working on getting the rats nest out. Im currently also trying to looking for the fuel regulartor which I am supposed to leave in place. Alright any other suggestions before I move on?
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2003 | 12:04 PM
  #45  
remydrm's Avatar
ROTARY POWER
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 612
Likes: 1
From: N.CA
sounds like a great idea if you are choosing to stay with a sequential setup. cleaning up all the extra emmisions crap under the hood is the right thing to do, saves the motor. get rid of all of it and go non-seq. the whole engine bay gets gutted out!
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2003 | 02:13 PM
  #46  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
Well I want to stay seq because Ive heard its better for track but the other main reason and more important is I dont have the money . Emmsions is not a problem. Also Ive heard you get better throttle response. Either way I cant stand the mess under there and would like to have a cleaner engine bay.
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2003 | 05:21 PM
  #47  
Fatman0203's Avatar
Thread Starter
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 3,639
Likes: 0
From: MIA
Also when you order the block off plates from the rx7 store do they come with where they belong?
Reply
Old Nov 27, 2003 | 07:13 PM
  #48  
JONSKI's Avatar
5yr member, joined 2001
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 908
Likes: 1
From: Marco Island, FL
Originally posted by Fatman0203
Also when you order the block off plates from the rx7 store do they come with where they belong?
No, but you'll know where they go when you have them in hand.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
MILOS7
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
7
Aug 25, 2015 07:37 PM
rexhvn
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
0
Aug 19, 2015 02:59 AM
cam_7779
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
9
Aug 18, 2015 07:48 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:36 AM.