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

Stock Turbo Question - FSM Errors?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 07:04 AM
  #1  
dgeesaman's Avatar
Thread Starter
Moderator
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 12,313
Likes: 27
From: Hershey PA
Stock Turbo Question - FSM Errors?

I was reading through the big'ol section F of the FSM, and noticed some odd numbers:



They have the Turbo Control, Charge Control, etc listed as switching over at 5500rpm. This is clearly incorrect. Was this changed in the '95 manual? Or was an addendum issued?

Dave
Attached Thumbnails Stock Turbo Question - FSM Errors?-f-162.gif  
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 08:40 AM
  #2  
JONSKI's Avatar
5yr member, joined 2001
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 908
Likes: 1
From: Marco Island, FL
Maybe that means secondary comes on at 4250rpm on an AT.
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 09:02 AM
  #3  
dgeesaman's Avatar
Thread Starter
Moderator
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 12,313
Likes: 27
From: Hershey PA
Which is what I was thinking also - since the autos redline a little lower than the manuals, IIRC.

Dave
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 10:07 AM
  #4  
DMRH's Avatar
Senior Member
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 587
Likes: 2
From: Sydney, Australia
I am aware of two print runs for the series-6 (92-95). First in 92 when released & second in 94.

I know the series-7 (96-98) version was simply memo's sent to dealers & they had to staple the extra pages into the original books.

The series-8 (99-02) had an update book that really wasn't all that comprehensive like the FSM was.

Can't comment on the series-7 version but can say that the series-8 cars change around the 4500rpm area from a "seat-of-your-pants" perspective......
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 11:27 AM
  #5  
Kento's Avatar
2/4 wheel cornering fiend
Tenured Member 10 Years
 
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,090
Likes: 3
From: Pasadena, CA
They could be just using those rpm numbers to ensure that any of those solenoids tested would be fully activated.
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 11:29 AM
  #6  
dubulup's Avatar
development
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 5,714
Likes: 7
From: Lafayette, LA
^ agreed. I'll look in my 95 manual, when I get home
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 11:37 AM
  #7  
dgeesaman's Avatar
Thread Starter
Moderator
Tenured Member: 20 Years
Liked
Loved
iTrader: (8)
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 12,313
Likes: 27
From: Hershey PA
Originally Posted by Kento
They could be just using those rpm numbers to ensure that any of those solenoids tested would be fully activated.
I think that's not the case, since the page is from the section used to test the ECU electrical inputs/outputs. So the mechanical delay would not be a factor.

Dubulup, it would good to confirm the data from a later printing, thanks.

Dave
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 11:45 AM
  #8  
dubulup's Avatar
development
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 5,714
Likes: 7
From: Lafayette, LA
Originally Posted by dgeesaman
I think that's not the case, since the page is from the section used to test the ECU electrical inputs/outputs.
exactly...you don't want some Mazduh mechanic testing something at 4500rpms, at switching point to see if its working properly...(frankly I don't see how you test this...on a dyno maybe) so, you tell him to test it 1000rpms after the solenoid should be switched.

Of course, I have no idea...I deal with mechanics and standards/processes/procedures in aerospace, and rule #1 make it as easy to test as possible. idiot proof everything! (then wait for bigger idiots and revise, haha)

but then again...some of the other solenoids look right on like the precontrol
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 12:07 PM
  #9  
DigDug's Avatar
Registered User
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,038
Likes: 0
From: Sterling, VA
It could just be a mistake. Maybe some engineer wrote down the values before a revision was made to the control system, and nobody thought to update it before the documentation people got their hands on it. Hard to say without having worked for Mazda in the early 90s...

FWIW, project management has come a long way in the last 15 years.

Last edited by DigDug; Sep 14, 2005 at 12:09 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 12:35 PM
  #10  
JaNusSolSumnus's Avatar
TRINGLS
Tenured Member 05 Years
 
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,053
Likes: 0
From: Clermont, FL
It's also highly possible that its just a typo... one digit over on the ole' keyboard....

~Kris
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 05:08 PM
  #11  
dubulup's Avatar
development
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 5,714
Likes: 7
From: Lafayette, LA
Originally Posted by dubulup
I'll look in my 95 manual, when I get home
exactly the same but on a different page

strange...I retract my previous statement, this is giving the switching data, not testing data.

Maybe they orginally thought the secondary would kick in at 5.5k, and found that the primary ran out of breath before that, due to US pre-cat restrictions or something similar.

OR just a bad translation, haha!
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2005 | 11:29 PM
  #12  
KevinK2's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 6
From: Delaware
This test is for low load operation, with no boost. transition is delayed until 5500 rpm.
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2005 | 07:22 AM
  #13  
dubulup's Avatar
development
Tenured Member 15 Years
 
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 5,714
Likes: 7
From: Lafayette, LA
makes sense.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
trickster
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
25
Jul 1, 2023 04:40 PM
befarrer
Microtech
3
Aug 22, 2015 05:52 PM
ncds_fc
New Member RX-7 Technical
1
Aug 15, 2015 10:06 AM




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:41 AM.