It was suggested to hear some feedback here before i take the next step.

What are your thoughts on going full non-sequentail with an automatic? (5 speed convertion out of the question). But i am curious because even when i can get my turbos running together in higher gears (3rd) when the cars shifts to 4th it drops boost to 5-6psi then takes me going about 120mph to get back to 10psi not even the 12psi i have programed. So im curious if im running non-sequential when the car shifts is the boost going to drop to? Please let me know if there is anything i need to know about going no-sequential in my automatic before i take measures to do the swap.

 

Going non sequential is for people who can't figure out how to fix their sequential system. A properly running sequential system makes better low end power, and is a joy to drive.

 

^ is one opinion.

 

Im posting in hopes of someone who can provide VALUABLE information regarding running a non-sequential in an automatic. Maybe someone who has done this or might have some therories.

 

I've never driven an auto FD with non sequential turbos but I do know that auto turbo cars don't lose boost when they shift. I would definitely do a full non sequential (rich man's) conversion.

If the auto is built correctly you could probably get some good drag times out of it. Why do you think GMC Syclones are so nasty?

 

My car was at one time automatic and I was running my turbos non sequentially at 12psi. I went non-sequential because I was sick of the vacuum line headache and from constantly having problems with the sequential system.

It fixed the boosting problems and it held 12psi steady all day long but you sacrifice a TON of down low power. You will no longer be able to build boost off the line and the lag time from a dead stop us unbearable. Once your moving it's fine, as the car will down shift and the boost will come on fast.

If you can deal with having horrible low end power then do it, but I think I would have stayed sequential in hindsight. Non-sequential works great if the car is stick, which I ended up converting mine to.

 

instead of advising the op one way or another, it's probably more important that s/he decides what the uses of the car will be. is this gonna be a drag car, a track car, a drift car, a street car - is so weekend or DD?

when the op decides what the use(s) of the car will be a better answer can be given; however, I will share my initial thoughts on the question. It sounds like you are only considering nonsequ to fix other problems. And in my experience this is exactly the wrong thing to make these types of decisions on.

 

++absolutely agree. I had very few sequential problems and I've owned the car 17 years now.

*Take a close look at (the pressure side) turbo control solenoid "E" on the rack, as it has a tendency to stick and cause a problem similar to what you describe.* Also--be sure you don't have any exhaust leaks at the exhaust manifold or turbos, esp. the pre-spool door/cover.

 

You will need a different stall to improve spool--that's common on Syclones and single turbo Supras. You'd probably want to consult some kind of automatic tranny specialist to see if they can figure something out. FD auto trannies aren't exactly Powerglides or TH350's in terms of part availability, and there is almost zero automatic tranny knowledge in the FD community.

 

^^ that's sorta true since Banzai's auto harness has hit the market. With the introduction of the harness, people have been reporting improved performance from their auto transmissions. A few people are running the auto in the 400+hp ranges.

A stall is a good investment; however, if it's a DD then it doesn't matter. Only if you're trying to reduce your 60-foot times. IF you're trying to drag this car then you might wanna consider swapping transmissions altogether - in all honesty. The TH350 or the C4 are both viable options. I don't believe this is what the op is wanting to do however.

The rotary works folks are (or have) completed a C4 transmission swap kit.

 

I'll tell you what. The only reason i want to go non-sequential is because i've spent the last year sporatically trying to diagnose the boost problem. I find **** all the time thats not working properly and i think ok now it should work. Well it does'nt and its starting to get expensive and really annoying and i've followed almost all the trouble shooting suggestions on the autosport site. Those stupid solenoid nipples break if i look at them wrong. Quite frankly i've had enough. Maybe i need to give it one more shot but still seriously considering non-sequential.

For now it's my daily driver but not for long. then it will be a weekend street car. I've heard that with full catless exhaust the lag is'nt that bad....full boost by ???? I have the power fc with bansai harness and the tranny was rebuilt 1.5 years ago. The thing is strong as hell.

 

nice! And I completely understand. Honestly, if you're this far into it and you'll be taking it off the road soon, then have you considered just going single?

I still look at stock TTs and am like WTF! Mazda was smoking something b/c it looks like a friggin' nightmare.


I'm curious as what was rebuilt in the tranny and why was it rebuilt.


(EDIT:: Thinking back on it it may be Howard Coleman that has a transmission kit in the process).

 

Keeping seq is for drivers who are: take a pick!
(1) inept at shifting.
(2) do not like to shift.
(3) are afraid of power.
(4) wish their FD really has a V8 and an auto tranny.
(5) can not afford to go non-seq or single.
(7) their girl friend/wife drive faster/better than they.

 

Going non sequential is for people who are terrified of the number (6).

 

^ ouch, you tell 'em chuck! Re: thoughts on the auto w/ nonseq... my car is manual w/ nonseq and I have to work the gears more in order to keep keep the rpms up and the power on. I get 10 psi by 3.5-4k rpm and 14 psi by 4.5k or so. I'm running a cat, so if you don't have to run one you can probably get better boost response by a few hundred rpm. If you can get your auto tranny to stay in that rpm range, you will have good boost/power. Because below that it is a dog. FWIW, I will be converting my car back to sequential at some point, just waiting to blow these turbos up 1st I would go single if I didn't have emissions BS (I live in CA).

 

Sheer bulllshit.

Non-sequential is for people like me who want to simplify and clean up the engine bay as much as possible. Fewer parts (especially with this car) = less stiff to break/fix. It's win/win. I haven't done anything to my car except fluid changes and spark plugs in four years. That's how I like it.

Done right (not cheap and redneck), non-sequential provides a liquid smooth power delivery curve from about 3400 rpm to redline. Not only is the car a "joy to drive", it will smoke any solenoid infested sequential car out there, and I'm more than happy to back up that claim.

 

Come into the light my friend.

 

This simplification argument I find the most utterly bizarre, despite being on this board 7 years. Don't buy a low production lightweight sports car with twin turbos and a temperamental one-off rotary engine if you want simple.

Yes, you can pull **** out of the engine bay and pretend you have a Chevy V8 in there but why not just buy the Chevy in the first place?

If I get tired of the complexity of my engine bay, I just close the hood.

Obviously, if you remove subsystems from a car, then those subsystems will no longer be a source of failure. Those systems are there for a reason though.

How removing 1k+ rpm of low rpm torque from an already torque-challenged car could be a win is beyond me.

Drag racing arguments are silly. The difference (if any) here would be submerged by driver difference.

For a street driven car (track or drag cars are a different story), sacrificing 1k+ rpm of low end torque for (at best) a 10 hp gain at ~6k rpm is lunacy.

A 10hp high rpm gain is not even going to be perceptible in this car (a few degrees temperature drop would cause as much of a difference). Even your granny could detect losing a substantial amount of torque at 2-3k rpm.

 

Not sure what's bizarre about it. If anything, the sensitive nature of rotaries makes simplicity all the more cirtical, since maintenance and diagnostics are also simplified.

This is a strawman argument.

You must pay someone to do all your work, then.

The tt actuation system on the FD is poorly designed, period. Go look at a MKIV Supra for comparison. Mazduh engineers aren't gods, they made numerous blunders with this car. The "well, it must be there for a reason because it's designed by godly Mazda engineers" argument utterly fails.

This car doesn't deliver much low end torque no matter what you do, so, to throw your Chevy strawman quip back in your face, go buy a vette.

I would win, "silly" or not.

Lunacy to you, but who are you? How many full non-sequential cars have you driven? I drove the car bone stock for at least five years. I know exactly what the claimed advantages of sequental are, and, if you leave the car completely stock, sequential is probably ok, but for anyone looking for power, you're just choking off the top end for some fractional improvement in bottom end response. I honestly don't miss sequential for a second; this engine loves to rev, it NEEDS to rev...so get your finger out.

More like ~30 for a correctly ported, full non-sequential manifold. Top end is night and day. With a light weight flywheel an full exhaust, the extra second to build boost is essentially unnoticeable.

 

I completely disagree. What application? from a high rpm roll on the freeway? definitely not from a stop or during an autocross... I wonder what the scca solo 2 national champ is running for setup? Oh yeah... sequential.


non-sequential is for those too lazy or just not trained enough to keep the sequential operation in place. Or, too broke to go single.


Non sequential twins are only comparable to a highly inefficient single, at best. I guarantee you can't disprove that. They only make a marginally higher amount of peak horsepower than the stock sequential setup (and that is ONLY if you do the "rich-man's" conversion)... and will never give you the response of a comparable-flow single, or stock sequential setup.


And your 30 hp claim.... take apart the stock sequential manifold and clean it up, and go from there. again, the difference will only be marginal between comparable amounts of labor... and the sequential twins will rock you around any short track, autocross, or even around town.

 

Unless you know something I don't, they don't make light weight flywheels for automatics...

 

Of all the people that have converted to non-sequential, I would bet that less than 5% of them had a properly functioning sequential system. I agree that it is complicated, but hey ............ life is complicated!

 

30 hp difference my ***, maybe on modified twins but not stockers. Get it fixed or sell the car, dont band aid it. non-sequential is for people who cant afford single and cant figure out the sequential system, or they are really in need that 10hp.

 

Either one, maybe I need a bit higher rpm but revving the engine doesn't bother me as much as it seems to bother those with their low end "grunt" sequentials (sarcasm)....what a joke

Some of these non-sequential haters need to drive my car, they would be converted.

What does that prove? One example? I can name many more who run non-sequential, so that's a worthless argument/diversion

Not this **** again. No, that is not the reason. AGAIN, it is for those who wish to delete uneeded crap in the engine bay and simplify maintenance and diagnostics. Sheesh, how thick are you people?

Nope, my system ran perfect while I had it

Single is a definite possibility in the future, and it's hardly a money issue. I'm satisfied with the current power output and I have alot of custom work done by Garfkinkle that would have to be discarded.

Non-sequential BNRs are putting down 380-400 rwhp regularly, which is nothing to sneeze at.

No, it's not marginal, it's about 30+ hp

Well, I disagree, I get full boost at 3400.

The stock set-up has no top end. Period.

You can't adequately port/hog out the stock manifold and keep it sequential. People like David Garfinkle who actually do the work know this....sequential huggers don't have a clue

 

Good point, you're not going to see the same benefit of NS with an auto, in terms of quick revving - then again I can't even imagine driving an auto FD