FdWannaBePt2

The only thing i know so far is that if one cannot diagnose turbos in sequential going non-sequential probably clear things up. But from a performance standpoint the only difference is that it justs changes where the power band is but why do some people buy the 99' spec, bnrs or any other twin setup that i might not possibly know about but then go non-sequential wouldn't it be better just to go single or is the spooling different where its probably not as quick as a sequential setup but not as laggy as a single set-up?

silverTRD

iTrader: (37)

a well functiioning sequential system is tough to beat IMO. quite a few people have problems running sequential in these cars and are tired of the headaches so the switch to non seq. people buy 99 spec or bnrs for more power over the stock setup. while a single is great for some people its not for others, for one the cost factor can multiply quite quickly when converting to single with all of the supporting mods. so you really have to ask yourself what you want to do with your car and how much power you want, and go from there.

silverTRD

iTrader: (37)

oh yeah...do a search. this topic has been BEATEN to death!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!try it. https://www.rx7club.com/search.php

MakoRacing

iTrader: (12)

Its just to simplify it by removing most of the vac hoses...might as well go single if your going to do that IMO

FdWannaBePt2

well i searched on this topic already which is i guess u can say im somewhat familiar with this topic but wouldn't running twins in parallel have almost the same requirements running a single thats just where i cna't seem to find an answer. thx

kuning

If I remember correctly from reading those zillions of thread pages (yes, I'm being sarcastic), running non-seq doesn't require as much as going single (replacing intercooler,radiator,fuel pump,etc). And again, if I remember correctly going non-seq with stock turbo configuration won't add any power.

But from time to time my memory has proven to be really bad.

You might wanna do more depth research on this through available sources (search function,fd3s.net,etc) rather than get flamed by the seniors

FdWannaBePt2

eh alright ill do more research again...

Jedon

I did mine because once you do a few power mods the 1st-2nd turbo transition becomes very abrupt which is great fun if you are going in a straight line but can really unsettle the car on a twisty road or track. With non-seq the boost comes on later but is much more linear, go to Wargasms dyno site and do some comparisons to see what I mean. True a single turbo would do the same thing but that costs a whole lot more money.

jpandes

That's why I went NS(the Po' man's way). Just too lazy to fix the seq system.

Montego

iTrader: (1)

1st-2nd turbo transition becomes very abrupt which is great fun if you are going in a straight line but can really unsettle the car on a twisty road or track

My car is being converted to non-seq. my Sequential actually worked fine. But I kept getting a spike at transition. With the 72 aging hoses (have changed a few already)and one of my solenoids just went out ,I saif **** it i wanna have consistent reliable boost.

adam c

iTrader: (2)

Non-sequential is for people who can't fix their sequential system

Rocking Rotary

iTrader: (14)

Non-sequential is for people who can't fix their sequential system


right on brother

Montego

iTrader: (1)

^^ or for people who wish to experience a little bit of reliability.

SlingShotRX7

I beg to differ..

The main reason that people go to Non Sequential is:

#1 to simplify the turbo system

#2 to eliminate blown motors during transition(boost spike)

At some point, you'll have a CAI, DP, HFcat or MP, CB.
When you start opening up the intake and exhaust the Transition(spike)
are alot more apparent.

Alot of people cry about low end response, but when you get to a point
in Modding your FD. with CAI, IC, DP, MP, CB which all the restrictions
removed. The low end response from NS isn't as apparent, as if it was
stock with stock airbox, 2 cats and stock exhaust.

Going with NS is similar to going single, in concept. But thats where the
comparisons end. You can go NS, po mans or full. With the current system
you have. No need for extra fuel pumps, intercoolers, fuel rail, injectors
Map sensors and etc etc etc..

adam c

iTrader: (2)

I beg to differ . Everything you have listed will work fine with a properly operating sequential system. MOST people go nonsequential due to problems. They almost never have a perfectly operating sequential system.

Montego

iTrader: (1)

My system was fully functional. Went ahead and did the whole silicon job thing 4 years ago . Now every 3-6 six months for the last 1 1/2 years I have to go under and hunt for cracked hoses and crap (and one of solenoids just took a dump). All fixable problems, but damn it ain't fun especially when you have to keep on doing it. Soo I'm going to try full non-sequential and see for myself which is better. Also to see at what RPM I get full boost and thus find out if my powerband increased

sig425

I went non sequen to simplify the system and to see if I would like the response of a single set up. As I plan to dial the boost up to approx 15... I felt it would be easier to deal with if I had non sequen. Non sequen is much like a small single from what I have read. If I like the feel, I will go gt35 or so once I save the cash. Po mans single (and a nice demo)

wReX

iTrader: (6)

Anyone know of any cars with seq stock twins pushing 400+ rwhp?

t-von

iTrader: (8)

Yes it is. Glad mine is still working with over 100k on them and the engine.

t-von

iTrader: (8)

It's hard enough for non seq to reach that level. The main problem with the seq set-up making that power is the valve restrictions in the piping that disturb flow. TRUE non seq setups don't have that problem because those valves are removed. The truth is, seq twins become non seq after the transition point.

cptpain

iTrader: (1)

i agree wholeheartedly. in simplest terms the actuator for the secondary turbo stays open (bypassing some exhaust from the turbine) until 4500 and then closes up to boost up back to 10. mazda did a good job on this but it wouldve been better to use divorced twins (small primary for low-end torque/response, bigger secondary for high-rpm power) but then it would've cost more. well one things for sure, whenever we start to work on our cars we notice ways that wouldve been better than stock and wished that the mods that we did came stock. that wouldve really been more reliable and actually won numerous awards due to this fact.

NeoTuri

iTrader: (2)

Up to this point, my seq setup has been next to flawless with exception to a ruptured coupler. Let's see if I can mess it up with my latest mods.

rajeevx7

iTrader: (11)

No Rats nest w/ 8billion vac lines to crack, 2 boxes full of emissions/flappers you dont need, no more electrically controled solenoids to go out......

*IF* boost EVER gives you trouble, you only have 4 vac lines to check in under 30 sec and maybe a blown WG actuator or leaky BOV. But those last two fail 100x less then solenoids.

Oh, I could spend countless more hours replacing solenoids, fixing vac lines, and slaving over the TCA; I AM capable but reliability is much more satisfying.

D4rw1n

iTrader: (2)

For a full non sequential conversion would it be ok to run the stock ecu with a manual boost controller?

Shad Laws

Hello-

I disagree.

One advantage of the sequential system is that, when transition first occurs, one of the two turbos is already completely spooled up (and the other is pre-spooled... not completely spooled but also not standing still). This means that the delay at transition is minimized. With the idea you propose, at transition you have to spool up one large turbo. It may be slightly prespooled, in a manner similar to the way the 2nd turbo is right now, but I guarantee that the delay will increase. The response would not be as good.

If the "divorced" twins idea was a good one, then Porsche would have used it on their no-expense-spared 959 :-).

Take care,
Shad