whats the shity things about nonseq
06-06-02, 11:35 PM
#1
Full Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Prince George, BC, Canada
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
whats the shity things about nonseq
what are the shitty things about nonseq and what would i have to do to make sure nothing catches fire when im racing my brother in his beemer (he's gonna get smoked because if he is still ahead in 2 gear im read lining it 
)
)
06-07-02, 05:13 AM
#3
Passenger
Posts: n/a
the worst thing about non-seq is all those dam vacuum hose's wait a minute it does not matter any more there are not being used hahahahahahahahaha. nothing at all and I think it is better because the turbos dont run hot as they use to cool temps mean more HP....
-Rikki
-Rikki
06-07-02, 09:54 AM
#5
Passenger
Posts: n/a
Wade
i went non-seq and it was a increase in the 1/4 mile speed I did 2 runs with seq and 4 runs with non-seq and the best run was
non-seq 12.43@117
seq 12.76 @113
same mods, same tires, and yes my seq was working correctly
that is my proof that it is a the best mod but only if the car is modded stock it will suck..IMO
i went non-seq and it was a increase in the 1/4 mile speed I did 2 runs with seq and 4 runs with non-seq and the best run was
non-seq 12.43@117
seq 12.76 @113
same mods, same tires, and yes my seq was working correctly
that is my proof that it is a the best mod but only if the car is modded stock it will suck..IMO
06-07-02, 10:03 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Posts: 596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Non-seq makes launching the car much easier, you don't get as much spin or hop, so that is a plus at the track you just need to rev high...
The negative would be in town or street driving, the lag is a little more than most would like, you can get smoked by a honda off the line but 1 second later they will be in your rear view mirror
The negative would be in town or street driving, the lag is a little more than most would like, you can get smoked by a honda off the line but 1 second later they will be in your rear view mirror
06-07-02, 10:06 AM
#7
Passenger
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Pressurized
Non-seq makes launching the car much easier, you don't get as much spin or hop, so that is a plus at the track you just need to rev high...
The negative would be in town or street driving, the lag is a little more than most would like, you can get smoked by a honda off the line but 1 second later they will be in your rear view mirror
Non-seq makes launching the car much easier, you don't get as much spin or hop, so that is a plus at the track you just need to rev high...
The negative would be in town or street driving, the lag is a little more than most would like, you can get smoked by a honda off the line but 1 second later they will be in your rear view mirror
Rikki's I will never get what those guys think!
Trending Topics
06-07-02, 11:28 AM
#8
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Dont_Be_A_Rikki
Wade
i went non-seq and it was a increase in the 1/4 mile speed I did 2 runs with seq and 4 runs with non-seq and the best run was
non-seq 12.43@117
seq 12.76 @113
same mods, same tires, and yes my seq was working correctly
that is my proof that it is a the best mod but only if the car is modded stock it will suck..IMO
Wade
i went non-seq and it was a increase in the 1/4 mile speed I did 2 runs with seq and 4 runs with non-seq and the best run was
non-seq 12.43@117
seq 12.76 @113
same mods, same tires, and yes my seq was working correctly
that is my proof that it is a the best mod but only if the car is modded stock it will suck..IMO
Non-seq by itself doesn't give any more power, period.
If you really did see such an improvement in your 1/4 mile, it was because something else was different. Maybe it was a little cooler outside, your plugs were newer, your tuning different, cat not as heat soaked, who knows. Regardless, I hope you aren't telling many people that more power is a side effect of the non-seq mod because of your observation, because it is simply not true.
Wade
06-07-02, 12:51 PM
#9
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Issaquah, WA, USA
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Non-seq clearly gives more power (both hp and tq) in the mid-range.
Top-end should be about the same (a tad more if you do full non-seq, mainly because some restrictions are removed).
Non-seq has less power in the low-end than stock-seq.
http://www.micromanx.com/goble/rx7/p...3/compare.html
Top-end should be about the same (a tad more if you do full non-seq, mainly because some restrictions are removed).
Non-seq has less power in the low-end than stock-seq.
http://www.micromanx.com/goble/rx7/p...3/compare.html
06-07-02, 02:41 PM
#10
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brian,
When people refer to their power they generally are talking about max power. Yes, my statement was oversimplified. If you want to split hairs, then I admit that a non-seq car might make more power around 4000-4500 RPM, as your car did. But if we continue to split hairs, I think we'll find that a sequential setup will produce a faster car overall in a variety of conditions, too.
However, the extra 4 mph and associated horsepower that Ryan saw at the strip is obviously not caused by the non-sequential mod.
BTW, never saw pics of your wheels, I'd still like to see them.
Wade
When people refer to their power they generally are talking about max power. Yes, my statement was oversimplified. If you want to split hairs, then I admit that a non-seq car might make more power around 4000-4500 RPM, as your car did. But if we continue to split hairs, I think we'll find that a sequential setup will produce a faster car overall in a variety of conditions, too.
However, the extra 4 mph and associated horsepower that Ryan saw at the strip is obviously not caused by the non-sequential mod.
BTW, never saw pics of your wheels, I'd still like to see them.
Wade
06-07-02, 03:32 PM
#12
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Issaquah, WA, USA
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wade, yeah when you said "Power", to me, that means the area under the curve--as opposed to only talking about top-end power.
IMO, if you don't give a full explanation, people won't fully understand what the advantages and disadvantages really are and then they can't make a good decision (for their situation/likes/dislikes) for deciding on whether or not to go non-seq.
The big problem is that some people seem to think the reason to go non-seq is to improve top-end power...which is not the reason to do it (since it doesn't really increase top-end power at all).
Kinda like someone asking how much horsepower they will gain if they get rid of 400 pounds of dead weight from their car. Well, they won't get any horsepower gains...but they will see performance gains in other areas (acceleration in this example :)
Hey, I came across some of those wheel pics on one of my machines at home just the other day...I will dig em up this weekend. :)
-Brian
IMO, if you don't give a full explanation, people won't fully understand what the advantages and disadvantages really are and then they can't make a good decision (for their situation/likes/dislikes) for deciding on whether or not to go non-seq.
The big problem is that some people seem to think the reason to go non-seq is to improve top-end power...which is not the reason to do it (since it doesn't really increase top-end power at all).
Kinda like someone asking how much horsepower they will gain if they get rid of 400 pounds of dead weight from their car. Well, they won't get any horsepower gains...but they will see performance gains in other areas (acceleration in this example :)
Hey, I came across some of those wheel pics on one of my machines at home just the other day...I will dig em up this weekend. :)
-Brian
06-07-02, 10:36 PM
#14
Passenger
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by Wade
Non-seq by itself doesn't give any more power, period.
If you really did see such an improvement in your 1/4 mile, it was because something else was different. Maybe it was a little cooler outside, your plugs were newer, your tuning different, cat not as heat soaked, who knows. Regardless, I hope you aren't telling many people that more power is a side effect of the non-seq mod because of your observation, because it is simply not true.
Wade
Non-seq by itself doesn't give any more power, period.
If you really did see such an improvement in your 1/4 mile, it was because something else was different. Maybe it was a little cooler outside, your plugs were newer, your tuning different, cat not as heat soaked, who knows. Regardless, I hope you aren't telling many people that more power is a side effect of the non-seq mod because of your observation, because it is simply not true.
Wade
I am not going to get into a pissing match with you but nothing was different at all maybe 3 degrees of temp but that is it I have the time slips to back it up 4 people aswell to back it up and running a single turbo(to4s) and I pulled on him aswell as he pulled on me it came down to who got the better jump I could never run a single but know the top end power is much better BTW there is a video in one of my old post to prove it dude...
I am not saying that you dont know what you are talking about but non-seq is faster bottom line in a 1/4 at least that what the time slips say.
06-07-02, 11:15 PM
#15
Meesto Spakaro
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the only downsides to non-seq are the lag, the ruich a/f mixture (more fuel consumption), and possibly higher engine temps due to the richness.
Owning an rx7 u shouldnt be worryin about fuel consumption, but i can tell the car is running a bit hotter. May need upgraded AST and radiator if you're gonna be running non seq in hot weather
Owning an rx7 u shouldnt be worryin about fuel consumption, but i can tell the car is running a bit hotter. May need upgraded AST and radiator if you're gonna be running non seq in hot weather
06-08-02, 01:31 AM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: canada
Posts: 401
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rikki... is probally right... What rpm do you launch at
Rikki?
I think Non-squential has a big advantage in launching the car and getting better 60 fts. then squential. Which is why you are getting a few more mph in the 1/4 mile.
Please correct me if I am wrong though. jc.
Rikki?
I think Non-squential has a big advantage in launching the car and getting better 60 fts. then squential. Which is why you are getting a few more mph in the 1/4 mile.
Please correct me if I am wrong though. jc.
06-08-02, 01:34 PM
#20
Lurking..................
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: PA
Posts: 2,220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are many websites on how to do it, but I used www.dontbearikki.com just go to the how-to section you'll see it there.
06-13-02, 02:46 PM
#21
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brian,
Please send me a PM or email mail me after you find those pics.
Just don't email the pics without talking to me first because there's a good chance they will fill up my hotmail inbox.
Ryan,
I certainly don't want to get into a pissing match either. Let me put it like this and I won't bring it up again (as long as you don't)
If a person dynos his car, changes NOTHING else but wires it for non sequential, then redynos, he will not make more power with non sequential (within dyno variance of course). This can be proven. The reason is because the restrictions are the same for nonsequential and sequential above 4500 RPM (where most of the power is and where most people drive when trying to go as fast as possible).
Now, it is certainly possible that you picked up 4mph in the 1/4 after your conversion, you could have shifted at 5000 RPM in each gear when you had sequential, after all, or given 3/4 throttle. So obviously there are ways to lower your MPH at the dragstrip.
But stating that to people who are considering converting is simply misleading. You are suggesting that the result of the non-seq conversion is more ultimate power (since MPH is very well corellated with ultimate power). And, if you really did pick up 4 mph, it was because something else was different.
If anyone here is curious why, or needs more convincing, etc. I will provide more detail in private. I don't want Ryan to think I'm on his case or anything so I will try not to mention it on the forum in response to one of this threads in the future.
Wade
Please send me a PM or email mail me after you find those pics.
Just don't email the pics without talking to me first because there's a good chance they will fill up my hotmail inbox. Ryan,
I certainly don't want to get into a pissing match either. Let me put it like this and I won't bring it up again (as long as you don't)
If a person dynos his car, changes NOTHING else but wires it for non sequential, then redynos, he will not make more power with non sequential (within dyno variance of course). This can be proven. The reason is because the restrictions are the same for nonsequential and sequential above 4500 RPM (where most of the power is and where most people drive when trying to go as fast as possible).
Now, it is certainly possible that you picked up 4mph in the 1/4 after your conversion, you could have shifted at 5000 RPM in each gear when you had sequential, after all, or given 3/4 throttle. So obviously there are ways to lower your MPH at the dragstrip.
But stating that to people who are considering converting is simply misleading. You are suggesting that the result of the non-seq conversion is more ultimate power (since MPH is very well corellated with ultimate power). And, if you really did pick up 4 mph, it was because something else was different.
If anyone here is curious why, or needs more convincing, etc. I will provide more detail in private. I don't want Ryan to think I'm on his case or anything so I will try not to mention it on the forum in response to one of this threads in the future.
Wade
06-13-02, 03:04 PM
#22
thats not paint....
I really think non-seq let ryan get off the line easier, which lowered his time.
No one has said how Mazda wont work on non-seq... wait maybe thats a positive.
No one has said how Mazda wont work on non-seq... wait maybe thats a positive.
06-13-02, 03:14 PM
#23
Passenger
Posts: n/a
Wade,
this will be my last post on this. Nothing was different at ALL I sware my hand to god dude. Yes I came off the line a little better but I am telling you that everything I have stated is the truth at least too me I dont care if anyone does not beleive me I have the slips to prove it my 1/4 mile improved just by going non-seq bottom line if I gain 4mph and shved 3/10 of aswell with the exact same mods nothing different at ALL. Wade I am not sure what you are getting at dude but NON-SEQ is by far better than SEQ on a highly modded FD bottom line that I will get into a pssing match with so bring it up any time
LATAZ
this will be my last post on this. Nothing was different at ALL I sware my hand to god dude. Yes I came off the line a little better but I am telling you that everything I have stated is the truth at least too me I dont care if anyone does not beleive me I have the slips to prove it my 1/4 mile improved just by going non-seq bottom line if I gain 4mph and shved 3/10 of aswell with the exact same mods nothing different at ALL.
Wade I am not sure what you are getting at dude but NON-SEQ is by far better than SEQ on a highly modded FD bottom line that I will get into a pssing match with so bring it up any timeLATAZ
06-13-02, 04:36 PM
#24
Rotary Enthusiast
"Non-seq clearly gives more power (both hp and tq) in the mid-range.
Top-end should be about the same (a tad more if you do full non-seq, mainly because some restrictions are removed).
Non-seq has less power in the low-end than stock-seq.
http://www.micromanx.com/goble/rx7/...q3/compare.html"
Brian has a great comparison here, but needs some clarifications, esp regaring low end power.
The seq runs both had lower boost in single mode, 11 psi or less. This is reflected in the seq'l torque curves.
The brooks run shown, in twin mode, is actually 13 psi. He had also had a 12 psi run, so I averaged them to get consistent 12.5 psi (in twin mode) curves. Brian's table was 'tainted' by the transition at one data point, so I used dff rpm points to compare hp. Below 5K is lower regulated boost for the seq'ls:
rpm, ns, sq, sq(brooks ave)
3500 140 140 125
4500 220 185 190
5500 275 275 280
6500 308 335 328
For seq'l, if the primary boost is brought up to 12.5 psi, and the transition is optimized to about 4K, then the midrange power would be similar, and of course low end response and power would still be great for seq'l.
in comparing the 3 curves, it's clear the seq'ls were running better above 6500 rpm for some reason, and this had nothing to do with seq'l vs non.
I'm sure ryan ran faster ns, but the difference may not be that great with a sequential tuned as noted, with a flat torque curve.
Top-end should be about the same (a tad more if you do full non-seq, mainly because some restrictions are removed).
Non-seq has less power in the low-end than stock-seq.
http://www.micromanx.com/goble/rx7/...q3/compare.html"
Brian has a great comparison here, but needs some clarifications, esp regaring low end power.
The seq runs both had lower boost in single mode, 11 psi or less. This is reflected in the seq'l torque curves.
The brooks run shown, in twin mode, is actually 13 psi. He had also had a 12 psi run, so I averaged them to get consistent 12.5 psi (in twin mode) curves. Brian's table was 'tainted' by the transition at one data point, so I used dff rpm points to compare hp. Below 5K is lower regulated boost for the seq'ls:
rpm, ns, sq, sq(brooks ave)
3500 140 140 125
4500 220 185 190
5500 275 275 280
6500 308 335 328
For seq'l, if the primary boost is brought up to 12.5 psi, and the transition is optimized to about 4K, then the midrange power would be similar, and of course low end response and power would still be great for seq'l.
in comparing the 3 curves, it's clear the seq'ls were running better above 6500 rpm for some reason, and this had nothing to do with seq'l vs non.
I'm sure ryan ran faster ns, but the difference may not be that great with a sequential tuned as noted, with a flat torque curve.
06-13-02, 05:12 PM
#25
Full Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Issaquah, WA, USA
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In Fritz's comparison of the 3 cars...Brooks' and Brad's car had ported motors which definitely helps on the top-end...I am stock ported (and running less boost).
Also, on some cars/setups, the primary turbo can't support more than 11psi by itself as it approaches the transition point. This also contributes to the hp curve starting to flatten out as it approaches the stock-seq transition point.
My point is not to argue which is better (since "better" will depend on your likes and dislikes) but give people as much info as possible so they can make the best decision for their situation.
-Brian
Also, on some cars/setups, the primary turbo can't support more than 11psi by itself as it approaches the transition point. This also contributes to the hp curve starting to flatten out as it approaches the stock-seq transition point.
My point is not to argue which is better (since "better" will depend on your likes and dislikes) but give people as much info as possible so they can make the best decision for their situation.
-Brian