Max output 10A
09-08-11, 04:08 PM
#26
Where the heck did Racing Beat get parts for a 10A? Where does anybody get parts for a 10A? are they all custom? Mazda hasn't sold a 10A in almost 40 years. And the 10A had a lot of problems that were not solved until Mazda had already stopped making it. It was NOT a reliable engine, due to inferior materials more than anything else.
The problem I see is that the 10A was a failure, or at least a failure as a viable commercial engine that can last. You can't pretend like it's just a small version of a 13B or something. By the time the venerable 13B's from the 86-92 had come out Mazda had basically re-engineered everything in comparison to the 10A.
But I don't know every detail about the 10A. Maybe you really can replace most of it with better parts from later motors, but in stock form it was a piece of junk.
The problem I see is that the 10A was a failure, or at least a failure as a viable commercial engine that can last. You can't pretend like it's just a small version of a 13B or something. By the time the venerable 13B's from the 86-92 had come out Mazda had basically re-engineered everything in comparison to the 10A.
But I don't know every detail about the 10A. Maybe you really can replace most of it with better parts from later motors, but in stock form it was a piece of junk.
09-09-11, 03:18 PM
#28
10a *****
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 306
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Where the heck did Racing Beat get parts for a 10A? Where does anybody get parts for a 10A? are they all custom? Mazda hasn't sold a 10A in almost 40 years. And the 10A had a lot of problems that were not solved until Mazda had already stopped making it. It was NOT a reliable engine, due to inferior materials more than anything else.
The problem I see is that the 10A was a failure, or at least a failure as a viable commercial engine that can last. You can't pretend like it's just a small version of a 13B or something. By the time the venerable 13B's from the 86-92 had come out Mazda had basically re-engineered everything in comparison to the 10A.
But I don't know every detail about the 10A. Maybe you really can replace most of it with better parts from later motors, but in stock form it was a piece of junk.
The problem I see is that the 10A was a failure, or at least a failure as a viable commercial engine that can last. You can't pretend like it's just a small version of a 13B or something. By the time the venerable 13B's from the 86-92 had come out Mazda had basically re-engineered everything in comparison to the 10A.
But I don't know every detail about the 10A. Maybe you really can replace most of it with better parts from later motors, but in stock form it was a piece of junk.
09-09-11, 05:10 PM
#29
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Alaska
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't know they had one.
I only credited them with most of the effort in persuading SCTA to reduce the displacement multiplier to a more reasonable number (still a bit to go yet, but 2X beats the heck out of 3X ).
I don't know for sure that you can swap the parts around like I've suggested, it's only something I've read about on this forum.
I was hoping someone would post with experience of assembling one that way, or a lead to someone that has.
Finding out if it's possible (by building one, or failing in the attempt) is only worth it to me if the potential is there to make the required power.
It sounds like the answer to whether or not it can make that kind of power, for what I'm doing, even with extreme modification is "no".
I only credited them with most of the effort in persuading SCTA to reduce the displacement multiplier to a more reasonable number (still a bit to go yet, but 2X beats the heck out of 3X ).
I don't know for sure that you can swap the parts around like I've suggested, it's only something I've read about on this forum.
I was hoping someone would post with experience of assembling one that way, or a lead to someone that has.
Finding out if it's possible (by building one, or failing in the attempt) is only worth it to me if the potential is there to make the required power.
It sounds like the answer to whether or not it can make that kind of power, for what I'm doing, even with extreme modification is "no".
09-13-11, 01:21 PM
#30
None, thankfully. Are you going to tell me that the 6mm seals and poor surface treatment were a good design? It's well documented that Mazda greatly improved everything on the later engines, from the clutch fan to the seals to the exhaust and intake systems. Even all the old magazine articles talk about Mazda trying to solve the problems of the 10A in later models. I would not race an engine that has nothing going for it except nostalgia.
09-23-11, 01:04 AM
#31
aerosev
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Narrow engine /smaller will give you more efficiency!.
You would however be fighting against 60s tech apex seals/slots etc using 10A rotors. I've heard you can cut 12A rotors down a fair bit from 573cc.
It may be possible to get 84-85 12A non turbo rotors, get them cut down so each chamber swept ~503.75cc. Within reason the 12A crank might still work because you can pack the stationary gear further out etc.
Even working on 115%VE 2015cc .55bsfc and 10500rpm you are talking about 282bhp. It might be pretty hard to get 115% VE @ 10500rpm. Seals might also stop working and make the BSFC drop too.
What is interesting tho is that 1psi of 'ram flow' would be worth about 20bhp. If you could get 1-3psi of positive pressure using outside air then you could potentially get your goal. The other thing I'm not sure about is if it is possible to get a vacuum effect on your exhaust due to air speed outside the car.
The other thing you could do is fuel the thing on some sort of alcohol fuel and inject at the entry to the ram tube so the air is precooled
You would however be fighting against 60s tech apex seals/slots etc using 10A rotors. I've heard you can cut 12A rotors down a fair bit from 573cc.
It may be possible to get 84-85 12A non turbo rotors, get them cut down so each chamber swept ~503.75cc. Within reason the 12A crank might still work because you can pack the stationary gear further out etc.
Even working on 115%VE 2015cc .55bsfc and 10500rpm you are talking about 282bhp. It might be pretty hard to get 115% VE @ 10500rpm. Seals might also stop working and make the BSFC drop too.
What is interesting tho is that 1psi of 'ram flow' would be worth about 20bhp. If you could get 1-3psi of positive pressure using outside air then you could potentially get your goal. The other thing I'm not sure about is if it is possible to get a vacuum effect on your exhaust due to air speed outside the car.
The other thing you could do is fuel the thing on some sort of alcohol fuel and inject at the entry to the ram tube so the air is precooled
There's my 5cents worth.
09-25-11, 03:51 PM
#32
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,832
Received 2,603 Likes
on
1,847 Posts
and people race nostalgia engines all the time, its called a porsche. 6mm seals are a much better idea than an air cooled turbo engine... even porsche knew it was a bad idea in the 1960's, but they kept doing it for another 30 years!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
frosty1993
General Rotary Tech Support
3
09-30-15 01:27 PM
befarrer
Adaptronic Engine Mgmt - AUS
3
09-22-15 09:33 AM
