Rotary Car Performance General Rotary Car and Engine modification discussions.

Bridge port without increasing intake timing?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 01-05-15, 01:53 AM
  #1  
Madman
Thread Starter
 
HoffDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Lake of the Ozarks, Missouri
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Bridge port without increasing intake timing?

Does anybody port their engines without changing the port opening timing? I was thinking that opening the port earlier would do more harm than good because it is decreasing the exhaust scavenging. Other than that I'd want to move as much air as possible and the port can be open as long as I can with out changing exhaust scavenging. Just for this example the exhaust port would remain mostly the same. How much can you bridgeport, or j-port if possible, without opening the port much earlier? Idle would be the only time I'm ok with the overlap, but almost as soon as it's off idle I'd like it to run perfectly smooth.
Old 01-05-15, 05:37 AM
  #2  
Old [Sch|F]ool

 
peejay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Posts: 12,505
Received 414 Likes on 295 Posts
That makes zero sense. The point of a bridge port is that it is the only way you are able to open the port earlier. Conversely, it is impossible to make a bridge port that does not open at least 70-80 degrees earlier than a stock port.

Opening the port early is what increases exhaust scavenging in the first place. It's how the ports work. Actual airflow through the port when the full face is open is not very significant until you get into the J-port range, the big benefit is exposing the intake port to the vacuum created by the exhaust to start it/keep it moving forward.
Old 01-05-15, 12:25 PM
  #3  
Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,802
Received 2,577 Likes on 1,831 Posts
my friend did a bridge port back in the day that would have been called a big J bridge, so it was way into the water jacket, but with timing as mild as he could. it worked really well, with a holley carb, it did 230rwhp and it would get 26mpg on the freeway, it was his DD for years.

i would suggest that a 230rwhp 26mpg rotary is possible, but you will be totally bonkers after a while.
Old 01-05-15, 01:15 PM
  #4  
Madman
Thread Starter
 
HoffDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Lake of the Ozarks, Missouri
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by peejay
That makes zero sense. The point of a bridge port is that it is the only way you are able to open the port earlier. Conversely, it is impossible to make a bridge port that does not open at least 70-80 degrees earlier than a stock port.

Opening the port early is what increases exhaust scavenging in the first place. It's how the ports work. Actual airflow through the port when the full face is open is not very significant until you get into the J-port range, the big benefit is exposing the intake port to the vacuum created by the exhaust to start it/keep it moving forward.
That does make sense and I didn't think about that. The idea of porting without much change to the timing just popped in my head. As j9fd3s said it is obviously doable.

Originally Posted by j9fd3s
my friend did a bridge port back in the day that would have been called a big J bridge, so it was way into the water jacket, but with timing as mild as he could. it worked really well, with a holley carb, it did 230rwhp and it would get 26mpg on the freeway, it was his DD for years.

i would suggest that a 230rwhp 26mpg rotary is possible, but you will be totally bonkers after a while.
That is really cool, I do want to try it sometime. I understand now what changing the timing will do, but I see that you also don't have to and you get a different result. Very interesting .
Old 01-05-15, 07:25 PM
  #5  
Moderator

iTrader: (3)
 
j9fd3s's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Posts: 30,802
Received 2,577 Likes on 1,831 Posts
just to be clear the timing on my friends bridge was way different from stock, and pretty radical, but it just was less timing than the normal monster bridge port template, but with the same size port as the monster bridge. it had a brap brap idle, but it had mufflers, and was street friendly
Old 01-05-15, 11:08 PM
  #6  
Old [Sch|F]ool

 
peejay's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Posts: 12,505
Received 414 Likes on 295 Posts
Eh, my engine is almost a carbon copy of the bridge ports Mazda was running in Group A in the early 80s, and it's pretty street friendly, and has mufflers and stuff too.
Old 01-06-15, 02:45 AM
  #7  
Madman
Thread Starter
 
HoffDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Lake of the Ozarks, Missouri
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by j9fd3s
just to be clear the timing on my friends bridge was way different from stock, and pretty radical, but it just was less timing than the normal monster bridge port template, but with the same size port as the monster bridge. it had a brap brap idle, but it had mufflers, and was street friendly
Gotcha.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
trickster
2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992)
25
07-01-23 04:40 PM
rx7brandon
General Rotary Tech Support
3
08-16-15 10:55 AM



Quick Reply: Bridge port without increasing intake timing?



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:10 PM.