2nd Generation Specific (1986-1992) 1986-1992 Discussion including performance modifications and technical support sections.
View Poll Results: who is right about the bnr build?
I am right that bnr stage 1 build will be safe
0
0%
Sharingan19 is right that i should just go rtek 1.7 with stock turbo
3
50.00%
other with opinion please
3
50.00%
Voters: 6. You may not vote on this poll

questioning safety of possible build

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-17-11 | 12:33 PM
  #1  
FC3S_nataku's Avatar
Thread Starter
mattg prob nt coming back
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,933
Likes: 0
From: OrangePark FL
questioning safety of possible build

hey everyone

I have a S4 t2 with a street port and im trying to make a fun "plug and play" set up. my thoughts on the build are to get a BNR stage 1 while keeping the TMIC and going with a racingbeat downpipe and silencer combo with some kind of single catback. for ecu management i want to go with a rtek 1.8 as to have 4 720's to help supply the fuel needed from the extra flow from the bnr stage 1. of course there will be the other fuel mods such as 255 pump and possible fpr. i have been discussing this with Sharingan19 for the last few days and he says that while the 1.8 will adjust the fuel map for the bigger injectors it will still run dangerously lean and i should just go with a rtek 1.7 with a stock turbo because i will only be gaining 20-30 hp with the stage 1. my argument is that the fuel delivery will adequate as the tmic being a big enough restriction to keep the boost at reasonable levels and the set up should be good for a reliable "plug and play" set up for about 300 hp. im looking for opinions from the locals to see who is correct in there argument lol. please feel free to vote and give a response. thanks
Old 04-17-11 | 12:45 PM
  #2  
arghx's Avatar
rotorhead
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 16,187
Likes: 436
From: cold
I say you can't be sure if it will lean out or not unless you actually try it and measure the AFR.
Old 04-17-11 | 01:03 PM
  #3  
sharingan 19's Avatar
Rotary Revolutionary
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,881
Likes: 2
From: Jacksonville, Tampa & Tallahassee
You're leaving out the most important part buddy....
The part about how you have a full frame turbo setup waiting in the wings and that this whole stock/bnr setup is only a stop gap solution until you install that. My issue is less that it will be radically unsafe and more that it is a waste of money.

carry on...
Old 04-17-11 | 01:08 PM
  #4  
FC3S_nataku's Avatar
Thread Starter
mattg prob nt coming back
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,933
Likes: 0
From: OrangePark FL
lol i left that part out because it doesnt have anything to do with the current subject of the thread.
Old 04-17-11 | 01:26 PM
  #5  
gxl90rx7's Avatar
destroy, rebuild, repeat
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 2,991
Likes: 17
From: Charleston, SC
the rtek website says the 1.x series were meant to be used with some sort of external fuel controller. i know when i ran the 2.1, if i had simply left it with default correction (essentially a 1.x) it would run lean. if the 1.x corrects for the bigger injectors as they say, the net result would be no additional fuel to the engine

i remember i got in an argument with someone in the rtek section over this exact subject, he seemed to think the 1.7 would not run lean, and it somehow uses all of the 720cc injector
Old 04-17-11 | 01:28 PM
  #6  
j9fd3s's Avatar
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 31,168
Likes: 2,812
From: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
several flaws in the logic here.

1. 2.5" exhaust is too small

2. you don't mention how much boost you plan on running. this is kind of important. with a top mount IC, you'd have to watch air temps, but much over 10psi and you're probably pushing it.

3. why bother with the rtek 1.7/1.8 when the 2.0 would do the same thing, AND be able to accommodate a different setup later.

IMO here are two options.

a. stock turbo/IC/10psi/550injectors/walbro fuel pump/ rtek 2.0/2.5 exhaust.

B (for better), BNR/10psi/550/720's/walbro/rtek 2.0/3" exhaust.
Old 04-17-11 | 01:40 PM
  #7  
FC3S_nataku's Avatar
Thread Starter
mattg prob nt coming back
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,933
Likes: 0
From: OrangePark FL
Originally Posted by j9fd3s
several flaws in the logic here.

1. 2.5" exhaust is too small

2. you don't mention how much boost you plan on running. this is kind of important. with a top mount IC, you'd have to watch air temps, but much over 10psi and you're probably pushing it.

3. why bother with the rtek 1.7/1.8 when the 2.0 would do the same thing, AND be able to accommodate a different setup later.

IMO here are two options.

a. stock turbo/IC/10psi/550injectors/walbro fuel pump/ rtek 2.0/2.5 exhaust.

B (for better), BNR/10psi/550/720's/walbro/rtek 2.0/3" exhaust.
sorry for being not clear on those points.

1. i planned on going with the 3 in racingbeat down pipe and silencer

2. i planned on running 10-12 lbs of boost. i know that the tmic does have a limit of around 12 psi. and a possible addition to the future would be some kind of aux injection as that is something that would keep the air temps down and could be kept as the set up progresses.

3. i would like to use the rtek 1.8 as to have as close to a "plug and play" set up as possible. i understand that the 2.0 would be better in terms that i could adjust more things and it could transfer to different set up's as the build becomes more complex but that is not what i am looking for. with more options things become more complicated. if i was to go to a engine managment system i would just buy a pfc with patch kit and go from there.

i hope that explains more of what im trying to achieve with this theoretical build
Old 04-17-11 | 02:02 PM
  #8  
sharingan 19's Avatar
Rotary Revolutionary
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,881
Likes: 2
From: Jacksonville, Tampa & Tallahassee
If you want more power, safely you have to change things. Period. (...yet for some reason that seems to scare you)

A 1.7 / 1.8 RTEK WILL NOT ADD FUEL. Therefore it will not (by itself) support any more power, regardless if you have 550/550, 550/720, or 720/720 injectors. You would still need to buy a AFC or some other BS to adjust fuel and you still wouldn't have timing control. Hence why a 2.1 would be a much better idea. It comes with the stock maps and presets to control the same injector combos as the 1.7/ 1.8 so its not like you are creating a base map from scratch, and it can actually accommodate future modifications.

You might as well sell the full frame turbo parts to buy a real exhaust and pay someone to tune the rtek/ BNR stage 1.
Old 04-17-11 | 02:35 PM
  #9  
FC3S_nataku's Avatar
Thread Starter
mattg prob nt coming back
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,933
Likes: 0
From: OrangePark FL
again not scared to try new things. i am just seeing if the build i have thought up would be a safe (relative term) plug and play build. it seems as this thread has disproved my theoretical build. it appears as the best "plug and play" build is still just a stock turbo with a rtek 1.7. Im not going to sell my full frame turbo or parts as i will get to a point where they will be used after other things on the car are to the proper/safe standard
Old 04-17-11 | 04:14 PM
  #10  
sharingan 19's Avatar
Rotary Revolutionary
iTrader: (16)
 
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 3,881
Likes: 2
From: Jacksonville, Tampa & Tallahassee
Yes! once again reason triumphs over conjecture... for now
Old 04-17-11 | 05:32 PM
  #11  
chatchie's Avatar
Rotary Enthusiast

iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 756
Likes: 0
From: mass
Im on a 1.8 with a streetport and run lean on the stock turbo. Especially in the midrange.

My wastegate is ported to 30mm,I put my stock TID back on, swapped my 3" single for a 2.5" dual and I still get 12-14psi from 2nd gear on. AFRs in the high 12 to low 13.The streetport flows lots of air.

I bought a BNR 4 and am getting a 2.1
Old 04-17-11 | 05:39 PM
  #12  
j9fd3s's Avatar
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 31,168
Likes: 2,812
From: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
Originally Posted by FC3S_nataku
3. i would like to use the rtek 1.8 as to have as close to a "plug and play" set up as possible. i understand that the 2.0 would be better in terms that i could adjust more things and it could transfer to different set up's as the build becomes more complex but that is not what i am looking for. with more options things become more complicated. if i was to go to a engine managment system i would just buy a pfc with patch kit and go from there.

i hope that explains more of what im trying to achieve with this theoretical build
i'd still get the 2.x and just set the menu to whatever injector i needed.... how hard is that?
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
whinin
Introduce yourself
17
03-30-19 07:53 PM



Quick Reply: questioning safety of possible build



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:28 AM.