Can someone explain this clause to me?
#1
Can someone explain this clause to me?
"Note that with really good engine management, a pp can be driven on the street quite successfully.
http://www.rotaryengineillustrated.c...l-port-14.html
Can someone explain how this works? I doubt it could kill the noise. Low end power? I don't get it.
http://www.rotaryengineillustrated.c...l-port-14.html
Can someone explain how this works? I doubt it could kill the noise. Low end power? I don't get it.
#2
Noise is entirely down to the exhaust. My stockport, P-port, and streetport all sounded the same on the same exhaust system.
Now, normally, streetable exhausts and P-ports do not mix because high overlap engines are very sensitive to tuning and backpressure issues. You end up making less power than a good streetport.
Torque, however... a P-port has ungodly amounts of midrange torque. Below about 2k they suck, but when the hammer's down they *pull*.
That's also the key: they do not make very much power at part throttle.
I took mine out because I can't afford a streetable yet free flowing exhaust system right now, building a streetported engine was cheaper. (I basically only drive my RX-7 on 200+ mile trips, so a decently quiet exhaust is essential)
edit: I forgot... DRIVABILITY. The P-port was atrocious on a carburetor, although my carb setup *was* less than ideal. With EFI it was a pussycat. Idled almost smoothly (about as well as my streetport) and it didn't buck anywhere near as bad as with a carb when at low throttle openings. I could even drive it in the city without having to do the WOT/neutral/WOT/neutral tango to keep from breaking U-joints. But the exhaust was just too restrictive and it caused a bunch of tuning issues at WOT.
Idling: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr7vU3cbH6E
Now, normally, streetable exhausts and P-ports do not mix because high overlap engines are very sensitive to tuning and backpressure issues. You end up making less power than a good streetport.
Torque, however... a P-port has ungodly amounts of midrange torque. Below about 2k they suck, but when the hammer's down they *pull*.
That's also the key: they do not make very much power at part throttle.
I took mine out because I can't afford a streetable yet free flowing exhaust system right now, building a streetported engine was cheaper. (I basically only drive my RX-7 on 200+ mile trips, so a decently quiet exhaust is essential)
edit: I forgot... DRIVABILITY. The P-port was atrocious on a carburetor, although my carb setup *was* less than ideal. With EFI it was a pussycat. Idled almost smoothly (about as well as my streetport) and it didn't buck anywhere near as bad as with a carb when at low throttle openings. I could even drive it in the city without having to do the WOT/neutral/WOT/neutral tango to keep from breaking U-joints. But the exhaust was just too restrictive and it caused a bunch of tuning issues at WOT.
Idling: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr7vU3cbH6E
Last edited by peejay; 09-30-08 at 11:34 AM.
#4
What about it?
If you're using carbon apex seals and winging it up high all the time, then yes life will be short. So will a street port under the same conditions. Engine life doesn't much have to do with the port as it does the RPM range used and the parts used. Keep it in stock RPM type ranges (under 8000) and it will live a long life.
There are a few rally cars here that use stock internals, 8000-ish redline, and peripheral ports, and they don't have any undue longevity issues.
If you're using carbon apex seals and winging it up high all the time, then yes life will be short. So will a street port under the same conditions. Engine life doesn't much have to do with the port as it does the RPM range used and the parts used. Keep it in stock RPM type ranges (under 8000) and it will live a long life.
There are a few rally cars here that use stock internals, 8000-ish redline, and peripheral ports, and they don't have any undue longevity issues.
#7
With those conditions you should see triple that with carbon seals. With ceramics, essentially wear doesn't happen and you'll be limited by the side seals and oil control O-rings, which in street use last essentially forever. They wear, but even after 200k it is minimal. (Maybe not ideal for power, but an engine will still run fine with .004" gap instead of .002")
Trending Topics
#9
I don't know anything about 20Bs. My gut feeling is that the more displacement you have, the harder it is going to be to have a quiet exhaust, since it now has to be free flowing for 400+hp instead of 225+hp, but the amount of flow at idle is still small so it's going to be louder at idle/cruise.
On the other hand, a stock de-turboed 20B would crap all over any street driven 2 rotor, just from the boost in displacement...
On the other hand, a stock de-turboed 20B would crap all over any street driven 2 rotor, just from the boost in displacement...
#10
Im not really as concerned with the noise as I am with the engine life. Engine life is largely what will determine my port type.
If I can get a PP three rotor to last 40k miles before a rebuild than I think that's the route I might go.
If I can get a PP three rotor to last 40k miles before a rebuild than I think that's the route I might go.
#11
Noise is entirely down to the exhaust. My stockport, P-port, and streetport all sounded the same on the same exhaust system.
Now, normally, streetable exhausts and P-ports do not mix because high overlap engines are very sensitive to tuning and backpressure issues. You end up making less power than a good streetport.
Torque, however... a P-port has ungodly amounts of midrange torque. Below about 2k they suck, but when the hammer's down they *pull*.
That's also the key: they do not make very much power at part throttle.
I took mine out because I can't afford a streetable yet free flowing exhaust system right now, building a streetported engine was cheaper. (I basically only drive my RX-7 on 200+ mile trips, so a decently quiet exhaust is essential)
edit: I forgot... DRIVABILITY. The P-port was atrocious on a carburetor, although my carb setup *was* less than ideal. With EFI it was a pussycat. Idled almost smoothly (about as well as my streetport) and it didn't buck anywhere near as bad as with a carb when at low throttle openings. I could even drive it in the city without having to do the WOT/neutral/WOT/neutral tango to keep from breaking U-joints. But the exhaust was just too restrictive and it caused a bunch of tuning issues at WOT.
Idling: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr7vU3cbH6E
Now, normally, streetable exhausts and P-ports do not mix because high overlap engines are very sensitive to tuning and backpressure issues. You end up making less power than a good streetport.
Torque, however... a P-port has ungodly amounts of midrange torque. Below about 2k they suck, but when the hammer's down they *pull*.
That's also the key: they do not make very much power at part throttle.
I took mine out because I can't afford a streetable yet free flowing exhaust system right now, building a streetported engine was cheaper. (I basically only drive my RX-7 on 200+ mile trips, so a decently quiet exhaust is essential)
edit: I forgot... DRIVABILITY. The P-port was atrocious on a carburetor, although my carb setup *was* less than ideal. With EFI it was a pussycat. Idled almost smoothly (about as well as my streetport) and it didn't buck anywhere near as bad as with a carb when at low throttle openings. I could even drive it in the city without having to do the WOT/neutral/WOT/neutral tango to keep from breaking U-joints. But the exhaust was just too restrictive and it caused a bunch of tuning issues at WOT.
Idling: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr7vU3cbH6E
#12
If I had the money for an IDA, I would have run one. IDAs are super expensive, they don't exactly grow on trees. A used IDA and a handful of jets would have cost more than the entire car did.
I was using a Holley... with a decidedly less than optimal intake setup because I wanted 14" runners and it all had to fit under the stock hood.
And I only had about 15 minutes a day to tune it... including 10 minutes to get it started and warmed up.
The main problem was runner wet out, and the lack of runner independence which really screwed up the ability for it to pull air through at idle. It would idle down at 700rpm, actually, but not on its own.
It was a HUGE difference with EFI. It sounded mean and angry but it drove very well. Just not much power because instead of the 2 1/4" straight through system I was running previously, I was using a mishmash of header, stock midpipe, some sort of muffler, and a 2 1/2" cat that has a whole bunch of pipe cuts and resleeves in it.
Actually, it's the same exact system as I am using on my 13B (the header is slotted to work with 12A and 13B) and it put down 154hp at the wheels with a too rich mixture... my guesstimate is that the P-port was maybe 110-120hp at the crank with the EFI... they do NOT like restrictive exhausts!
I was using a Holley... with a decidedly less than optimal intake setup because I wanted 14" runners and it all had to fit under the stock hood.
And I only had about 15 minutes a day to tune it... including 10 minutes to get it started and warmed up.
The main problem was runner wet out, and the lack of runner independence which really screwed up the ability for it to pull air through at idle. It would idle down at 700rpm, actually, but not on its own.
It was a HUGE difference with EFI. It sounded mean and angry but it drove very well. Just not much power because instead of the 2 1/4" straight through system I was running previously, I was using a mishmash of header, stock midpipe, some sort of muffler, and a 2 1/2" cat that has a whole bunch of pipe cuts and resleeves in it.
Actually, it's the same exact system as I am using on my 13B (the header is slotted to work with 12A and 13B) and it put down 154hp at the wheels with a too rich mixture... my guesstimate is that the P-port was maybe 110-120hp at the crank with the EFI... they do NOT like restrictive exhausts!
Last edited by peejay; 10-05-08 at 09:47 PM.
#13
Thanks for the replies, but I have decided to go with a large streetport, the main reason being induction method. Although I have always envisioned this engine to be naturally aspirated, I think it's a good idea to leave the turbo option open in case I ever feel like having 600whp instead of 300...and with a PP that would be significantly harder.
That option alone is worth the loss of 50whp that I would get from running large side port. If speedsource only came up with 380ish at the wheels through a racing tranny I doubt I'm going to find any more than that through a PP, and some N/A 20Bs on this forum are already creeping up towards those numbers with a side port.
That option alone is worth the loss of 50whp that I would get from running large side port. If speedsource only came up with 380ish at the wheels through a racing tranny I doubt I'm going to find any more than that through a PP, and some N/A 20Bs on this forum are already creeping up towards those numbers with a side port.
#14
Moderator
iTrader: (3)
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 31,197
Likes: 2,825
From: https://www2.mazda.com/en/100th/
ITB is probably mandatory for a PP
an NA motor will basically last indefinately, especially if its a weekend street car
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post