RICE RACING
-
Posts
279 -
Joined
-
Days Won
4 -
Feedback
0%
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Media Demo
Store
Posts posted by RICE RACING
-
-
Some here may find this of interest.
I decided to share this since lots of "internet engineers" these days are comparing all kinds of turbos and theorizing about what will fit what best and how it will work, with ironically none of them ever testing properly the set ups they are recommending to the 'community' they claim to be doing a service too.
Anyway.
Below is an over lay of exactly the same engine type (13B-REW) stock standard.
EFR9180 IWG 0.92AR (green) v EFR7670 EWG 1.05AR (red), same target boost, same rpm acceleration rate. One on dyno done in 4th gear and other on road in 3rd gear, different gearing ratio's but importantly the accel rate is equal thus turbocharger is loaded the same way to make a valid comparison.
While I wont put up everything (only enough to put certain people in their place lol) the cars run same EGT, same lambda, same timing, all fundamentals are otherwise equal to give a fair comparison. Moral, don't believe anyone be they a vendor/supplier or internet engineer unless they can show you overlays of professional data analysis of exact comparisons to back up their claims of what will work on your engine type! comparing a motor that is not the same is just plain stupid and misleading.
So my parting message to the many stalkers who follow the thread around the world, why recommend something when you don't know what you are talking about or how to properly test it, let alone prove it?
:)
-
Back to Datsun content, got proof of durability mother luvers???
Time on Load, bloke who drives it is a maniac, rapes car each time its turned driven.
300+ 9 second passes? who knows who cares, as I measure durability in hours, its got 19 hours to go before engine will be inspected (we hope, but that is the aim), see how long the shitbox lasts at all a 9180 can deliver.
-
On 12/16/2018 at 8:23 AM, KiwiRS4T said:
We have drift cars in NZ with three or four rotor engines making huge power with a good degree of reliability. It can be done.
^ and some of those examples you quote as 'reliable' famously detonated at WTAC and spewed out oil (though no one was killed LOL). Also spinning wheels for a few seconds is not comparable to loading up an engine at 200+kph consistently and repeatedly.
I stand by my original comments, mechanical engineering is the ultimate distiller of bullshit, therefore you only see things in the world that work, this is why you don't see rotaries be they turbo or otherwise in anything meaningful at the top, be that circuit racing, drag racing, top speed events, or out on the streets.
Compare them on an equivalence basis and they are nowhere, still a novel engine though for kunts who like to be different
-
This is what is crucial in these engines and why I rave on about Life Racing who are the undisputed masters of knock control engines honestly.
You can quickly and randomly at times go from minor knock to pre igntion in one engine cycle! and good luck if your ECU of choice and calibrator have no real experience in running to this limit :)
-
2 hours ago, Nismo 3.2ish said:
Had a test run in the RX8 , thought they had a hive of bees under the hood
Did you have to do to the motor and what supporting mods to get this result ?
I would imagine you blew a few donks trying to get it right and I bet it cost a bit on R&D to get the motor to perform for 2 years without going POP!
Hope you didn't kill too many drivers to get the end result LOL
The motor in that car is a real nugget actually, built in NZ (it's in the title) but the porting is shit, rotors are the wrong CR, but it has a center bearing main shaft, while not necessary at all it is in there, these nugget engines are very prone to oil blockage and need attention to the breather system to make them work (again shit design) but it lives.
As said the porting is rubbish in the the extreme just goes to show you a rotary can make power with rubbish workmanship LOL...
Some pics below v's a proper port job.
In regards to getting it to live, I've been doing this since 1995 or so (my first turbo rotary) but what I did not have access too since only last 7 or so years is actual hi end race electronics that are exactly what is used in the best forced induction endurance race series around the world, this is what 'honestly' transformed a novel/different idea into some thing that works in all conditions and any eventualities we threw at it (and continue to put it through). We are the only people who run knock limited turbocharged rotaries (to my knowledge)... engines are fully controlled in knock to pre ignition stages, and believe it or not have never yet lost an engine since running the Life Racing F88 ECU. It has taken well over 300 iterations of calibration revisions (yes 300!) some may find that hard to believe but its allot of hours of development and nothing more than that, hardware wise bugger all has changed, some development of water injection specifications and proper integration into the ECU.
Don't get me wrong lots of people (not just me) I am sure have the formula to make these kunt boxes actually work but its the implementation and making it a reality that is the hard bit we have all struggled with !
-
9 minutes ago, Nismo 3.2ish said:
It really gets going ,? 13B is such a small motor and it weighs less than half of the RB26 motor
9180 on that, MAD , how do they stand up to high revs under that power?
In two output shaft revolutions on a 13B it fires 4 times so its still displaces 2.616lt effectively. They are a small physical engine that is for sure, and have some great merits in relation to power density, The biggest drawbacks are if you have to compete in specific fuel consumption basis or specific power, they are about 20 to 30% less efficient when talking equivalent engine specifications.
Since the inception (1960's) prone to sealing problems mostly cause of using a single linear beam to span 80mm distance (13B case) and keeping it in tolerance (flat, round tip on housing surface) is for all intensive purposes impossible. Then consider it has shared chambers and you can effectively take out up to half of the engine. It involves very specific calibration requirements to keep them alive (much harder than any piston engines typically).
In short to answer your question directly though.
This motor v's a RB with same turbo, I have running at same specific power (give or take) bhp/lt/bar and currently have them both at around 1 hour on full load, the Mazda still has compression LOL. Its something no one can really do this is why you don't see any on the road as real road cars, of if they do they have a motor every month put into them with no data to back up the claims of 'durability' we have been proving this car for over 2 years consistently. I will say one thing, without a Life Racing ECU and water injection system none of it would be remotely possible at all. Sure you can have a one hit wonder BS dyno claim or a few 'drag passes' and corresponding arsefacebook posts of world domination, but none of those cars EVER have any road proof of them working
or if they try they detonate crack the block throw oil on the tires and spear off into the bushes killing the driver LOL.
-
41 minutes ago, s14 rb25det said:
ok nice! what efr is that?
EFR 9180 IWG version, running around 118,000rpm at peak engine rpm
This is it running at a bit lower power setting
-
Here are some interesting real world tests (sorry its a 13B rotary Mazda) but still worth looking at.
100kph to 150kph in 2 seconds and 73 meters, makes 30 psi boost in 3rd gear at ~4800rpm and will hold power to 9300rpm it has a usable power band (235rwkw) from that rpm too, it really goes better than the peak power would suggest, fast on the road, too fast as it requires traction control most times.
Hope to get to try one (EFR) for myself :)
-
4 minutes ago, Lithium said:
Flipside of that is you get people who spend lots of money on a few quality parts but match or apply them poorly, and naturally often a lot of those expensive parts get ripped for underperforming when they've been sabotaged by poor implementation.
Imho a well put together setup using "cheaper" parts (NOT to be confused with shit parts) will much more often than not outperform a setup using all top brand stuff with no well considered/implemented plan.Maybe find someone who finished Yr12 and passed some core subjects like mathematics, physics and chemistry?
Its not that hard honestly and I am a dumb kunt.
I agree there are max homo types out there who will buy quality stuff and think that is it, but there are many who use hyped up stuff and get short changed when there are far better quality items out there at ironically the same prices LOL.
-
For this amount of money you can buy a real computer, I don't get it other than people they use have no idea what is out there?
-
29 minutes ago, BakemonoRicer said:
Budgets....forget budgets when building a GTR.
Do it once do it right. Just about everyone who takes a budget option ends up unhappy.
Apply that to any car, sub system many choose to use :)
Classic case someone will by a Halaltech shitbox, and use the excuse 'that is what my tuner knows' ironically spend as much as you would get a proper ECU for, in the end you have a world of pain, and an inferior item that you will always be reminded of how shit it really is. When all you needed to do is open up your wallet and use your brains.
See it all the time, in general the aftermarket scene is just dumb, its all I can put it down as.
-
2
-
-
old mate failed military cadet and anal probe lube stick man have no idea LOL.....
-
Tomei (who built this motor) rate it to some stupid power level, it's done a few hours now at all an EFR9180 can make, see how it goes I guess?
-
-
8 hours ago, Lithium said:
I am definitely getting deeper, though I'm only starting to play with setups that have THAT much data collection....
353 channels on the R34 and only 312 on the RX7 :P almost run out of bandwidth to do much more, but we get most of the stuff that is required.
-
Not just me who referes to them as 'boat anchors' either its common even on top end activities LOL
-
1 minute ago, Lithium said:
Yeah I normally think in PR across the engine, I only flipped it around for the benefit of others who might be reading and may feel more comfortable thinking 1.4x higher exhaust pressure.
Haha I wasn't trying to convince you that you should be running an EFR9280, I was just going back to where this all started - which was the release of the EFR9280 and how justified it's existence may be. Maybe the EFR8474 would be more rewarding in that case.....or LS swap...
Yeah I get what you are saying, I think if more of them calibrated their own engines they would see merit in referring to it as what happens across the head/ports. It was interesting seeing it myself first time I did this 15 years ago, with the Automagic inside the shitbox Autronics we all loved back then. Now just set up my own tables for it on the ITB boosted set ups.
I like the way you approach it personally, its all good talking about max output, but lots and lots loose sight of why we do this crap, its to have a quick and durable car that is enjoyable and does not require a boat anchor up front, leave them for the mardigras parade where they belong.
-
2 minutes ago, Lithium said:
I am definitely getting deeper, though I'm only starting to play with setups that have THAT much data collection.... so I can't give numbers yet but soon enough. I've not questioned anything you've said on you having an unacceptable bad MAP/TIP, at all - I'm just saying that in lieu of not having any of that data, I'm speculating that there could be a case that the compressor side is actually at least partly responsible for the TIP getting too high.
From a theory point of view, I'd argue that once I had the data (or what I've extrapolated from tuning without the MAP/TIP info) is that it would really depend on what the setup is and what I was doing with it. For example, with an E85 street car which may be used for the occasional drag meet or blast through the hills I'd tolerate a much higher MAP/TIP than perhaps for an endurance race car or drag car. Lots of factors to consider, not least "is it stopping me from making more power?
" but also response and reliability - though you clearly know that.
If we had a hypothetical RB30/EFR9180 type setup lets say for sake of argument if you were running an engine that is crossing past 1:1 just before 6000rpm currently then the compressor starts plummeting in efficiency then it could end up running with >1.4 TIP/MAP ratio and climbing steeply by 7000rpm which I would call out of hand. In the exact same scenario an EFR9280 could for sake of argument be at 1.2 TIP/MAP ratio at the same place and climbing, but FAR more steadily than the EFR9180. That hypothetical is still obviously not perfect, but I would say would make a HUGE difference.
I like to talk in pressure ratio across the engine so to me personally it makes more sense to refer to it as map/tip.
On some engines (weird shitbox like wankel or high over lap reciprocating) the relationship of say if you had 0.700 it does not necessarily translate to a 30% power loss due to pressure differential across the engine. So some are effected allot more than others. What I have found in my limited experiences is there is a correlation to lower output and non linearity still staying on compressor map as this ratio worsens. I don't know if the 9280 would help much?????? May try it as an interim test anyway since we know what the 9180 does, keep all other variables the same.
The concern is as I said way back, that the inline 6cyl, that we run so efficiently, even in this capacity and flow rate combined with twin gate, horse cock manifolds blah blah, does not have the ideal response like an inefficient wankle (read wasted energy in exhaust!) so potentially the larger compressor I cant see helping that situation, and a few posts back, the car makes enough power really as is.
LS swap? :P
-
Evo almost ready.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Lithium said:
Weird flex, but ok. I'm going to restrain myself from going off topic on that one haha. The estimated airflow thing is a fair call, however - while it's nice to get a thumb suck it definitely is an estimate which relies on all kinds of things being right which probably aren't always bang on. It's one of the reasons I was interested in TIP, MAP and turbine rpm on the setup you are using, as really it was going to be a more reliable way of getting a gauge of how hard the compressor is working and how much the engine is getting choked by the turbine.
I can't answer that at all, have not seen any TIP data
The data you have given would make me expect TIP to get AIDS above 6000rpm purely because of the compressor flow, regardless of how well the hotside flows... however I don't know how the MAP/TIP is *before* the compressor starts choking. Maybe the hotside would *also* be a limitation, but if the MAP/TIP isn't bad before 6000rpm then I'd hazard a guess and say that it might actually improve a heap with the bigger compressor and then you'd start finding out if/when the hotside legitimately becomes a restriction of it's own.
Lith it sounds like your do a bit of this?
What is your limit for map/tip or what do you find in experience on the types of engines you do starts to yield lower results and increase negatives in relation to such parameters like say knock or another metric.
-
8 hours ago, burn4005 said:
sorry I assumed the max speed for a 9180 was ~1119/120k rpm from where you've started blanking out. discovered now its 116k so you can see where I was coming from.
NP and I agree with you that enough debate, I appreciate your input and some of what I put up is of use so lets keep at that cause I know I can't test everything myself, so its good if we can work together since there is not many people who spend 30k in electronics and development time/resources per car, and in multiples its even more rare, not just one off personal hobby projects (nothing wrong with that though) but the more you do the better potentially the data collection is.
-
47 minutes ago, burn4005 said:
OEM manufacturers go to extreme levels to accurately model engine characterists because they REQUIRE it. emissions are getting incredibly tight. motorsport engine control is basic stuff by comparision, especially on the fuelling side. those advanced motorsport ecus aren't doing anything clever
You do realize LR do OEM development with that exact same 'motorsport engine control' that exceed Euro5&6 standards? https://www.liferacing.com/products/ecus/gdi-series/ so not sure where you are going with that one to justify Ve based ECU's? I think its just marketing or justification of principle of operation getting confused with reality but hey.
I know a LR is extremely clever, but I use it daily so I am biased, yes. Will dismount hobby horse now.
-
6 minutes ago, burn4005 said:
sorry I assumed the max speed for a 9180 was ~1119/120k rpm from where you've started blanking out. discovered now its 116k so you can see where I was coming from.
No stress, eitherway turbo is not right on that engine, not even a 13B to be honest, its more for small engines when run to full power.
-
Ve is a guess, but lets not argue it hey? you like yours I like mine, what was the last Bosch motorsport ECU you personally used? Cosworth? Life Racing?
Borg Warner EFR Series Turbo's V 2.0
in Forced Induction Performance
Posted · Edited by RICE RACING
Too much power with WM50, means you need the best electronic control and calibration to match