Decent Mazda Motors

z31maniac wrote:

93EXCivic wrote: In the modern world of Japanese 4 cylinders it is pretty mediocre IMHO.

Wait, how is it fair to compare an engine that was designed 25 years ago to current ones? Take the 5.0 from an '84-85 Mustang GT and compare it to the 5.0 in my '13 Mustang GT (Engine came out in 2011 so likely designed in 2009ish). Double the HP, loves to Rev, more TQ, etc.

The point is that it wasn't the strongest mazda 4 cylinder at the time, let alone japanese motor.

Then we get into varying degrees of "modern."

z31maniac wrote:

sergio wrote: Torque steer keeps you involved in the driving experience. Just like a manual transmission does.

If that's what you need to tell yourself, it's actually boring to not be able to use full throttle until 4th gear on anything but racetrack pavement. But keep adhering to that false sense of machismo.

I'm assuming that's exaggeration? Or you were very heavily modded with subpar tires and suspension?

The MS3 has nasty torque steer. Maybe not Saab Viggen bad, but close. They do come with mechanical LSDs stock and the ECU would dial back HP to 230hp in 1st and 2nd gear when the wheels weren't pointed perfectly straight. The 1st. gens. were worse than the 2nd. gens. in that regard.

On my old 1st. gen. I had good results reducing torque steer by replacing the crappy rear motor mount with a stiffer one and adding slightly sticker and wider tires. The stock MS3 engine mounts weren't sufficient for the base 2.0L, never mind the DISI!

RexSeven wrote: I don't think so. DI makes the 2.3L DISI rather tall and I can't think of any RWD transmissions off the top of my head that bolt to it. The DISI pulls like a freight train and has gobs of torque. but has some issues you need to be aware of (fuel dilution, lousy PCV valve system, high-pressure fuel pump runs out of breath above 5500rpm). I think 500bhp is the max one can handle on a stock bottom end and that's with very careful tuning. The MS3's gearbox is pretty stout.

Psst... A duratec ranger's transmission and the NC miata's transmission just to name a few.

Swank Force One wrote:

z31maniac wrote:

sergio wrote: Torque steer keeps you involved in the driving experience. Just like a manual transmission does.

If that's what you need to tell yourself, it's actually boring to not be able to use full throttle until 4th gear on anything but racetrack pavement. But keep adhering to that false sense of machismo.

I'm assuming that's exaggeration? Or you were very heavily modded with subpar tires and suspension?

Nope, bone stock car. Anything other than super smooth pavement meant an upper body work out if you went full throttle in 1-3 gears.........and that was even with the ECU cutting it to 12psi vs 17psi.

I'm sure the notoriously soft engine/trans mounts didn't help, but if you haven't driven one, it may be hard to believe how bad it is.

On smooth pavement though, it was heck of a fun car to drive.

z31maniac wrote:

93EXCivic wrote: In the modern world of Japanese 4 cylinders it is pretty mediocre IMHO.

Wait, how is it fair to compare an engine that was designed 25 years ago to current ones?

I meant things like pretty much any Honda 4-cylinder (B-series, D-series, H-series), Nissan SR20, etc. When I say modern I meant late 80s thru the 90s which is some how in my mind modern...

93EXCivic wrote:

z31maniac wrote:

93EXCivic wrote: In the modern world of Japanese 4 cylinders it is pretty mediocre IMHO.

Wait, how is it fair to compare an engine that was designed 25 years ago to current ones?

I meant things like pretty much any Honda 4-cylinder (B-series, D-series, H-series), Nissan SR20, etc. When I say modern I meant late 80s thru the 90s which is some how in my mind modern...

Duly noted!

z31maniac wrote:

Swank Force One wrote:

z31maniac wrote:

sergio wrote: Torque steer keeps you involved in the driving experience. Just like a manual transmission does.

If that's what you need to tell yourself, it's actually boring to not be able to use full throttle until 4th gear on anything but racetrack pavement. But keep adhering to that false sense of machismo.

I'm assuming that's exaggeration? Or you were very heavily modded with subpar tires and suspension?

Nope, bone stock car. Anything other than super smooth pavement meant an upper body work out if you went full throttle in 1-3 gears.........and that was even with the ECU cutting it to 12psi vs 17psi. I'm sure the notoriously soft engine/trans mounts didn't help, but if you haven't driven one, it may be hard to believe how bad it is. On smooth pavement though, it was heck of a fun car to drive.

I've driven a couple, and didn't find them that bad.... but then again, considering what i daily drive... well....

Actually, my car doesn't torque steer real badly, but make substantially more power than a stock MS3, and weighs less. Traction isn't really an issue once you get out of 2nd gear.

Unless it's Gainesville International Raceway on a 100 degree day. Then 3rd gear spins.

Swank Force One wrote:

fidelity101 wrote: But if you are looking for mazda v6 you should check out the mazda millenia. It had a small displacement supercharged v6 that runs a miller cycle.

I wouldn't wish that motor upon my worst enemy. You won't make 300whp on it. Ever.

True. but it is neat!

fidelity101 wrote:

Swank Force One wrote:

fidelity101 wrote: But if you are looking for mazda v6 you should check out the mazda millenia. It had a small displacement supercharged v6 that runs a miller cycle.

I wouldn't wish that motor upon my worst enemy. You won't make 300whp on it. Ever.

True. but it is neat!

It's neat right up until the supercharger needs to be rebuilt. Then it's cheaper to buy another car. That's why you see so many supercharged millenias in the junkyards with clean bodies. 80% of them have bad superchargers.

In reply to Swank Force One:

If were talking ficticious dollar ammounts or figurative budgets then this is no issue.

Now you make me want to snag a millenia from a junkyard if its just got a bad sc...

lol, whoever said the Renesis needs to go away and STAY away, such a horrible motor. The KL seems to be the V6 of choice for the Mazda, I wonder why there arn't many builds that I have been able to find on them. I'll look into the KL turbo Miata, that would right down my alley! lol. But again, very insightful thread.

Baylis wrote: lol, whoever said the Renesis needs to go away and STAY away, such a horrible motor. The KL seems to be the V6 of choice for the Mazda, I wonder why there arn't many builds that I have been able to find on them. I'll look into the KL turbo Miata, that would right down my alley! lol. But again, very insightful thread.

Because the majority of the people who own KLs have Probes. 'nuff said.

The only reason i'd go with a KL in your scenario is if you really REALLY wanted the V6 for whatever reason. Or because you wanted to make the swap really different enough to bother.

An FE3 is cool, but after the work and such, if you're "only" looking for 300-400hp in a Miata, even i would probably stick with a BP over swapping an FE3. It's just not different enough. It acts and feels like a big overbuilt BP. (which probably isn't far from the truth.)

A KL Miata will feel DIFFERENT.

An F2T Miata will feel DIFFERENT.

In reply to Baylis:

yeah because 200whp NA out of 1.3L is stupid.

/sarcasm

z31maniac wrote: Nope, bone stock car. Anything other than super smooth pavement meant an upper body work out if you went full throttle in 1-3 gears.........and that was even with the ECU cutting it to 12psi vs 17psi. I'm sure the notoriously soft engine/trans mounts didn't help, but if you haven't driven one, it may be hard to believe how bad it is. On smooth pavement though, it was heck of a fun car to drive.

I drove a few first gens when they came out and found this to be a non-issue personally....slightly worse than my sho hitting the secondaries in 1st gear. My guess is craptastic tires were the culprit.

fidelity101 wrote: In reply to Baylis: yeah because 200whp NA out of 1.3L is stupid. /sarcasm

200whp out of a 2.6L is less impressive.

yamaha wrote:

z31maniac wrote: Nope, bone stock car. Anything other than super smooth pavement meant an upper body work out if you went full throttle in 1-3 gears.........and that was even with the ECU cutting it to 12psi vs 17psi. I'm sure the notoriously soft engine/trans mounts didn't help, but if you haven't driven one, it may be hard to believe how bad it is. On smooth pavement though, it was heck of a fun car to drive.

I drove a few first gens when they came out and found this to be a non-issue personally....slightly worse than my sho hitting the secondaries in 1st gear. My guess is craptastic tires were the culprit.

The Dunlops were definitely not the best tires I've ever driven on. Even on good pavement in 2nd rolling into the throttle would still usually break the tires loose around 4-4500.

What about mixing and matching 2.3 blower and 2.5 bits with a turbo and a nearly free Mill S?

The only thing useful out of the milly would be the injectors and rods. The injectors will get you to 300 but not 400. The rods might get you to 400 but at that point I'd rather trust some good forged stuff.

yamaha wrote: In reply to Swank Force One: IDK, I know they love to KABOOM with idiot owners adding power improperly though

The trick with everyone popping the DISI's lies within a few fatal fuel issues. The secondary fuel pump that drives the fuel to the rails is LEGENDARILY underweight for any kind of power makiing. It likes to smoke its internals, drop fuel to #4 and fold rods. That's the big one. As a matter of fact, fuel is the major issue with this car across the board. The stock pump also likes to not be as fast as the rest of the motor. Since the 2.3 puts out silly compression for a stock turbo mill, it'll spool anything nearly instantly. I have 13psi on the stock K04 at 2400 RPM. A stock one will do 16psi by 2800. Fuel simply can't keep up, so people start jamming boost through the stocker, and if it doesn't pop the seals first, it hoovers WAY more air than is feasible to fuel on the stock pump. People have made a reliable 400+ on the stock bottom end with a proper turbo and an uprated fuel pump. I know it's not quite as legendary as say, a 4g63 or an FE3- but they're damn strong. Plus this is probably the single beefiest driveline Mazda has EVER put out. Current standing record is something north of 700whp, stock clutch, stock trans, stock axles. It's frightening.

As far as people swapping them, I actually only know of one documented swap, period, and a buddy of mine owns the car. Even then he just stuffed the DISI into a 2005 hatch, because he had the hatch and got a smokin' deal on a complete that suffered a case of lid side down at BIR. The biggest problem is Mazdas refusal to play nice in reference to ECU's manufactured after Ronald Reagan's presidency. The DISI one took a solid 5 years to get fully cracked, down to fuel and everything. Not to mention a LOT of people are gun shy now that everyone's already popped a few of em. They're strong motors, just gotta be cared for properly. I'd say wait for more of these to pop up in junkyards and you might see some stuff with them, but they're probably always going to be underground due to the fuel.

So it's like.... the exact opposite of an F2T, where you just throw a E36 M3load of fuel at it and ramp up the boost and let it all sort itself out.

... The FE3 rods are actually even thicker than the F2T rods, and of a denser metal. ...

Denser metal?
Depleted Uranium perhaps?
Or are the F2T rods made of steel foam? ;)

erohslc wrote:

... The FE3 rods are actually even thicker than the F2T rods, and of a denser metal. ...

Denser metal? Depleted Uranium perhaps? Or are the F2T rods made of steel foam? ;)

I dunno. Machine shop did a metal analysis on a Kia FE3 rod and simply said it was a better metal, "denser."

The F2T rods are gigantic and don't break. Ever.

The difficulty of a swap is relative. And anything more than 300-400hp in a Miata is useless... let me say that one more time... USELESS. I'd even argue that 300hp is about as high as one would go practically. V6 would be different thou. Also thinking about a 4 cylinder turbo diesel, depends on which one tickles my fancy at the time of the build. Already building the V8 NB, so thinking about what I would like to do to a NA.

EDIT: And I'd take a 13B over a Renesis any day of the week. I just don't like the rotaries very much.

Baylis wrote: The difficulty of a swap is relative. And anything more than 300-400hp in a Miata is useless... let me say that one more time... USELESS. I'd even argue that 300hp is about as high as one would go practically. V6 would be different thou. Also thinking about a 4 cylinder turbo diesel, depends on which one tickles my fancy at the time of the build. Already building the V8 NB, so thinking about what I would like to do to a NA.

So... how much power are you actually wanting and how many cylinders do you want? Starting to get confused here.