Further Thread on Oil Supply
 

I am still accumulating parts for my '99, 200 - 220 WHP eventual with TD04L-13T (like the idea of double the factory offering). Intrigued by the rear plug oil feed (head) vs cold side feed (block), and would like to utilize that clean approach. Apparently Nitrodann an Sturovo are using it, but not on US version cars, and possibly on NA's only? On the last thread, Keith Tanner and Corky Bell were asked to comment on this feed location, but neither did. So, I am re-inviting those knowledgeable gentlemen to give comment on using that (those?) rear ports.

Use them both and tie them together! hehe jk

If it was me I would use the closest supply to the pump, but that's me... If you were worried, the best thing to do would be to just tap both individually and get your readings on cold start, hot idle, and WOT and compare. I always like using the block for oil feeds, that's where it's at in most of the factory applications I've used (subaru, nissan, mazda), and where most factory pressure sensors tie into. I figure the factory does it there for a reason.

Bottom line - try it and report back. If you fry your head, consider it science.

The mazdaspeed has it setup to have both the coolant and oil flow from the ports off the block.

I've often wondered why no one has taken an MSM block and checked to see if Mazda did anything differently in the oil passages from the MSM to the BP4W/BP6D.

Surely someone around here has a blown up MSM block at some point.

Block and head have bp4w stamped on it, as far as I know the block is nothing special.

I have got to have done it 50 times now, and never have had any issues, used in 300whp+ circuit cars and daily drivers, no hastles ever no abnormal cam wear at all, no lifter noise nothing.

Dann

50 times? REALLY? :jerkit:

Do you intentionally quadruple all the numbers you ever talk about? You have done 50 miata turbo setups in the past couple years? Gimme a break.

*edit: I've wrenched on about a dozen miata's/turbo setups/tuned megasquirts in the past couple years, so basically......like.......400

Um.. Well I undercharged for work for a long time to get enough work to pay my bills and fitted a lot of peoples parts, not just my own setups, if I included both the setups I finished and the ones I have built which included this type of feed, and shipped out to people... yeah probably 50.

I sell a lot of log/downpipe/feed/return setups to people, they take a day to build and ship and its cheap, I have done a hell of a lot.

I have 2 na6 turbo kit builds this week, both use this feed, one engine on a stand, with my feed.. etc

You realise this is my full time job right? (go ahead flame away)

Dann

I will get a pressure gauge on the head port and see what it has. Won't get into the numbers war, just report the pressures. Not sure what WOT has to do with oil pressure, but I will get it hot and cold and at varying RPM.

Where is Joe with one of his magical oil feed diagrams?

This is the earlier motor with hydraulic lifters, it may even be a 1.6 but IDGAF atm:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383092190

Notice that even on this sparse diagram there is a part called "Oil Control Plug" and that to me means a restrictor. (I also find it interesting that the factory turbo oil and coolant feeds are not included in this diagram, but that is not a topic I'm chasing right now.)

Purely speculation but:

I'm willing to bet that the early BP runs a lot more oil VOLUME to the head due to its oil hungry lifters and the 4W/6D is running less oil to the head due to solid lifters. I can see Mazda doing this by putting a smaller oil orifice in the later heads, keeping more oil in the bottom end and/or sending it to the VVT actuator. In the above diagram, the green arrow is pointing out the location where the oil pressure gauge port is located. The small amount of oil we are stealing from the turbo comes from this port BEFORE that restrictor, so we aren't really robbing anything.

Mazda chose to source oil pressure for the VVT actuator not from the head where it would be easy, but from the oil pressure gauge port, before the restrictor. See the logic here? Stealing volume from the valvetrain seems like a really bad idea in the 4W/6D head. I have a BP6D head in the garage that I would be happy to measure this plug if we knew where it was, but I don't have access to an early BP head.

I'm not flaming, I just think you're exaggerating like you always do.
Just a year or two ago you were a complete and utter noob, working as an apprentice mechanic at some general mechanic shop, and "here to learn about miata's"

Now all of a sudden you're claiming to be some master mechanic turbo miata guru. I know you've done a few setups, but I'm almost positive its not 50 or even close to that.

but whatever, I don't care. I just can't stand habitual/compulsive liars.
Sounds like a solid start to trying to figure this out.

In for results.
Exactly my point. (and I already stressed this point in the other thread just like this one)

Mazda decided to source the turbo oil feed from the block and not the head for the msm.
Mazda also decided to source the vvt oil feed from the block and not the head on the BP6D and Z3
The two major Miata turbo kit makers all source from the block and not the head as well.

That is a MAJOR hint to me that the head might not be a good place to draw oil for the turbo.

But like I said before: I'm still very much tempted to do it. And actually still might give it a shot. Maybe

Im sitting typing from the (admittedly amateur) office in my workshop, that I run, and there is 2x NA6 here, a BP on a stand, a 4agze on a stand, an NC racecar, an a twincharged 4wd, and an AE86. Ill go grab a photo or 3....

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383099870

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383099870

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383099870

Im not allowed to identify the 4wd unfortunately.
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383099870

Note the oil feed,
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383099870

http://s21.postimg.org/n3tcspmbr/20131030_132133.jpg

Mazda engines and heads etc top right.
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383099870

Engine for the very first aussie exocet.
http://s24.postimg.org/f7a9662fp/20131030_132906.jpg

Workshirt Im wearing right now.
http://s24.postimg.org/bc6v3lj9x/20131030_132942.jpg

Take from it what you will. Check the exif if you have to. Fuck me I dont know why i feel the need to prove this but I do.

Edit number 4 or 5: ... So yeah I have done dozens and dozens and dozens of these feeds, Im pretty sure most if not all on B6's though, but not a single problem so far. Take the info or leave it.

Dann

I really like it. I'm just afraid to use it.

I don't have enough info for BP's with solid lifters. I really dont. I could check the total flow out of the plug on an NA, and you could do the same test with a BP and compare volume?

Dann

Thanks V-dizzle. The series of PM's we exchanged was actually what lead to me to look into all this stuff. I was unaware we had another thread going about this.

I agree, head is super easy but if it doesn't work well, you boned.

I just pulled an engine out of an SP (Australian only model with a Garrett turbo, 100 of these cars were sold by Mazda Australia) and it uses the port on the back of the head for the turbo oil feed. They are all VVT engines so they have the beefier oil pump, I haven't heard of any oil related issues with the SP model.

Good info thanks, i still miss your old Sab screen name btw..

:)

Dann

can you PLEASE take a picture or two?

that would be really awesome

Does it use the hot or cold side head gallery? Does it use a ball bearing turbo? They use very little oil.

The ones by Nitro and Sturovo are hot side. I guess you are asking about the SP versions. For me, I'm wanting to use a journal brg unit. Agree that BB would be less of an issue.

Seriously, that is the BEST news I've heard thus far. Pics FTW!

What size turbo out of curiosity, and how were they controlling it?

someone find all the deets on these cars asap lol

MX5CarTalk.com NB SP / SE (Mazdaspeed) MX-5 Miata Comparison Claims a GT2560R @ 7 psi or GT2860R @ 5 psi.

Some Pics Here: New Car Test - Mazda MX-5 SP Turbo - AutoWeb New & Used Cars first one looks to show braided oil feed from hot side.

The description of "The Shortcomings" sounds exactly like someone running a powercard or other piggyback controller.

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383152130https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383152130

Someone use magic and find these two images in higher resolution. It seriously looks like a braided line pointed straight UP and then running down to the turbo.

WHAT THE DEUCE?

Wow, I never even heard of that thing. I mean its not really OEM, but looks like it was possibly overseen by Mazda or at least a small division of it?

Very interesting.

And yeah, I tried to blow up those pictures too with no luck :giggle:

Attachment 185056

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/269056...da-miata-mx-5/

Ok now I'm really tempted to use that location lol

You can tell that thing is nowhere near OE standards, but the fact that they came with a warranty from mazda (if I'm reading that right) definitely puts me at ease

I'll be honest, I kinda like the airbox thing.

I have coming:
1/8BSPT to -AN4 fitting for head port
-4AN 90* to -4AN straight hose
-4!N to 10x1.5 fitting for turbo, with built in 1.5mm restrictor

The only thing I'm missing is a Tee.

The plan is to connect a gauge to the hose and map pressure vs RPM dead-headed. Then add the Tee and the restricted "inlet" piece, and the CHRA, and remap the pressure with the oil flowing through the (non-spinning) turbo. This should pretty much tell the extent that this set-up will starve the valve train. I should be able to get some feel for the flow-rate as well, but I don't know what is right amount. I will post cups per min, I suppose, along with video.

The timing on this will depend on my ability to source the Tee and whatever connections I need to add the gauge.

The SP was made in limited numbers, there were 100. There is one that is white, there is only 1 white one, it is known as the Unicorn.

They use a GT2560 and were genuine mazda vehicles. from the dealership with full regular warranty, they are the fastest MX5 ever released from the factory by FAR, they bend rods in OEM form.

Dann

I was also tempted to use the head oil galley on my 99 efr build but the oil galley does have a restrictor on it (see pasage between 2 and 3 cyl) and i chickened out at the end and runned the oil line from the pressure sensor like most people have done 😕
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383407218

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383407586

?

Dann

I'd be interesting to get a measurement on that restriction. (hint hint)

Not that we'd be able to find an SP to measure, but its a nice thought.

From reading this thread, and the previous, I'm still skeptical. I'm not saying for sure it's a bad idea, just the evidence isn't there. Yes dann has done this a lot, and the SP seems to do it, but that really isn't a good sample of data. Seems like Mazda likes to make small changes between years to various things, and it's very possible that although this may work great on some year engines, it may fail miserably on others.

Turbos require very little oil, so I'm not very worried about that. I would be concerned more about the cam bearing surfaces.

The hole on the galley restrictor is 0.0945"

Bitchin' Thanks HHammerly. You said that was a 99 block, right? That means solid lifters. Anyone got a 94-97 block to measure?

Actually the restrictor measured is from a 2000 block

Here we go, this is the engine I pulled out:

https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1383437254

As far as I know it's all as it came from Mazda Australia, it certainly looks the same as other SP cars I've seen.

Cheers

the airbox is great.

Also I have one of those CF airboxes for sale for TWO MILLION DOLLARS! :giggle:

I'll give you about tree fiddy :giggle:

If/when you disassemble that oil feed, let us know what you find. If you pop the head, please measure the restrictor in the block. :party:

Ive never seen one of those airboxes trade for under 2k

Dann

I've got a '97 block sitting under my bench, I'll dig it out tomorrow and measure the restrictor and report back.

Ah man, I was just discussing this idea with the old man on our build. Of course we had the exact questions, comments, concerns that have already been discussed here.

Really interested to see what comes out of this. Thanks for the effort and info!

At least on an NA6, do it every time.

Dann

Got a chance to drag the spare '97 block out today, the restrictor measured .094"... same as the '99 measured earlier. Doesn't seem like they changed anything between HLA and solid lifter blocks. Now we just need someone with an '01+ block to measure.

So if this restrictor is .094" across the board, is this a good thing?

Is that enough to feed a turbo and keep the head lubricated?

A turbo oil feed line seems pretty big in comparison, but the turbo has a restrictor as well correct?

How much oil actually flows through a turbo anyways?

A couple of litres a minute is plenty.

Dann

This post will likely be lengthy. I have my tests run, and this will include the results. I will also discuss how we might utilize the information, and give some subjective opinions (redundant, perhaps).

I came off the rear head port with a 1/8 bspt to -4AN fitting, then to a 20" long flex. I flushed this into a cup. Didn't see any contaminant, but I didn't filter for it either. Next I attached a gauge and got these readings:
30 psi @ 1kRPM, 40@2k, 44@3k, 44@4k. Unfortunately I did not look at CLT.

Next I added a Tee, right at the head fitting, and ran a second -4AN of 36" length to a -4AN to 10x1.5 turbo inlet that has a 0.060" built in restriction. With this flowing into the fill hole in the head, I got the following:
19@1k, 32@2k, 36@3k, 36@4k. Roughly, the flow rate measured 1.0 L/min at idle

Then I added my TDO4 (WRX) to the end of the long line:
20@1k, 31@2k, 34@3k, 35@4k. Roughly the flow rate measured 0.32L/Min at idle. See attached You-Tube video of that flow at idle. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AGt...ature=youtu.be

Later, I realized that I should have waited until the oil was at full temp to run the test. So, with CLT at 195F, I have, with gauge only:
17@1k, 26@2k, 29@3k, 30@4k

With the 0.060 restrictor at the end of a 36" long -4AN (note, the gauge is at upstream end):
10@1k, 18@2k, 21@3k, 22@4k

I did not repeat with the turbo.

Never, in these tests, did the valve train sound starved.

For me, I will refer to the attached MHI sheet, compliments of someone on a DSM forum (they and the Subi forums have this same discussion, by the way):

What I think I am seeing, is that, with the TD04, I should barely be able to run the head port, without the added restriction. The flow with restrictor and turbine was low, but the pressure is within the spec.

Kind of like this:
At no flow: Idle, 17psi = 1.2 kg/cm^2 > than 0.8 minimum
At no flow: 4K RPM, 30 psi = 2.1 kg/cm^2 which is right at the lower limit of 2.

At higher than expected flow, the pressures will be lower. However, in practice, I think not much lower as the flows with the Turbo attached were considerably less than the restricted line without the turbo.

That is what I plan to do. Run from the head port, -4AN of about 20" to inlet of the TD04, un-restricted. It may be a month, but I will report back.

From what I gather, if one is running a bearing unit, the head port should give enough pressure for a low flow, and a 1mm inlet restriction.

Unfortunately, the data was marred by not all of it being taken at full warm-up. But the primary take-away is the 195*F, no flow readings. If that is enough pressure to drive oil into your turbo, and EDIT: if the flow is not too much (EDIT: LESS than the usage of the 0.060" open restrictor), then you should be OK.

FWIW: The initial diagram posted by Eo2K, is a B6. Cam angle sensor pickup on the intake cam. What is mildly amusing, is the listed oil capacity of 3.8 quarts. IME, B6s take about 3.8q, although 3.6 is frequently listed. Ditto for the BP, 3.8q listed, 4.0q is closer to reality, on a level surface, filling to the top of the "F" line.


Unused oil/coolant ports on the B6/BP (and most engines for that matter), are just that, unused extras. Not surprising they're not included on factory diagrams, as they're essentially not there, as far as the factory is concerned.




Cool idea though, I like the idea that the boys at mazda already used this for a turbo setup. Even from a "low production, high output" setup, the fact that the factory used it makes me feel as though it is a legitimate solution. UOA would be great, but someone has to do it first.

I'm kinda confused a bit with that post. Will re-read many times over to hopefully understand correctly.
What I'm getting is pressure at the back of the head dropped roughly 20psi after you tapped the back of the head with a .060 restrictor at the end?
But did your overall engine oil pressure drop after you added the t?

The first numbers are dead headed on the head port. The second numbers are open flow through the restricted hose. The third with the turbo on the end of the restricted hose.

He lost 8psi hot or cold (in the head) by opening up the flow to the restricted line or turbo (at 4k).

Yes, you understood correctly.

I did not have a gauge on the main gallery (Oil Pressure Sensor location). However, the change there would be less with this set-up than with a block feed at the same turbo oil flow, as the head port is downstream of the now famous 0.090 restrictor.

The question to be resolved is only the starving of the valve train, not the main and rod bearings.

This is my generalized take: Mains and Rods have tremendous pressures due to reciprocation and combustion. Cam bearings have considerably less as it is the forces of the valve springs (and some inertia) that they must support. Turbo bearings are the least as the forces are somewhat balanced and the shaft simply spins and transfers torque from turbine to compressor.

What my test did show, was how low the head pressures should get if the turbo oil feed was fairly high (higher than needed in most cases). What I do not know is what kind of oil pressures are needed to support the cam bearings, and be able to squirt a little oil onto the lobes.

Though we did not hear any indication of starving (clatter), I don't know that this tells the whole story.

And I don't understand why there was so little difference between the PSI with and without the turbo, as the flows were so different. My assumption is that the oil got hotter as that part of the testing proceeded.

However, I believe that your explanation is exactly what I wished to convey.

Very cool, thanks for that.

I thought valvetrain starvation was the whole point of this test, apparently not.

But you did prove that there is a very significant reduction in pressure with the turbo feeding off the head rather than the block, so that kinda reassures my paranoia from earlier.

Though I'm not writing it off still obviously.

I wish there was a sure thing answer to this issue lol

There is. VVT pump makes everything better.

On a regular bp running it sure, but on a vvt car?

On an unrelated note, I'm a bit worried now since I planned on sourcing my AN-6 feed from a oil filter sandwich adapter.


...looking at the diagram, that's pre-filter and any junk floating about goes straight to the turbo